Leaf spring question

[VK3UTE]

Hi All.

I am in the process of removing the rear springs from Mary my
2A 88 for clean up. I was thinking of removing 1 or 2 leafs as I don't plan to carry much weight and I would like the ride a little softer, has anyone else done this and if so was it successful? I have cleaned up the front springs and the difference is amazing! I

Cheers Simon

[chazza]

Yes. Do a search for "Parabolic Springs" on the S3 forum and see what Isuzurover did to his standard springs,

Cheers Charlie

[isuzurover]

Simon, If you have the OE 88" rears (11 leaves x 4ish mm ) then I wouldn't remove any. They are already ~160 lb/in which is quite soft. If you have LWB or aftermarket springs, then the OE 11 leafers are probably the best option.

[VK3UTE]

Thanks Isuzurover. :)

I will check to see what I have and follow your advise, if they are OE I will clean them up as was done for the front and hope the ride improves;)

Cheers Simon

[isuzurover]

Thanks Isuzurover. :)

I will check to see what I have and follow your advise, if they are OE I will clean them up as was done for the front and hope the ride improves;)

Cheers Simon

Just make sure they aren't aftermarket 11 x 5mm leaves. In which case they will be VERY stiff and you can remove plenty of leaves.

Many 88's were fitted with 109" springs, so the same applies.

[VK3UTE]

Pulled the rear springs apart today and they are all 5mm except the main leaf which is 6mm.
From that I assume they are the aftermarket ones;) so I cleaned and painted them and will assemble them with 3 or 4 leafs removed and see how they go. That might explain why the ride was so bad:angel:

[VK3UTE]

All back together, left out 4 leafs which kept the lengths equally spaced. What a difference:) when you hit a bump now the back wheels stay on the ground and you don't hit your head on the roof!

It does feel a little too soft but I will give her a run like this and see how she goes. Thanks for the advise:D

Front leafs before
http://www.aulro.com/afvb/members/vk3ute-albums-mary2-picture3090-img-2073.jpg

And after

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/members/vk3ute-albums-mary2-picture3091-img-2072.jpg

Cheers Simon

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Did you put some moly grease between the leaves, makes a great deal of difference.

[VK3UTE]

I used anti-seize paste which I hope will do the job ok.

[VK3UTE]

I got a little board in the shed today, I've always wondered how much articulation a standard 2a has:eek:

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/members/vk3ute-albums-mary2-picture3403-img-2370.jpg

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/members/vk3ute-albums-mary2-picture3404-img-2371.jpg

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/members/vk3ute-albums-mary2-picture3405-img-2372.jpg

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/members/vk3ute-albums-mary2-picture3406-img-2373.jpg

Not bad for an old girl. 430mm, nothing special done other than a clean, lube and a few leafs removed from the rear. She still has axle straps fitted too.

Then I got thinking how much better would a Defender be:angel:





Well

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/members/vk3ute-albums-mary2-picture3408-img-2375.jpg

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/members/vk3ute-albums-mary2-picture3407-img-2374.jpg

520mm not that much more really...

Would be interesting to see how much more a 2a military would have

Pretty cool I reckon:)

Cheers Simon

[Ozdunc]

Why do axle straps need to be used? Surely not to protect the shocks. To stop the shackle from over rotating?
Are they really needed? F40s and Fj60 don't have them for example.
If you use a more flexible leaf you could get more droop by utilising a longer shock. Although you may need to alter the top mount for the shock to allow for the longer closed length which might be a can of worms you don't want to open.

[Slunnie]

I would put money on the Military IIa having the least amount of travel with its stiff springs.

[VK3UTE]

Why do axle straps need to be used? Surely not to protect the shocks. To stop the shackle from over rotating?
Are they really needed? F40s and Fj60 don't have them for example.
If you use a more flexible leaf you could get more droop by utilising a longer shock. Although you may need to alter the top mount for the shock to allow for the longer closed length which might be a can of worms you don't want to open.

I figured they are there to protect the shocks and maybe the tail shaft from binding. Not really sure they are necessary.

I don't have any plans to modify anything, for 99.9% of the 4wding I do she is more than capabable:)

[JDNSW]

As far as i know they are to protect the shock absorbers. Many people have run without them without problems, but they are probably only needed in extreme conditions - heavy load, well lubricated springs, very rough conditions and shocks overheated and not damping properly so that they reach the end of their movement with the axle/chassis distance still rapidly increasing.

