Ride height

[TedAllen]

Hi gang,
Now this might arouse some interest. Over the last 35 years I have owned and seen many Javelins.
Most cars have varied slightly in the height from the road at the rear.
The club handbook and other various manuals seems to make no mention of this.
I have seen Javelins where almost the whole of the back tyre is to be seen in the wheel arch and others, like mine ,where the edge of the wheelarch is level with the top of the roadwheel. I have seen many side on photos and they all seem to differ.
How much tyre should show, say, with a full tank, empty boot and no passengers ?
Could this variation be down to shock absorber length or have the torsion bars been out and put back incorrectly. My car had new shockers a few years ago but I can't remember the make and type.
I don't find it a problem at all, when I put the caravan on she doesn't sit down any further but with the van on the towbar drop plate grounds on speed bumps and bad roads....not an ideal situation !
I don't think this problem will arise too often as I have just bought a new van which may be too heavy for the old girl. It may only pull the box trailer in future....still, I'd like it a bit higher. Oh, and she's not rusty either.
Any thoughts ?
Ted

[Forumadmin]

Yes there are ways of putting the rods and arms back incorrectly. The rods can of course wilt after heavy use. The front is adjustable for ride height.

If you think about it, rods can be put back in a different side and a different way around. The arms can be placed on a different face of the hexagon.

Trail and error is what I resorted to. Not sure if there is a procedure.

[Leo Bolter]

Gidday all.

As an addition to the previous remarks about the settling of the suspension (wilting . . . now there’s a word that describes it . . . and my personal state, nicely!). I would like to point out that all the load carrying rubber bushes will end up over the years, with the centres offset from that which was designed and while each would not amount to much . . . it all adds up!

SHOCK ABSORBERS:
The static height of our cars should not be effected by the dampers provided they are not “Air Shocksâ€

[TedAllen]

Good tips, guys,
I am not sure whether these bars will have ever been out. Certainly not in the last 35 yrs. On thinking about the ride height I would think that the height is correct if the sill is parallel to the the ground. She's stood on the flat now so I shall attack her with a measure tomorrow and see what the difference is at the ends of the sill. I think in my case a pair of gas shocks may be the answer....if available !
Whilst on the subject, a rear torsion bar has been an extremely useful tool in the workshop and on the road over the last 20 odd years. It makes an excellent lever for jobs like forcing down lower wishbones to get ball joints together etc. I have lost count of the number of non-starts I have attended where the bar was threaded through a mass of pipes and cables to give a recalcitrant starter motor a couple of heavy clouts .....a sort of long hammer !

[Drummond Black]

Ted / Keith I think that Leo has summed it up correctly, however let me add my pennyworth ( thats all us retired folk can afford now !! )

Apart from ensuring that the spring arm rubbers are in a serviceable state it is worth checking the outer alloy castings that trap the rear torsion bars and locate the rubber bushes. They are usually in a sorry state and / or cracked. The original design was too thin and did not allow for the usual corrosion that occurs. The replacement castings are off a much thicked section and are much more robust.

When I first assembled the Jupiter the rear height was about two inches too high. I spoke to Steve Keil about it and his advice was to leave it and run it for a bit and see what happens. Lo and behold within afew weeks it settled down to the correct height and has remained correct ever since.

Many many years ago I had a problem with my first Javelin which sat very low and after replacing all the rear rubbers and castings very little difference was obtained. I rectified the height level by taking the arms off again and cutting them near the torsion bar end ( not all the way ) opening them out slightly to form a vee and welding them up. I can remember making a jig to do this to ensure I only got a few degrees movement and that they were both welded up to obtain height. This proved to be very successful and the modified arms remained on the car till its end.

Drummond

[David Morris]

Hi Ted and All,

This post raises some interesting recollections from a couple of years ago.

When we purchased our current black Javelin ( DCB 246 ) she was really quite low at the rear, so much so that she would easily 'bottom' on the rear axle bump stops when carrying more than one passenger. The 'top' of the wheel arches were then about level with the deepest indentation on the wheel pressings with nobody in the vehicle.

I thought about all the solutions that have been mentioned above and whilst she was in for serious chassis repair to the front legs with Dennis Sparrow, ( remember to keep those vertical bolts tight on the front suspension fixings!! ) and at the rear Dennis and I thought seriously about cutting and welding the rear spring arms to reset the ride height. Then the penny dropped!

Our car had been owned by Ken Lees back in the 60's ( she was in Golden Sand then ) and he had used her extensively for competition, as he was the then competition secretary in the JCC. He had obviously reversed the rear arms, which are handed, to achieve a lower rear ride height and presumably better roadholding? Putting the arms back on their correct sides solved the situation completely!

I have just been out to the garage and at the rears there is now just about 1" of clear rubber visible above the wheel rims and the 'top' of the wheel arches. To be fair, there is about 1" on one side and 0.5" on the other side, but this must be a variable dependent on the front torsion bar settings and the quantity of tools, spares etc. in the boot!

I hope this helps. Certainly, I have found a difference in the 'squiggyness' of the rear torsion bar rubbers. I had one genuine Jowett NOS example, and this was quite hard, compared with what had been fitted to the car. I managed to find three more of the same type from JCS and these four are now on the car, so perhaps this helps as well?

All the best,

David

[TedAllen]

Thanks Drummond,
I might have known a Scotsman would be pleading poverty soon after retirement ! Give me ring and I'll send you a couple of bob to tide you over until pension day ! I also did this trick with the arms, cutting a "V" out and welding them up. I had them around the workshop for years but never got round to fitting them. They have now disappeared...like all things kept for later use!
David, your car sounds as though it's not much higher than mine !
All good info though and very welcome.
Ted

[ian Howell]

I was very pleased to see a reference to Ken Lees in this thread.

I attended one of the club committee meetings (in Luton I think?) back in the early 70's and Ken's Javelin was parked across the road where Ken and I stood watching the world pass by. I didn't know it was his and I commented on it's apparently 'neglected' state.

Ken did not flinch, but casually remarked that it got that way because he used it a lot for racing!

It is good to see that the car survived what must have neen a fairly arduous existence under Ken's custody!

(They never wear out, they never wear out . . . .)