GME Multi leaf v GME Parabolics articulation

[Cornish Rattler]

Hi guys

In the garage over the weekend i noticed that one of the rear halfshaft gaskets was leaking on my sons S3 88 so on Saturday i decided to replace the gasket and when jacking up the landy under the shocker plate and i noticed that i could jack the landy up at least twice as much as i can jack up my S2a 88 till the opposite tyre starts to lift, the S3 is on std multi leaf GME springs and my S2a is on GME Parabolics and both have 235's fitted and both are used on road only and the S3 feels more softer ride, any idea's please 🤔

[David Sparkes]

What you describe is a natural characteristic as Parabolics do not have the built-in roll stiffness that the multi-leaf springs do.

TeriAnn Wakeman noted this.

"Properly set up these (parabolic) springs will provide almost coil spring like softness. However since nothing comes for free there are a couple penalties that come with the soft parabolic spring. One is an increase of side sway. Two to four leaves only attached at the ends and middle have considerably less resistance to side torsion than a block of leaves in constant contact along their lengths. So side sway on curves, from quick maneuvers and body tilts for terrain will be more, and the dynamic centre of gravity will effectively be a little higher."

Regards.

[missingsid]

Am I reading this correctly, the S3 on std type leafs has better articulation than the S2 on Paras?

If this is right then I am very interested in the reason!

All I can think is the S3 has more weight so compressing the springs more?

[Snagger]

Leaf springs aren’t all a set rate.  The original multi leaf semi elliptical leaf springs had different stiffnesses for different applications, with varying numbers of leafs and thicknesses of each leaf - the softer springs generally had more leafs but each was thinner, while the stiff springs have thicker leaves but less of them.  LR used stiffer front springs for diesels than petrols, thicker rear springs for pick ups than station wagons and so on.  Lightweights even had a special set of springs if they were FFR.  
 

Parabolics vary by manufacturer, but are generally set up as a compromise, the manufacturer only selling one rate of front spring (two leaf) and typically standard or heavy duty rear springs where the HD just has an extra leaf added to the standard.  They are not tuned to the vehicle like the originals.

So, it seems the SIII has the more supple and comfortable spec of the semi elliptical type while the SII has a generic mid-range set up on the parabolics.

[Chicken Drumstick]

8 hours ago, Cornish Rattler said:

Hi guys

In the garage over the weekend i noticed that one of the rear halfshaft gaskets was leaking on my sons S3 88 so on Saturday i decided to replace the gasket and when jacking up the landy under the shocker plate and i noticed that i could jack the landy up at least twice as much as i can jack up my S2a 88 till the opposite tyre starts to lift, the S3 is on std multi leaf GME springs and my S2a is on GME Parabolics and both have 235's fitted and both are used on road only and the S3 feels more softer ride, any idea's please 🤔

I'm willing to bet the parabolics are of a heavy spring rate. When looking into this over the years, almost all the sellers/makers only sell HD spring rates with 3 or more leaves. I suspect this is because a parabolic will allow more roll and they are trying to prevent this.

Heystee offer some flexy light spring rate springs, but had none in stock when I wanted them. So I went with Rocky Mountain Spares (which are very similar). I went 2 leaf. Which was too soft for hauling, but rode very well on the road or rough terrain and had lots of flex.

Sadly not mine anymore. Had a few other mods, but the parabolics worked very well.

[Cornish Rattler]

8 hours ago, Chicken Drumstick said:

I'm willing to bet the parabolics are of a heavy spring rate. When looking into this over the years, almost all the sellers/makers only sell HD spring rates with 3 or more leaves. I suspect this is because a parabolic will allow more roll and they are trying to prevent this.

Heystee offer some flexy light spring rate springs, but had none in stock when I wanted them. So I went with Rocky Mountain Spares (which are very similar). I went 2 leaf. Which was too soft for hauling, but rode very well on the road or rough terrain and had lots of flex.

Sadly not mine anymore. Had a few other mods, but the parabolics worked very well.