They fill the same role as the bump stops, but in the opposite direction. Properly installed, they should limit articulation no more than the shock absorbers themselves do.

John

[Warb]

From memory Rocky Mountain Parabolics recommend the check straps be set to support the axle 1/2 inch before the shocks bottom out, because they are designed, as John says, to prevent the shock itself acting as the stop and suffering damage as a result.

Some shocks may be more prone to damage than others, depending on design and quality, but it is also a matter of vehicle usage. At rock crawling speeds the shock will bottom out slowly and is unlikely to be damaged. But if the shock hits full extension and has to "catch" the entire weight of the axle, wheels, tyres, brakes etc. that are moving at high speed, then it's more likely to get damaged. Of course with rusty old leaves that are largely stuck together that may never happen, but with a newly assembled and lubricated spring pack, driven at speed down a rutted track with the vehicle being "launched" off the bumps and the rebound damping at minimum because the shock is hot, then.....

[Slunnie]

From memory Rocky Mountain Parabolics recommend the check straps be set to support the axle 1/2 inch before the shocks bottom out, because they are designed, as John says, to prevent the shock itself acting as the stop and suffering damage as a result.

Some shocks may be more prone to damage than others, depending on design and quality, but it is also a matter of vehicle usage. At rock crawling speeds the shock will bottom out slowly and is unlikely to be damaged. But if the shock hits full extension and has to "catch" the entire weight of the axle, wheels, tyres, brakes etc. that are moving at high speed, then it's more likely to get damaged. Of course with rusty old leaves that are largely stuck together that may never happen, but with a newly assembled and lubricated spring pack, driven at speed down a rutted track with the vehicle being "launched" off the bumps and the rebound damping at minimum because the shock is hot, then.....
Shocks these days should be pretty good. Coil spring and notably air spring shocks all catch the axle before the springs have released all of their force in addition to the weight and inertia of the unsprung mass.

[Warb]

Shocks these days should be pretty good. Coil spring and notably air spring shocks all catch the axle before the springs have released all of their force in addition to the weight and inertia of the unsprung mass.

But if the check strap is set to catch the axle only 10mm before the shock does, the question is whether 10mm of suspension travel is worth the risk (no matter how small) of a busted shock and possibly a ruined trip? For a competition vehicle that arrived on a trailer, 10mm may be important and the bust shock is part of the game, but on a week long camping trip to the middle of nowhere....

Rocky Mountain (I'm using them as an example only because they document the check strap settings etc., whilst even the Green Bible doesn't) sell and recommend a couple of brands of "quality" shocks including OME. Yet they are still insistent about the fitting of check straps. Obviously there are the normal legal requirements for them to consider, they don't want to be sued because someones shocks got smashed, but even that suggests they believe there is some kind of a risk.

It is of course personal choice, but on my LRs I don't see a penalty in fitting check straps, and I do see at least a small potential for problems if I don't. They don't cost much, they don't create any problems, so I'll fit them!

[digger]

I'd very much like to see your lift test on the following...

a) a 2a 109 (to see comparison with 88")
b) 1 90 modern defender (again for comparison)
c) military 2a 88
d) military 2a 109
e) perente...


and
f) on a gunbuggy.... (it will be the same as the 88 but will mean another
photo of a gunbuggy on the forum :)


the diffences may be very interesting, so for the sake of science (well for my curiosity really) get out you landys , get out your forklifts, and lift, photograph and measure thanks!!

[Ozdunc]

If a shock doesn't have a built in bump stop, which I imagine a 40 year old shock didn't, a check strap would be a good idea. Modern shocks usually have internal bumpstops which should negate the need for the strap, bilsteins definitely do and I'm pretty sure most foam cells do as well other wise there'd be a whole heap of defenders with check straps instead of dislocation cones.

[isuzutoo-eh]

I thought check straps were to protect brake hoses!

[Warb]

If a shock doesn't have a built in bump stop, which I imagine a 40 year old shock didn't, a check strap would be a good idea. Modern shocks usually have internal bumpstops which should negate the need for the strap, bilsteins definitely do and I'm pretty sure most foam cells do as well other wise there'd be a whole heap of defenders with check straps instead of dislocation cones.

