| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Peter Scott
United Kingdom
1240 Posts |
 Posted - 25/02/2010 : 20:04:12
|
Many P owners replace the Luvax rear shockers with Hartfords, a la J2. But did any Ps use Hartfords, at the rear, in period?
Peter |
|
|
Robin Macmillan
United Kingdom
415 Posts |
Posted - 25/02/2010 : 20:43:51
|
| The early PA had Hartfords I believe |
 |
|
|
Peter Green
United Kingdom
1682 Posts |
Posted - 25/02/2010 : 21:22:53
|
Peter,
The PA Parts List does not list Hartford shock absorbers at the rear. I see from the parts list that the part number of the front shock absorbers changed at chassis number PA2142/PA2143. Please could someone tell me what the difference in the shock absorbers were.
Peter. |
|
|
|
bahnisch
Australia
674 Posts |
Posted - 25/02/2010 : 22:13:19
|
| I had an early PA (0432?) which had Hartfords at the rear. |
|
|
|
bahnisch
Australia
674 Posts |
Posted - 25/02/2010 : 22:45:46
|
| Corrections to my post! I must have Hartfords on the brain! My car (actually 0437) had hydraulics at the rear (Luvax or piston type, its along time ago!) and Hartfords at the front. |
|
|
|
Rodney Collins
United Kingdom
424 Posts |
Posted - 26/02/2010 : 09:19:29
|
Peter, are you thinking of replacing your leaky rear luvax's to hartfords?
Rodney |
|
|
|
Gordon
United Kingdom
691 Posts |
Posted - 26/02/2010 : 11:37:49
|
I can recommend fitting telescopic hydraulic shock absorbers to the rear. It is easy to make up brackets that pick up existing chassis holes that allow vertical mounting of the units thus allowing refitting of original units if you must!! Very difficult to see and gives an excellent ride which I deem a good thing for the car and bodywork. Could you argue that it is no less original than fitting Hartfords? The damping means of a telescopic absorber are no different to the original ie pistons displacing oil! Please don't lets have a long debate on the values of originality - it won't change my mind!
Gordon |
|
|
|
Terry Andrews
United Kingdom
546 Posts |
Posted - 26/02/2010 : 13:34:46
|
Robin
Many years ago I had the chance to see the 2 nd P type made after the prototypes. It was very original and had Luvax shock absorbers fitted. So I would question that early cars had Hartfords.
Peter
I think the change you refer to could well be the change from round edge to flat type Hartfords. I.e. late PA’s could have the PB front Hartfords?
Many years ago you could not get the Luvax shock absorbers overhauled. Now days Graham Brown now makes new bodies for them. S&V and others made conversions for the P type, which I have on my car for 30 plus years. Over the years I have found that by adjustment one can achieve a very nice compliant ride with the Hartfords fitted. I found in the early years I had them too tight. Now they are slackened off which is good for touring but may not as good for those who race.
Regards….. Terry
|
|
|
|
Peter Scott
United Kingdom
1240 Posts |
Posted - 26/02/2010 : 14:18:52
|
Rodney
I am well on the way to fitting Hartfords. I trial fitted it all up a couple of days ago to check the clearance of the arm to chassis as it is quite close. Now I am just waiting for the new cross member paint to dry before final fitment.
Terry
I make the initial setting to my Hartfords by checking the torque required to start them moving. A Riley forum suggested 19lbs but this seems too slack to me. I have initially set mine to 28lbs. How do you set yours, for road use not competition?
Peter |
|
|
|
Cymber
United Kingdom
966 Posts |
Posted - 26/02/2010 : 21:11:15
|
I agree with Gordon. Telescopics give a much improved ride for road use, they effectively soften the suspension as most of the damping is on rebound. A side benefit is that it gives space for a modern battery and a toolbox all unseen.
Maurice Blakey. |
|
|
|
Colin McLachlan
United Kingdom
991 Posts |
Posted - 28/02/2010 : 14:16:24
|
I am about to give my PA back axle a complete overhaul, and inter alia treat it and my wife's spine to a set of telescopic dampers, to replace the original Luvaxes which I suspect may be past their prime  . I should appreciate any info on which ones to use, and the design of the necessary brackets. Is there a make or size that is particularly suited? Should I perhaps consider adjustable ones to allow me to find the best setting by trial and error? Does anyone actually make a conversion kit?
Thanks,
Colin. |
|
|
|
Terry Andrews
United Kingdom
546 Posts |
Posted - 28/02/2010 : 15:15:49
|
Peter,
This is the way I do it after many discussions with many people over the years. Terry Holden, Peter G or Barry F and others may also wish to comment.
First of all the Hartfords should be in good serviceable condition. The units should slide evenly without sticking. All the woods and brasses should be clean and free of any accumulated sticky dust and dirt which is collected over a years motoring. I then lubricate them with petroleum jelly. I then tighten them so that they feel that they have the same resistance and put the pointer on the same position on each dial. They are then refitted to the car. Jack up the car and put on axel stands. Now put a hydraulic jack under the centre of the back axel. Tighten the Hartfords until the axel is just about holding when the hydraulic jack is released. Now slacken off the Hartfords evenly so that when the jack is released the axel slowly drops level under it’s own weight. This is YOUR starting point. You now need to road test the car and adjust to suite the ride you prefer.
