This is a read-only archive of the old Madabout Kitcars forum. New posts and replies are no longer possible, but every thread is still here to browse and read.
I have already got two new front wishbones from Mark Mathews, which made absolutely no differance. I have set the ride height, and the front springs are rubbing on the inner wish bones, has any one had the same issue, and if what was done to cure it.
Yep, mine rub when on the build stands, and when I had the car on wheels the other week it looked as though there will be problems in use.
I've not raised it with marlin, as I've got a number of other ill-fitting parts (exhaust, gearcable bracket, driveshafts....) to get sorted, and I'm just starting to work through them.......
Mine is rubbing but it is still on axle stands
I am hopefully getting me brake discs this week so i will find out if it still rubs when it is down on the wheels this weekend
I will post the out come when that happens
Firstly I'm assuming your using standard GAZ shocks and springs from Marlin....if so then there should be no fouling at all. The springs are pretty close to the susp wishbones when the car is on the deck but they do clear easily.
Have you got the upper wishbones on the right way round?...have a look at pictures on the gallery..there is a shot of the silver demo car and my orange one showing correct orientation.
Otherwise...not sure, post a picture up of your installation so I can see it.
Mmmmm....looking at your pics the assembly looks correct.
From memory mine were very close when on stands but once on the deck the clearance increased and is OK.
Rich
I think unless the wishbones were massively incorrect, they'd only fit one way around.
To put the situation with my car in perspective, when on the deck, i have to rotate the springs so that the arm can slot between the coils. Admitedly the front of my car is still pretty light, but to get around this I set the ride height at a "reasonable" level, and still the spring were too close........ especially when one accounts for the fact the arms move either side (up and down) of the static position.
I'm watching what happens with Steve's situation before doing anything about mine.
I spoke to Mark Mathews last week over the issue, and he has reccomended a change in spring lenght to be the best way he can see to overcome the problem. He is working on a car or has recently been working, not sure but the upshot is, he has used 7.5 inch 300LBS springs. I will be looking down this route myself now, so I can move on.
I don’t think any of us should be happy with that “fix”. If shorter springs are fitted, then the effective suspension travel will be reduced, and the chance of unseating and fully compressing the spring will be increased.
If our cars don’t work with the gaz shocks and springs, and every chassis preceding our has been fine, then the reason for this needs to be determined, and proper remedial work undertaken.
A shorter spring shouts “bodge” to me, and is not acceptable.
just a thought guys, but could u measure the outside diameter of the springs?
are they 2.25"?
the assembly in the picture looks correct to me.
however you have you're top camber rod end wound out quite a long way.
when on the road the upper wishbone does not clash with the springs on mine.
just a thought guys, but could u measure the outside diameter of the springs?
are they 2.25"?
the assembly in the picture looks correct to me.
however you have you're top camber rod end wound out quite a long way.
when on the road the upper wishbone does not clash with the springs on mine.
HTH
John
I’ll measure mine later, but as they seat correctly on the shock I suspect they’re the correct diameter. The camber of the wheel isn’t too far off vertical when on the ground (it’s hard to perceive), which makes me wonder if the top arm is shorter (or the connection at chassis / hub different) than yours – that would certainly explain the clash we’re experiencing.
Perhaps one of the people with non-clashing arms could take some pictures with a good ruler / digital vernier in the shot?
I had not considered the suspension travel issue, I do tend to feel this is a bodge, but I have found trying to get the answer I am looking for so difficult, my initial reaction was one of, on well another hurdle crossed. Judging by the responce of others this is something that will not go away in a hurry, and Mark needs to sort it out. I know some of you have had issues, it would be intersting to contact Mark and see how he deals with your concerns.
I did get a reply from two other buiders who when they measure their wishbones in relation to the chasis the gap was about 180mm to where the two arms weld, in my case this was about 170mm ish, I tried several times to convince Mark of this, but he said that was the template used on all the cars. I personally do have reservatons over that.
The 149 mm on your drawing, is more like 144 mm on my left arm. The other dimensions appear to be the same, which makes sense given what Mark Matthews told me yesterday.
Apparently the hard points are jigged, but the diagonal (for want of a better description) "...if cut a bit short, or a bit long, gets placed where it fits best..."
Whilst there are more features that dictate the co-ordination of the components, I beleive there is at least one error on my car.
Incidentally I've had the car on the ground, and have played with ride height and bounced the car. The geometry isn't perfect but it's not rediculous, and my springs audiably 'pop' past the arm!
My experience seems to show that the "jig" or template that MArlin use must be made of elastic...
Not many of the parts on John's car are aligned properly.
P1ss poor IMO.
My experience seems to show that the "jig" or template that MArlin use must be made of elastic...
Not many of the parts on John's car are aligned properly.
P1ss poor IMO.
Some of of Sportster builders have suffered similar problems. The top mount for my rear springs are in completly the wrong place causing the top and bottom bump stops not align. Mark's first comment was "it didn't really matter" - I intend to press him a bit more on this. At the moment it looks like I will have to cut them off and get a "mobile welder" to re-fit them in the correct place - at MY expense. I am not impressed....
My experience seems to show that the "jig" or template that MArlin use must be made of elastic...
Not many of the parts on John's car are aligned properly.
P1ss poor IMO.
I'm getting quite infuriated with the parts that don't fit on my car - the last few weeks have been spent fabricating...(engine mounts, pedal box, gear cable mounts, gearshift linkage).... the latest issue is that my exhaust doesn't fit and I need to "...bend it...."........all very well and good if it were the lightweight hangers that needed tweaking, but it's all completely out, and bending 2.25" stainless tube is quite difficult!
Nothing on my car aligns either but not as far as exhaust yet but have fitted the rubber flooring and a tip is if you do one side dont use this as a template for the other side thinking the chassis is even on both sides as it's miles out!
Evening all. Ok, so as I'm about 8 years behind everyone else building my car I'm only just discovering all these problems.
I have gotten over the issue with the wrong rear damper length being supplied. I attempted to roughly set up the geometry of the car today. With standard Gaz dampers on the front - 330mm open length, fitted with 7" 300lb springs - surprise surprise, they fowl the front upper wishbones.
Again, I bought these parts many years ago so its far to late to go back to Marlin and expect them to replace with new.
For the builders who have let Track Developments fettle with their suspension set-ups. Any chance any of you have the standard Marlin upper front wishbones going spare?
Just going from memory there was a batch made some 5mm wrong in length, but you may find if the rears are not part of that batch the rears may be able to used on the front, obviously the pick up for the rear suspension adjustment would need to be welded on, but could be worth a try.