A dislocation cone can only work if the axle is still travelling freely. If the shock has reached its maximum extension, the axle must stop moving or break the shock to continue. So, by logic, if a dislocation cone ever sees the spring unseat, it is because the shock is "longer" than the uncompressed spring. I have no direct knowledge, but something makes me doubt that LR or any other manufacturer fit shocks that long as standard, so that argument only applies to very modified vehicles.

To prevent the spring from falling out, it would be more normal to limit to axle travel to less than the full extension of the spring. As Slunnie stated above, this means that the shock stops axle travel before the spring is uncompressed. Note that this means the entire system was DESIGNED to work that way. The Series LR was not. The point here is that if the entire axle mass on the Series is less than that of a Defender (as an example), then the Defender shock should indeed work without a check strap, but the Series does not use a Defender shock! If it is known for certain that the aftermarket shock fitted in the Series has been designed to catch the axle in that vehicle, then it should be fine. But that may vary from brand to brand, and we do know for certain that the original designers felt it needed a check strap.

So, for an Old Man Emu shock, is it safe to assume that the Series version shares the same bump stop componentry with the Defender version, and is therefore safe to use without straps? Probably. But how about the shocks that SuperCheap sell? They may share components with a shock that is designed to work that way, but on the other hand the designer of that shock should have known that the Series uses check straps, and therefore may have chosen to save a couple of dollars and leave out those un-needed components.

Also, as pointed out by isuzutoo-eh, fitting check straps does ensures that the brake hose is safe even if longer than original shocks are fitted, though the other approach here is to fit longer shocks, then fit check straps to suit those shocks, then fit a longer brake hose!

Disregarding all of the above for a moment, WHY wouldn't we fit them? A set of straps costs around $30 for OEM, and about $10 for aftermarket. Fitting them is not difficult, or time consuming. They have no real downside, unless we get upset about the loss of an almost insignificant 10mm of suspension travel and a few grams of extra weight. So for a few dollars, and no downside, a $100+ dollar (if you fit OME's) shock absorber is given extra protection. Or we can save a handful of dollars and potentially risk shock damage and a ruined trip.

I just don't see a reason not to fit them!

[zulu Delta 534]

There is one major reason TO fit travel restricting check straps and that becomes fairly obvious if you follow the force generated by the initial impact all the way through its short journey, and think through what happens when one wheel is lifted off the ground, and often, violently.
Let us follow the force exerted through the axle, then the spring to the damper.......and then where? When the damper reaches its limit, all this force is still transmitted further on through the measly little mounting that holds the damper to the chassis, and then finally to the thin metal that makes up a Land Rover chassis rail itself. End of journey.
In earlier vehicles this fitting was mounted by a single bolt that protruded through the chassis rail. This is the piece (chassis rail) that ends up wearing all the force whether your new fangled shockies have internal travel stops fitted or not, and in some severe cases and over time, this component will fail and tear. Is this a part that you want to damage?
Travel check straps are a relatively cheap consumable that have been put in place to protect much more expensive parts such as, the damper itself, the brake line system, the prop shaft universals and sliding splines, the integrity of the single point mounting system of the damper itself and finally and most importantly, the skeleton of the vehicle itself. This is done quite simply by spreading the shock over a wider section and therefore minimising the shock in any one part of the frame. The strap itself, because of its make-up, offers a certain degree of elasticity that further absorbs/dampens shock.
I can not see one reason at all that would make it beneficial to remove this vital protection item, to apparently gain a couple of cms of wheel travel, something that can usually be ably compensated by a bit of applied driving technique.
Regards
Glen

[Ozdunc]

All good reasons to fit check straps. But I concur with isuzutoo-eh that it would be to protect the brake lines primarily. That hadn't occurred to me.
I disagree that a quality shock will fail because of repeated full extension because the inherent damping when extending will control the rate at which the shock extends. Compared to the forces the shock and suspension under goes under heavy/full compression, full extension is small beer.
For cheap shocks I'd always use a check strap as they are generally cheap for good reason, but with a quality shock I'd be happy to take the risk for that extra 10mm. Each to their own.:)
Under no circumstances would I be happy to run without bumpstops.

[isuzurover]

As far as i know they are to protect the shock absorbers. Many people have run without them without problems, but they are probably only needed in extreme conditions - heavy load, well lubricated springs, very rough conditions and shocks overheated and not damping properly so that they reach the end of their movement with the axle/chassis distance still rapidly increasing.

