| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Terry Andrews
United Kingdom
546 Posts |
 Posted - 24/10/2011 : 15:59:07
|
I would like to know from the elder statesmen of Triple-M register is the following believed to be true.
I was told a long time ago from someone who had been around Triple-M cars for years that not all Triple-M 3ft 6 inch front axle are the same. I was told that the J4 and L type were made from different (stronger) materials, so that they did not bend as easily as the same shape axels fitted to say the F, J & P. So is this rubbish or is it true. Terry A
|
|
|
JMH
United Kingdom
911 Posts |
Posted - 24/10/2011 : 18:53:37
|
Terry,
I believe that D Types at least are weaker & less substantial than a J (a D axle was discarded from the Hawke garage years ago - to a D Type owner, for that very reason). When analysed, the J2 axle was described to me as "pre-war version of EN7". I haven't been lucky enough to do the same to a J4 to know what the material for those may have been, or whether they're a bit beefier still.
JH |
Edited by - JMH on 24/10/2011 19:00:09 |
 |
|
|
David Allison
United Kingdom
665 Posts |
Posted - 25/10/2011 : 10:27:16
|
As far as I know the D and M axle are made from the same material and the later axles were made of a better steel.
This was because steel was still quite new technology and the improved steel probably wasnt available in 1930-32.
The later axles were made of the improved iron all the way through to the MGA.
An improved axle design was developed for the K3 following trials on the Mille Miglia when the standard K axle was found to be a bit on the spindly side.
The tale goes that both Ettore Bugatti and Enzo Ferrari were in some way responsible - but in fact the design was in place before the prototype left the factory for Italy.
The J4 had a divided track steering assembly (as did the K3) to counteract the effects of bump steer (a blind alley) but the axle was otherwise the same as a J2 I am quite sure.
I did build a J4 front axle but it was a LONG time ago and I am not certain - however apart from the divided track asembly I can not remember anything significantly different to a standard J axle.
The P axle is not noticably a great deal different to the J one (in terms of strength at least).
It must be remembered that MG had a restricted budget (and selling price) they used the best material that they could gain a return on - in other words "if it cost too much you didnt fit it!"
Regards David |
|
|
|
Onno
Netherlands
1045 Posts |
Posted - 25/10/2011 : 12:02:04
|
David
you must mean all the way to the TC?
as from the TD the front suspention was independent.
Any way of recognising the weaker D/M axle?
Onno "D" Könemann |
|
|
|
Richard Hardy
United Kingdom
2159 Posts |
Posted - 25/10/2011 : 23:51:28
|
David
I am pretty sure the J2 and J4 axles were not the same, the castor angle setting was different for the J4s.
Rich
Vintage MG Parts |
|
|
|
Mike Allison
United Kingdom
196 Posts |
Posted - 26/10/2011 : 13:20:12
|
Hi there everybody,
The J4 axle was different from the J1-3, in that it started life as an L-type one, which was made of better steel and enabling it to carry more stress, as befits a car with a heavier engine, or one subjected to greater stresses. Sadly I have never found the steel requirements called up for either axle.
The P-type continued to use the better material, and it is quite likely that later J2's used the same material, whatever it was.
All MG axles were forged at the Wolseley Works, but their record keeping had, in the main, been destroyed by the time I had sufficient seniority in the Company to request this sort of detail.
I hope this clears up the mystery to the satisfaction of all.
Mike |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
