[Guide] Corona/Peugot/Hilux Conversion with Height Adjustable Coilovers [56k DIAF]

[af300e]

But all the load isnt on the spring seat, infact almost all the shock loading is going straight to the spherical bearing as its the damper which takes the shock loading, not the spring.
The spring really just holds the cars weight.

Um, ok, but no I don't think so.

Take for instance an ae86. Many people perform rear coilover conversions. The shock tower must then be reinforced because it is now under a vastly increased load. When only the shock bears on the shock tower a tiny little thin piece of crappy sheet metal is enough.

Yes there is some loading through the shock, but I'd say it is small compared to the load taken by the spring perches.

[SillyCarS]

Having the spring/vehicle load on the camber plate is probably a better design.

exactly!

still dont recommend them

[MWP]

Take for instance an ae86. Many people perform rear coilover conversions. The shock tower must then be reinforced because it is now under a vastly increased load. When only the shock bears on the shock tower a tiny little thin piece of crappy sheet metal is enough.

Yes there is some loading through the shock, but it is very small compared to the load takem by the spring perches.

Hmmm, interesting argument, but i still think the damper takes a lot of the shock loading.... thats what it does by definition.

[af300e]

I've tried to find some numbers on dynamic loads in shocker mounts vs spring mounts but haven't had any luck. I agree that there is no doubt a good amount of loading on the shock mounts, especially with extra stiff performance shockers and whilst driving over a rough road where the strut speed is high.
But, even by observing the strength of the spring perches compared to the shocker mounts, it suggests that there is a significant difference between the loads that each are subject to. I'll ask an engineer about it tomorrow if I can remember.

[The Real Roadrunner]

I've tried to find some numbers on dynamic loads in shocker mounts vs spring mounts but haven't had any luck. I agree that there is no doubt a good amount of loading on the shock mounts, especially with extra stiff performance shockers and whilst driving over a rough road where the struct speed is high.

Can you PLEASE stop calling them shockers? inserts or dampers would be fine and it wont make my head hurt as much while reading your posts.

I do agree that the spring load should be on the camber plate also but i dont think the way T3 have done it is very nice.
Also its not often that the strut will be 90* to the camber plate so i think there would be alot of misalignment with the springs if they happened to not be fully captive on rebound which could cause them to pop off the seat.

There is probly a much better way of doing it but the spherical bearings (in the jap brands) seem to take the loads for a few years before needing replacement. if i had the pissweak T3 bearings i would be checking them daily.

cheers
linden

[af300e]

Linden, you had trouble with T3 stuff?

[The Real Roadrunner]

Yep, in harsh conditions the bearings flog out in no time flat, which may be their reasoning behind the bearing style upper hat but i see no reason why they can't redesign their tops to use a reasonably strong bearing.
making spacers to suit them is also a PITA due to the small lip on the bearing, still beter than the noltec gear but i prefer to just build my own stuff now (for my own use) as i know it works.

cheers
linden

[SillyCarS]

final result, ugly but it works!



what would be killer it if the had a ball and socket style joint at the top, ie large radius semi circle facing concave down with teflon in between

[old_school_jap1]

what would be killer it if the had a ball and socket style joint at the top, ie large radius semi circle facing concave down with teflon in between

what would be good is if you just got the t3 camber tops instead of the cuscos

[SillyCarS]

it wouldnt matter. it would still mung hard cos the face is flat

duh!

[SillyCarS]

here i drew you a digram



no matter what the spring hat is free to travel up and down the strut, so ultimately its gonna hit the bottom of the camber top. no matter what type it is

now when you go over a bump the strut is gunna pass trough some kind of angle. but! it mungs hard and failz

[old_school_jap1]

okays i get ya..... thanks for the edumacation. helper or tender springs would help decrease the munging would they not?

[SillyCarS]

i guess so but i reckon an easier solution would be to solid mount the top hat like a stock spring

[The Real Roadrunner]

what would be killer it if the had a ball and socket style joint at the top, ie large radius semi circle facing concave down with teflon in between

Great minds think alike.

ive been trying to think of how to do it and incorperate a race in the bottom of it to allow the spring hat to move around freely.but it would have to locate on the bottom of the strut top some how.

cheers
linden

[SillyCarS]

teflon sleave

EDIT: been doing some drawings. First one to the patents office wins