They fill the same role as the bump stops, but in the opposite direction. Properly installed, they should limit articulation no more than the shock absorbers themselves do.

John

Check straps can stretch much more than a fully extended shock absorber, so they would need to be shorter, thereby increasing effective spring rates and/or limiting travel.

I would suggest that myself and others in the LROCB who do (or did) fairly serious offroading in series landies with no check straps would have found the need for them if there was any.

For the last ~17 years (and longer for some other LROCB members), I have regularly been doing things like:

Heavily loaded (1.1T of Jarrah)
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

Long distances (Brisbane-Perth) with heavy loads in hot weather and soft well lubricated springs, including plenty of offroading.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2012/05/815.jpg

Plenty of serious offroading that flexed the springs to the limit:
http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p29/isuzurover/LR_PICS/DSC_0600.jpg
http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p29/isuzurover/100_0035m.jpg

All with (very) soft springs, no check straps, and either OEM military or OME shocks - which were often past their best!
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

In all that time, I have only broken one FRONT shock (which were never fitted with check straps) and no rear shocks.

We are all forgetting that coil-sprung landies use the shocks to limit travel from the factory, yet don't need check straps.

All the arguments on here are idle speculation with no basis in reality. the check straps were an idea dreamt up by over cautious engineers in the late 40's and based on 1940's metalurgy/shock absorber strength.



There is one major reason TO fit travel restricting check straps and that becomes fairly obvious if you follow the force generated by the initial impact all the way through its short journey, and think through what happens when one wheel is lifted off the ground, and often, violently.
Let us follow the force exerted through the axle, then the spring to the damper.......and then where? When the damper reaches its limit, all this force is still transmitted further on through the measly little mounting that holds the damper to the chassis, and then finally to the thin metal that makes up a Land Rover chassis rail itself. End of journey.
In earlier vehicles this fitting was mounted by a single bolt that protruded through the chassis rail. This is the piece (chassis rail) that ends up wearing all the force whether your new fangled shockies have internal travel stops fitted or not, and in some severe cases and over time, this component will fail and tear. Is this a part that you want to damage?
Travel check straps are a relatively cheap consumable that have been put in place to protect much more expensive parts such as, the damper itself, the brake line system, the prop shaft universals and sliding splines, the integrity of the single point mounting system of the damper itself and finally and most importantly, the skeleton of the vehicle itself. This is done quite simply by spreading the shock over a wider section and therefore minimising the shock in any one part of the frame. The strap itself, because of its make-up, offers a certain degree of elasticity that further absorbs/dampens shock.
I can not see one reason at all that would make it beneficial to remove this vital protection item, to apparently gain a couple of cms of wheel travel, something that can usually be ably compensated by a bit of applied driving technique.
Regards
Glen

Nice theories Glan but no basis in fact. Those that remove check straps are not breaking rear shocks, just like coilers don't go around breaking shocks.

The one time I broke a shock (FRONT). I managed to do another 2 days offroading then drive ~300 km home with no problems. On a series landie you could remove all 4 shocks and drive around without any problems, as even soft springs like mine provide sufficient damping and resistance to over-extension.

With leaf springs you need all the advantages you can get offroad. Btw - your assumption that those removing check straps are lacking driving technique are wrong. People like JasonK from LROCB is one of the most skilled drivers I have ever had the pleasure of offroading with, and has been doing difficult offroading in his ex-mil IIA for >30 years with soft springs and no check straps. He has already found the limits, and those with check straps would not be able to come close. He frequently out-drove locked series with check straps still fitted...

edit: Btw - here is Jason's IIA. (No check straps since the '80s!)
http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p29/isuzurover/LR_PICS/LROCB_etc022.jpg





...

I just don't see a reason not to fit them!

Conversely, the only reason I can see why you would bother to fit them is:
(a) You have a show vehicle which you want to be original
(b) you never leave the tarmac (even then you can save yourself some money by not fitting them).

For anyone who does any serious offroading, they are a significant disadvantage. As above, I know half a dozen series owners who collectively have >100 years experience driving series landies without check straps fitted. None have ever broken rear shocks.

As above, the imaginary purpose to save brake hoses if a shock snaps is just that! (I run standard length (military) hoses all round).

[Warb]

I disagree that a quality shock will fail because of repeated full extension because the inherent damping when extending will control the rate at which the shock extends. Compared to the forces the shock and suspension under goes under heavy/full compression, full extension is small beer.

