Thanks Julian, I can hopefully satisfactorily answer your first point but can only give further questions to the second:
Point One.
I didn't say it was unnecessary to use a rose joint, only that its reliance on water shields is its weakness.
Over the years I have completely stripped three front suspensions....a Sprint with 33,000 miles, a Dolomite 1300 and my current 1850 (50,000 miles)
and all had varying degrees of corrosion to the bolts. The 1850 was worst as one bolt had seized resulting in the pickup holes being worn oval (I fitted new uprights).
Hence why it is the water shields that I don't like.
The problem with rubber bushes is that said rubber is bonded to the steel centre, therefore on a Dolomite suspension the rubber has to work very hard
resulting in a short lifespan (and of course associated deterioration of other components and the road holding of the car.)
Superflex bushes replicate the operation of the RJ rather than a rubber bush (the Superflex bush moves around its fixed stainless steel centre),
hence my comment about their suitability as an alternative.
(That is also the case for Superflex bushes intended for MacPhersion strut TCA bushes where originally rubber, eg T2000, Cortina, Capri....)
Point 2. Are voided bushes really significantly more expensive to make? I am thinking I disagree that they are, given the volumes we are talking about?
(What is curious is why use two when one could suffice....you could use the voided bushes at the back.)
(Also, the bushes used to retail for the same price so I don't know if price would have come into the decision at the design stage? Whatever, the retail prices
are irrelevant to the question.)
When they were testing prototypes did they try all solid bushes (or all voided)? With 155 tyres on rather narrow rims I am thinking that any differences
in suspension setups are harder to determine?
Using voided bushes was common to other manufacturers too.
These bushes are fine but do however have a rather short lifespan. (I know someone who fitted them annually to a Cortina after the summer caravan holiday.)
On a more general theme....
Even though technologies have moved on since the 60s and 70s,
the main problem we have with certain remade parts is that they aren't as good as the original versions.
I have experimented with some alternative parts from other makes. This is not because I am necessarily dismissive of the original designs
but because I am looking for viable alternatives, which hopefully means resources can be directed into remaking quality parts where we have no alternative.
(On a personal level I will use remade or alternative parts rather than originals because I prefer that said originals be fitted on restorations.)
Many things are better nowadays, eg tyres, hoses, hose clips, oils, coolants, headlamps, radiators, wiper blades, switches, etc,etc.
Some things are not as good
brake pads, adhesives, fishing tackle.
Ian.
Register
Login
FAQ
Search
