Page 9 of 46

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 10:20 pm
by pebbles
Passenger panic bar,,,,sorry.

http://www.hrc-dat.com.au/sub6.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 11:12 pm
by Garm
Holy bent tube, Batman!

Image

(and holy old web page!)
http://www.hrc-dat.com.au/sub4.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:24 am
by dbrick
Garm wrote:Holy bent tube, Batman!

Image

(and holy old web page!)
http://www.hrc-dat.com.au/sub4.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
There's a part BEGGING to be reproduced. I'd take one

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:33 am
by Garm
I'm on it, along with some of the easier sheet metal parts.
Already talked to my good friend John Kuchta, who is a top notch fabricator.

I also want to make an intake for those willing to lose their washer reservoir. :idea:

http://www.specialtycars.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 6:55 am
by notoptoy
dbrick wrote:
Garm wrote:Holy bent tube, Batman!

Image

(and holy old web page!)
http://www.hrc-dat.com.au/sub4.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
There's a part BEGGING to be reproduced. I'd take one
Not at THAT price!

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 2:09 am
by Garm
Updates. swapped out the tach (2 days, long story, another thread), installed urethane sway bar bushings.

Springs and non-smog needles are up next.

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:24 pm
by Garm
Started installing the front lowering springs today.
Got one side done, and now I know better how to do it.

1. How far down do you cinch up the shock nuts over urethane bushings? I did it until I got a just a little squish, showing the same amount of thread as before. I don't see any way to torque those nuts to any spec.

2. The springs don't seem to have a particular spot (turning them, not up and down) that they need to sit. Is that correct?

3. Didn't notice any bushing/gasket/perch pad/etc. that the springs would sit on or underneath. Is there some soft part that is supposed to go there?

So here's my attempt at grinding down the bump stops (pretty fun, made a huge mess around the grinder, and on me):

Image

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 7:42 pm
by SLOroadster
I tighten my shock mounting nuts so they are good and tight. I didn't know there was actually a torque setting for them. As for the springs, there should be a thin rubber spring pad. If I remember correctly, the springs are flat on both ends so it doesn't matter how they sit in the perches.

What comp springs did you go with? Did you stay with the KYBs?

Will

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 7:44 pm
by dbrick
No orientation, I usually match the worn spot. There is a pad on top, don't recall seeing one on the bottom, none in the parts blow-up, just on top. I always grease the bottom of a spring if it's metal to metal. Shock bushings are supposed to swell slightly, not bigger than the washers.

On the footrest. I meant reproduced here in the US for a reasonable price.

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:02 pm
by Garm
^ I gotcha on the footrest.

Dave, that's how I did the shock nuts exactly. The car has KYB gas-adjust in front and they aren't worn out, so I re-installed them. Switched to urethane bushings. Springs are Dean's "super comp". I wanted to try them out. My method here is to move up incrementally through suspension upgrades (like sway bars) and really feel the car out.

This was my first chance to inspect fittings, bushings, play etc. It all has to come apart again anyway!

[edit]

Wiki instructions refer to two top nuts and two bottom nuts on the shock.
Mine only has one top and one bottom. Problem?
Loosen the two nuts holding the shock to its bottom mounting point......If you are replacing the shocks-remove the top two nuts securing the shock in place.

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 10:49 pm
by SLOroadster
The two nuts on the shocks are there to act as lock nuts, the extra one gets tightened down to keep the other one from backing off.

As for the springs, check your lower control arms. If they aren't parallel with the ground (as in not sloping toward the oil pan as I'm guessing yours are) you have a roll center height issue. This will also mean you have a roll couple issue as well since the rear roll center is a little on the high side as well unless you have either traction bars or a panhard or a Watts Link setup. If you have ever seen a lowered Alfa GTV in a corner, you will understand what I'm talking about when it comes to body roll due to a bad roll axis and mismatched roll centers. I'm guessing you are too low up front requiring a much higher spring rate, and it puts your oil pan at serious risk.

Will

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:06 pm
by Garm
If they aren't parallel with the ground (as in not sloping toward the oil pan as I'm guessing yours are)
When I put it on the ground tomorrow, I'll check. What makes you suspect that?

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2012 12:39 am
by Garm
Meanwhile, I have a plotter and lots of vinyl (got tired of paying for graphics and stickers) so I made this. If anyone wants one it's $10, I have lots of colors and can stretch it or change the height/thickness as well.

This is the original Datsun "Microgramma" font.

Silver:

Image

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:01 am
by SLOroadster
Garm wrote:
If they aren't parallel with the ground (as in not sloping toward the oil pan as I'm guessing yours are)
When I put it on the ground tomorrow, I'll check. What makes you suspect that?
They are shorter than mine, and mine sit level ;) Perhaps Dean made them a little taller than they used to be, but I think his site states they are the lowest of the low. Since I know you have some autoX experience you should know that lower is good, too low causes issues. Does it look cool? Yes, but looking cool and working well can be two different things.

The easy way to eye ball aproximate roll center is by looking at how the lower control arms sit in relation to the ground. If you draw an imaginary line from the lower ball joint through the lower control arm mounts, you can see the direction it runs. On a stock setup, the line will tilt upwards toward the motor. If you were to plot this out, the point in which the lines from the left and the right sides intersect will likely be above the a-arm mounting point. This would indicate that the roll center is close to or above the center of gravity. If the lower control arm slopes downward toward the center, you can guess where your roll center is going to end up, likely below ground level, and that is bad. If you have the line running nearly horizontal from the lower ball joint through the lower control arm mounts, obviously it cant be too low, or too high. I have to say, I'd love to stick a roadster on an alignment rack, run a piece of tape between the two rails to simulate the ground and actually take some string and actually measure where they cross with different sets of springs and see who really does have the "right" setup, or for that matter see how good or bad they all really are.

Will

Re: Garm's 1969 project

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:28 am
by fj20spl311
Will,
You might have a error in your Roll Center Calculation.

The intersection of the lines drawn through the control arm pivot points are the instant centers. The intersection of lines drawn from the contact patches to the instant centers is the roll center. This locates the height of the roll center above the ground, and the location left or right from the center line of the car.