When a sudden load or unload is applied to the axle, in basic terms oil is forced through valves in a piston. The forces involved, and the reaction of the valves (rate of fluid movment etc.) have been carefully calculated by the designer of the system. The reactions are not always linear, a sudden load may allow fluid to move more quickly than a slow push. Equally the resistance to upward movement is less than the resistance to downward movement, so the force of the "bump" is absorbed by suspension movement in a controlled but gentle way, and the car is not then propelled skyward by the spring returning to it's rest position.

None of the above, however, predicts what happens in a shock absorber when it hits full extension. If the shock has been designed to provide the end point to travel, then the mechanism to achieve that will have been built in. Such is the case in coil sprung vehicles, where (as was pointed out by Zulu Delta) the mounting points are also designed to handle those stresses. In the LR Series, none of that is true of the original design.

This does not, of course, mean that the shock will fail, nor that the chassis will fail. But it means that removing the check straps is moving outside the original design criteria and intention of the system. Most systems have sufficient over-engineering that small changes are easily absorbed, but that's a leap of faith unless the calculations are done.

It may be interesting to consider that car manufacturers are notoriously penny-pinching, and very keen to save money where possible. Yet as far as I know in 30 odd years of production they never saw fit to save the cost of the check straps and associated bracketry. It may be that they were originally specified by 1940's engineers, as isuzurover says, but the engineers through to the 80's (?) didn't see fit to change them despite falling profits and all the other problems that the company underwent!

I admit I'm new to Series Land Rovers, but my experience of every other car and bike is that it is always possible to improve the performance, but without careful consideration and often extensive secondary modifications, such improvements almost always come at the expense of reliability or longevity. It's rare for car companies to spend money or limit performance for no reason. But then again, we are talking about LR here, so who knows?

[series3]

Hey Isuzurover,

Do you know what sort of open/closed lengths your non-standard shocks are? Have you got extended mounts for them?

Sam

[isuzurover]

Hey Isuzurover,

Do you know what sort of open/closed lengths your non-standard shocks are? Have you got extended mounts for them?

Sam

Hi Sam,

Mine is a mil chassis so has 1.5" spring hanger and bump shackle extensions, so abut a 0.75" lift over standard. The Mil shocks are slightly longer to account for this - so ~0.75-1" longer, extended and closed lengths.

On the front all I have done is:
Fit softer springs (similar to 88" petrol springs).
Have the OEM shocks rebuilt by WW shocks.
Remove the bump stop spacers (the shocks are just short enough to get full bump stop compression).

Rear:
Softer springs (similar to 109" station wagon springs).
For a long time I ran (reconditioned) OEM monroe military shocks. However I eventually swapped to 110/RRC rear shocks, which are about 2" longer than standard. I still have the military bump stop spacer in the rear so the shocks aren't too long in compressed length.

Note I have not modified shock mounts or spring mounts at all (F or R).

[zulu Delta 534]

Nice theories Glan but no basis in fact. Those that remove check straps are not breaking rear shocks, just like coilers don't go around breaking shocks.



Fair call I guess. It appears that over a couple of years I have obviously wasted a fair bit of time and effort re-welding cracked chassis rails and broken shock absorber mounts for no apparent reason.
Regards
Glen

[isuzurover]

Fair call I guess. It appears that over a couple of years I have obviously wasted a fair bit of time and effort re-welding cracked chassis rails and broken shock absorber mounts for no apparent reason.
Regards
Glen

Any pics???

I have never seen a broken shock mount on a series. Seized shocks? Rusty mounts?

Cracked chassis rails are likely due to rust or springs that are too stiff. Military 109" springs are ridiculously stiff.

The bottom line is that an ex-mil 109" with OE springs is incapable of fully extending (or even fully compressing) the suspension under design loads. A SIII 109" for example is fitted with 480 lb/in rear springs, so 960 lb for every inch of spring compression, and almost that (plus shoch damping) for extension. Even if you fully compressed the springs and launched the car off a cliff you won't get full shock extension. I have tried (OK, not using a cliff).

Any cracking of chassis rails you have observed would be due to overly stiff springs - and maybe even as a result of having check straps fitted???