You can the do the same with the front axel.
Some like a very firm ride but you do not need this for a road touring ride. I have found with use that the Hartfords do not need to be set up so hard that your eye balls rattle in their sockets when you hit a sixpence laying in the road. Now over to the others for their comments and thoughts.
Regards….. Terry
|
|
|
|
kimber
United Kingdom
1529 Posts |
Posted - 28/02/2010 : 16:11:23
|
Terry, I wouldn't disagree with your method for road use. Long before I ever went motor racing, my father showed me how to 'set up' Hartfords on a Triple M car, part of which involves 'bouncing' the car by standing on either the rear or front cross-tube. There is a certain amount of 'feel' involved which is hard to describe and much easier to learn by demonstration. Tyre pressures were a lot gentler, too e.g. 24-26 psi. Playing around with shock absorber settings and tyre pressures can make a huge difference to the level of comfort for road use - ranging from seriously uncomfortable to surprisingly comfortable.
However, as soon as you start seriously throwing a Triple M car around (which I accept many people may never wish to do), you definitely need much tighter shock absorber settings and, generally speaking, higher tyre pressures. Very often, race circuits and other competition venues have very smooth surfaces and a car which is set up for optimum track performance can be excruciatingly uncomfortable to drive on the highway, especially after the present winter which has wrecked a lot of road surfaces.
My own road going P-type is a bit too 'squidgy' at the rear end and has a tendency to steer from the rear when one is 'pressing on'. To be fair, it does have some fairly tired looking original springs at the back and non-original lever arm shocks (Morris 8?) Anyway, they're not doing a lot and I was intending to install Hartfords as they are fully adjustable.
However, I was interested to note the comments about telescopics. As my car gets a lot of road use and I'm not overly concerned about originality, if they are truly beneficial, I might consider it. |
Edited by - kimber on 28/02/2010 16:13:58 |
|
|
|
rholl
United Kingdom
7 Posts |
Posted - 28/02/2010 : 17:23:09
|
Just a thought from a non-racing, but touring P Type owner. I fitted rear Hartfords a year or so ago. An 'old hand' suggested the following method to set them up: Remove from car. Place the knuckle of one arm on your best bathroom scales. Press down on the other knuckle in a scissor action, and read the force to maintain a smooth closing action. Both can be set accurately. mine give a firm but comfortable ride at 26 lbs. Simplistic, but it seems to work!
Richard Holl |
|
|
|
Peter Scott
United Kingdom
1240 Posts |
Posted - 28/02/2010 : 20:03:13
|
All - Thanks for the many replies.
I gather that most probably there were no Ps fitted with rear Hartfords as original equipement. (Or were there one or two very early ones with them to use up old stock or to special order???)
Thanks also for the suggestions re setting up Hartfords. I like the idea of setting up to a certain torque as it is very simple to do. I mount the shocker in the vice and pulling the arm with a spring balance. My guess at 28lbs is very close to Richards 26lbs, which gives me some comfort that I am in the right 'ball-park'. No doubt the falling axle is more accurate. Perhaps I will try that after the Hartfords have done a few miles and settled in.
Without wishing to open up an 'originality' debate, I couldn't put telescopics on it. Just a step too far for me but everyone to his taste. Whatever makes you happy driving it.
Rodney - The rear Hartfords are now installed and the battery replaced. Just need to replace the petrol tank and it will be ready for the road again. 
Peter |
|
|
|
Terry Andrews
United Kingdom
546 Posts |
Posted - 01/03/2010 : 11:16:14
|
Hi Andrew,
I agree with what you say also. I did focus on road going as opposed to racing, as Peter asked what I did. I must admit to using the “bounce” method you describe after the dropping the axle method described above. Also you do need to try different tyre pressures as part of the general car set up, Dunlop’s are different to my current Avons. I have not noticed any rear steer using Hartfords at the rear on soft setting. I would say my car is in the medium setting.
And others,
Also I agree with Bruce some time ago in another post that we really have are “dampers” and not shock absorbers. The point I was trying to make is that you need to have a constant reference to go by. From that reference you can go softer say for road or harder for track use. If in doing this you do not like what you had done you can reset back to your known reference using the dropping axel method. Nothing wrong in measuring the poundage before you fit onto the cars but if you re-just to new settings, how do you know what they are without taking the “dampers” of the car and re-measuring? Also be aware the “dampers” do go sticky and should be cleaned and re-set as part of routine maintenance. This stickiness happens more if the car is not used, than one in constant use. I think the advantage of telescopic dampers is that they should require less maintenance and some may get harder towards the end of their travel. More expensive ones are adjustable….. is this were we came in?
Regards…. Terry
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