Thank's CD, yeah i'm looking at fitting a roof tent at some point and will probably go back to std GME springs as i want to put camping stuff in the back as well but i was very suprised of what i found as i always thought paras would give better articutation even though the rears are 3 leaf and fronts are 2 leaf, and i've not long changed from std shocks to longer shocks thinking it was the shocks that was the problem as i had the std shocks in the garage when fitting the paras, now i know ☹

[Cornish Rattler]

13 hours ago, missingsid said:

Am I reading this correctly, the S3 on std type leafs has better articulation than the S2 on Paras?

If this is right then I am very interested in the reason!

All I can think is the S3 has more weight so compressing the springs more?

Yes to the S3 on std springs and better articulation than my 2a on paras but no to the S3 being heavier as the S3 88 is an empty truck cab and my S2a 88 is an empty van 🤔

But one thing i have noticed is the S3 has a lot more body roll than the 2a 😕

Edited June 7, 2021 by Cornish Rattler

[deep]

Probably because I typically buy older, well-worn Land Rovers, I've found nicely run in leaf springs to be very supple and to provide great articulation.  (You can tell the springs are nicely run in because they have notably reduced thickness where they rub on each other!) In fact, I would say the improvements brought on with coils were more to do with geometry under load than actual articulation... 

[Cornish Rattler]

12 hours ago, Snagger said:

Leaf springs aren’t all a set rate.  The original multi leaf semi elliptical leaf springs had different stiffnesses for different applications, with varying numbers of leafs and thicknesses of each leaf - the softer springs generally had more leafs but each was thinner, while the stiff springs have thicker leaves but less of them.  LR used stiffer front springs for diesels than petrols, thicker rear springs for pick ups than station wagons and so on.  Lightweights even had a special set of springs if they were FFR.  
 

Parabolics vary by manufacturer, but are generally set up as a compromise, the manufacturer only selling one rate of front spring (two leaf) and typically standard or heavy duty rear springs where the HD just has an extra leaf added to the standard.  They are not tuned to the vehicle like the originals.

So, it seems the SIII has the more supple and comfortable spec of the semi elliptical type while the SII has a generic mid-range set up on the parabolics.

Thanks Snagger, yes that is correct, so after billing it looks like i will be changing springs ☹️

[missingsid]

Interesting, as the whole point of Paras is to increase flex I am stunned that suppliers provide stiffer spring because they are too flexible. I realise that I am lucky that my LR is not an everyday car whereas for lots of people they are.

This has made me reasses my current leaf spring set.

[Cornish Rattler]

When i first got into series  landy's and replaced the springs i used Paddocks for replacement springs as well as other parts and as there was a vast difference in price between BP and OEM std springs which i think was British springs back in the 80's / 90's i always went for BP std springs then i think after getting back into classic cars for a few years then going back to series landys again paras came along but was a bit pricey so again i fitted std BP springs but later went to GME paras as i think Paddocks had started selling GME stuff then which at the time i thought was ok and ran them for about 4 years then sold the landy as i started to get into coil sprung landy's and then later went back to series landy's again and replaced the springs during the rebuild with GME paras then we got my sons S3 and replaced the springs with GME std springs and this is what we've found 🤔

[Chicken Drumstick]

5 hours ago, missingsid said:

Interesting, as the whole point of Paras is to increase flex I am stunned that suppliers provide stiffer spring because they are too flexible. I realise that I am lucky that my LR is not an everyday car whereas for lots of people they are.

This has made me reasses my current leaf spring set.

I think the issue is, most times the spring rate or intended use isn't published by the sellers/resellers in the UK. Years back Heystee used to have some good info on their site listing all of the different springs from 2 leaf through to 4 leaf rears for the 88. Looking today I can see that info isn't there any longer and they don't list as many options. Also their shop comes up with a Wordpress site so maybe they no longer trade anyway. If it wasn't for the info, I wouldn't have known what to look for.