[Warb]

For anyone who does any serious offroading, they are a significant disadvantage. As above, I know half a dozen series owners who collectively have >100 years experience driving series landies without check straps fitted. None have ever broken rear shocks.

I've done some serious offroading in the past, and I'd be surprised if many people would even notice 1/2inch less wheel travel. These days I don't have much time to go out just to drive, but as a farmer I do a fair amount of off-road driving anyway!

It is also worth considering that a few experienced drivers not breaking shocks doesn't guarantee the modification is safe. We've all seen situations where one person manages and another breaks equipment. Equally I imagine we all know people who can make old equipment perform miracles, and others who destroy new "top of the range" gear whilst doing something very simple. Experienced drivers tend to be aware of the limits of their equipment, and to keep in mind the risks, so even whilst attempting something quite difficult they are often easier on their equipment than others. My father used to call this "mechanical sympathy", and it explains why beginners often have dented panels and worn out winches, whilst the experienced drivers are sitting at the end of the same track waiting for them to catch up!

Perhaps the lack of shock breakages reflects driving skill and experience as much as design integrity?

[isuzurover]

....I'd be surprised if many people would even notice 1/2inch less wheel travel. These days I don't have much time to go out just to drive, but as a farmer I do a fair amount of off-road driving anyway!


....



Perhaps the lack of shock breakages reflects driving skill and experience as much as design integrity?

Many of series owners - maybe not. Those who do serious offroading (certainly). i.e. the average farmer wants to get around their farm as easily as possible. They don't go and drive up rock waterfalls because they are there.

I personally noticed a huge difference when I removed my front bump stop spacers (1.5") and when I fitted slightly longer rear shocks. Both changes only on the order of what removing check straps would give you.

Most of those I mentioned in LROCB who removed their check straps were qualified engineers and or automotive tradespeople. There was a large range of mechanical sympathy (or lack thereof) amongst them. The list of landie parts I have broken over the years is LONG - but no rear shocks or spring leaves...

I cannot accept that if there were inherent design issues with removing check straps then so many people could have managed for so long without them - with absolutely no shock etc failures on the rear axle...

[VK3UTE]

Opened a can of worms here:wasntme:

Seems to me if the front doesn't have them the back will be ok with out them too. Saying that I've no plans to remove them but I might disconnect one and park her on the forklift and see if there is any difference. Interesting discussion...

[goingbush]

First thing I ever did with any of my Series 2's was to fit Army shackles and rip the Axle straps out, Never had any shocker issues or flipped over shackles.

Looking at the forklift test the Series 2 LR has more wheel travel than a D3 / D4 ,


Just a Thought
Im pretty sure its an easy to fit old Transit Van front springs into the rear of a Landrover , They are a thick single leaf, As are Holden SB Combo rear springs, Im sure they will also fit. They are very supple & don't bind up at all, great for off road work - probably not so good for load carrying.

interesting comparison video here of a difflocked leaf sprung 2A swb with no wheel travel and a Coil Sprung 90 with a wicked amount of suspension travel.

LR execs probably saw this and thought they would not worry about suspension travel in the Disco 3/4

fast forward it to about 2.28

Lockers vs Extreme Suspension - YouTube

[series3]

First thing I ever did with any of my Series 2's was to fit Army shackles and rip the Axle straps out, Never had any shocker issues or flipped over shackles.

What implications come with fitting extended shackles to a non-military chassis?

Sam

[JDNSW]

What implications come with fitting extended shackles to a non-military chassis?

Sam

Rear - change in angle on back U-joint, no real problems except possible vibration. On swb, may hit U-joint angle limit.

Front - change in angle on front U-joint, change in steering caster - potential steering problems. The front prop shaft may contact the gearbox crossmember.

All problems can be prevented by fitting the modified spring hangers as on the military and One Ton chassis. A cutout for the front prop shaft is needed in the gearbox crossmember.

John

[Warb]

I personally noticed a huge difference when I removed my front bump stop spacers (1.5") and when I fitted slightly longer rear shocks. Both changes only on the order of what removing check straps would give you.

If the spacers can be removed without the shocks bottoming before the un-spaced bump stops, and there isn't an issue with the springs flattening out to a length greater than the distance from the mount to the end of the shackle, then I'd agree that you can do without them.

