FridgeFreezer Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 Revisiting the idea of slightly more comfortable springing for the 109, I've been pondering the idea of fitting modern style flat (or closer to flat) springs but without either of the usual routes of fitting longer springs or going SOA. The reasons are that I don't want to have to add length to the front of the chassis to accommodate longer springs, and I don't need the extra lift and wrap that SOA would bring (I already have portals so the extra leverage of SOA would be unhelpful). As far as I can see, all it needs is either relocated (lower) spring & shackle mounts, or longer spring mounts on the front of the spring & longer shackles on the back. I'm also wondering if both can be achieved by using MOD spring mounts which are naturally lower, or at least something of the style. First question is does anyone know of any springs which are the same length / load rating (or close) but flatter? Discuss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazzar Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 Why not use standard springs? Bring them to a commercial vehicle spring business and they will give them any arc you require. But if they have the same spring rate will they have any more comfort? I know with the portals you have loads of clearance but the idea of adding more stuff underneeth the chassis goes against the grain. What I'm going to try (time permitting) is put UHMW tape between the leaves, and to taper the ends of the springs (ie take the sharp edge off them) to reduce the resistance to movement. Debate: G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FridgeFreezer Posted August 23, 2009 Author Share Posted August 23, 2009 It's a good point - I hadn't thought of having a normal set flattened. Although I see your point about adding stuff under the chassis, I think you could go for something a fair bit flatter without adding an awful lot of extra stuff underneath, here's what I was thinking: Front spring mount lowered a few inches (possibly using mil outriggers or a modification of) Shackle mount moved to being on the bottom of the chassis rail rather than tubed through it. I would probably only do the front springs, the rears are longer and a bit more forgiving anyway. UHMW on a normal leaf pack should soften it up, the friction between the leaves is a deliberate part of the operation but how critical that is, and what happens if you remove it, I would say you'd just have to find out. Tapering the ends is making the spring thinner, so reducing the rate a little. The thought has just occurred that the Santana PS10 runs leaf springs and rides quite nicely, so I wonder what the details are of that setup? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRecklessEngineer Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 Fit coils? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazzar Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 On my plan: reduced friction would be compensated by using stiffer shocks, only the very tips of the leaves would be radiused, shouldn't affect the rate at all, as there is no spring action in the very corner of the end of the spring. If you are slinging the rear spring hanger under the rail then you might try longer springs by moving it back, transit rears or something - the longer the spring the more articulation. Axle position would mean an uneven length front and rear - might even help with axle tramp/warp. Or would it make it worse? Never seen a new Santana (last time I saw a Santana I was 12, in Spain on hols!) so can't help you there. Good discussion! G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich_P Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 The thought has just occurred that the Santana PS10 runs leaf springs and rides quite nicely, so I wonder what the details are of that setup? What little I do know is that the Santana PS10 utilises parabolic springs, and it also features grease nipples on the springs. But having said that, I'm not sure if the nipples were for the bushes or the spring leaves. Probably the former given the concept of parabolics! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicks90 Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 fridge, might be worth speaking to some of the zuki boys from difflock who have fitted YJ springs, from all accounts they are a few inches longer than zuke springs - and series springs are also a few inches longer than zuke springs. so they may be fairly simillar. YJ spring packs are definitely alot flatter than series efforts and both vehicles are of a simillar weight, so could be about right for your needs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.