 

Rockymountain still have some good info:

https://parabolicsprings.com/parabolicsprings.html

 

[steve b]

The correct spring rates are in the factory workshop manual and as far as I can tell Jones Springs are the only manufacturers able to make to this data , and do it very well . I will not supply any other make to my clients and all the sets I've supplied and fitted go on at precisely the right standard ride height , have plenty of flex and ride extremely well . 

The vehicles sit perfectly level across the axle and there has been no evidence of sag at all .  

Steve b

[missingsid]

Ah the modern selling curse, provide sufficient info to sell but not enough to cause more complex questions that they can't handle and cost more.

[Cornish Rattler]

I think i've sorted it i've just jacked them both up S3 is still empty but 2a has all the camping gear in it and couldn'd be bothered to take it out but both seem to jack up the same 11"ish so think with weight in it my paras flex the same as std springs 

[Cornish Rattler]

31 minutes ago, Cornish Rattler said:

I think i've sorted it i've just jacked them both up S3 is still empty but 2a has all the camping gear in itfor Billing and couldn'd be bothered to take it out but both seem to jack up the same 11"ish so think with weight in it my paras flex the same as std springs 

 

Edited June 11, 2021 by Cornish Rattler

[missingsid]

Such sweet looking motors.

[Cornish Rattler]

23 minutes ago, missingsid said:

Such sweet looking motors.

Cheer's missingsid driving them both to Billing in two weeks time 😁

[missingsid]

9 hours ago, Cornish Rattler said:

Cheer's missingsid driving them both to Billing in two weeks time 😁

What one on each foot?

Sure thar was said here previously by someone else but could not resist.

[Cornish Rattler]

2 hours ago, missingsid said:

What one on each foot?

Sure thar was said here previously by someone else but could not resist.

Haha 😀

[oneandtwo]

The best riding series I’ve had was a 2A lightweight modified for trialling with military spring hangers front and rear, with front dumb irons modified to military Spec with increased drop. It had custom elliptical leaf springs but with only three leaves - the 7.50 tyres would contact the tub on articulation, and it rode like a well sorted coiler. Was also running an SU carb on tweaked 2286 petrol with full cage, tank in rear load bed, ignition coil mounted in cab and a host of other well thought out mods. The rear springs are visible in the photo below

I sometimes regret rebuilding it back to standard(ish) onto a new Richards chassis and Rocky Mountain 2 leaf parabolics now.

 

[missingsid]

Another trialling mod was to use Transit single leaf front springs on IIRC the rear?

[Snagger]

Has anyone been following Design&Development?  Bryan has made up a few prototype sets of swivelling shackles for front and rear axles alike.  They’re akin to the Gon2Far rear revolvers.  He’s planning to start evaluation soon.

[landroversforever]

On 6/8/2021 at 6:10 AM, missingsid said:

Interesting, as the whole point of Paras is to increase flex I am stunned that suppliers provide stiffer spring because they are too flexible. I realise that I am lucky that my LR is not an everyday car whereas for lots of people they are.

This has made me reasses my current leaf spring set.

Doesn't surprise me to be honest. Look at the number of people sold (and choosing to buy) 'HD' springs etc for coilers. Massive suspension lifts born from stupidly high spring rates so they end up with less flex than before. Waaaay too many suppliers out there don't know what they're selling and why so unenlightened customer doesn't know they could achieve better.

[Snagger]

This is the point.  Like +2” coils and other mods for LRs, they’re generic, while the original springs were more tuned to the vehicles they were fitted to.  Look at all the multicoloured bands painted on genuine LR coils to denote their rates and then look at any aftermarket coils, cheap or expensive, and you find the same lack of detail - they just slap a height increase and the “std” or “HD” and call it done.  It’s just the same for most leaf springs and all the dampers out there for both suspension types.  Look at how all the parabolics suppliers include Pro Comp ES9000s, despite the clear evidence their damping rate is way too high and that ES3000s are far more suitable, both on and off road, even for heavy vehicles.
 

You don’t get any significant more articulation from parabolics unless you get a soft set or are heavy - their most notable benefits just that they don’t seize up like semi elliptical leaf springs.  If you have the time and inclination to maintain the original springs, they give better ride, flex and wrap resistance.