On the rear of the '59 I fitted longer shocks (and longer brake hoses) to give me extra travel, and then fitted check straps adjusted to about 10mm shorter than the shock length. The check straps aren't the original material, but a very thick rubberised strap as used by Rocky Mountain. If it doesn't stretch I've lost 10mm travel at most, which still gives more than the original set-up. If it does stretch - which is more likely and probably preferable to stopping the axle "dead" - then depending on the degree of stretch I have either a strap slowing and stopping the axle prior to the shock doing so, or some assistance to the shock in that process. In either case I have more travel than standard, and avoid the shock and its mountings taking the full load of abruptly stopping the axle. I've yet to test the results, as I'm still rebuilding the vehicle.

On the other hand, my farm 88" has fencing wire holding the suspension together, no rubber in the bushes and no oil in the shocks. Apart from a great deal of banging and crashing as the springs move about in the "bushes", and a somewhat firm yet bouncy (?) ride, at off-road speeds it still drives OK.

[85 county]

ops

[happydad59]

Good day all, I am new to Series Rovers (but have 3 classic rangies before) and have just purchased a well documented "unfinished project" - most of it is together and the rest is in a few boxes. My first question is that when it came off the trailer at home I noticed that it had a significant lean to port, the distance from axle to chassis was 20 mm greater on one side. I am assuming that this is a result of springs grabbing after being pulled down tight with the tie down straps. I noticed early in this thread that a set of springs had been pulled apart. Does this required special tools or any replacement parts to reassemble. What should be done to the springs when they are apart? Paint? Grease? Oil?

[isuzurover]

Good day all, I am new to Series Rovers (but have 3 classic rangies before) and have just purchased a well documented "unfinished project" - most of it is together and the rest is in a few boxes. My first question is that when it came off the trailer at home I noticed that it had a significant lean to port, the distance from axle to chassis was 20 mm greater on one side. I am assuming that this is a result of springs grabbing after being pulled down tight with the tie down straps. I noticed early in this thread that a set of springs had been pulled apart. Does this required special tools or any replacement parts to reassemble. What should be done to the springs when they are apart? Paint? Grease? Oil?

Springs may need to be reset as they get older. You would need to remove and check that the free camber is still in spec with the SIII workshop manual spring table. (Dina has posted it on here a few times).

Spring packs are easy to dismantle and clean. You just need to bend back the clamps if they are the folded over type, and undo the centre bolt. Best to put the spring pack in a vice as it will spring apart when you remove the centre bolt. The centre bolt should be replaced when reassembling. Any spring works can sell you one the right size.

[happydad59]

Thanks isuzurover, should I grease between springs when reassembling?

[Ozdunc]

The lean to port is designed in as well. The RH springs have more camber in them to offset weight of the the driver and fuel tank.

I greased in between my leaves. The springs feel much more supple now.

[isuzurover]

Thanks isuzurover, should I grease between springs when reassembling?

There is debate on that. I do. I also use "spray grease" in a can periodically.

[Ozdunc]

Can you swap leaves between front and rear?
Not the first 3 I would have thought, but some of the smaller 'bottom' leaves.

On the rear I only need 4 of the 8 leaves, but on the front I blow through the available travel and its sagged 30mm.
Could I swap one of the longer rear leaves in for one or two of the the thinner front leaves to stiffen (and possibly restore ride height to) the front spring?

[isuzurover]

Can you swap leaves between front and rear?
Not the first 3 I would have thought, but some of the smaller 'bottom' leaves.

On the rear I only need 4 of the 8 leaves, but on the front I blow through the available travel and its sagged 30mm.
Could I swap one of the longer rear leaves in for one or two of the the thinner front leaves to stiffen (and possibly restore ride height to) the front spring?

What wheelbase landy do you have, what springs and what is the thickness of each leaf?

On all S2=> landies the spring packs are 2.5" wide Front and Rear, However the centre bolt holes are a different size, so that would say no.

IMHO you are better off getting the spring packs properly reset.

[Ozdunc]

It's a SWB.

By eye bolt holes - do you mean the bolt that holds the leaves together?

The leaf thicknesses are mismatched 4mm on the front and ~7mm on the rear.
I'm thinking that a reset would be the best bet, but I'm unsure of who in Sydney does it.
What sort of cost is a reset?

So the leaf swap would be temporary, just thinking the thicker leaf might restore a bit of camber whilst I figure out what to do.

[isuzurover]

It's a SWB.

By eye bolt holes - do you mean the bolt that holds the leaves together?

The leaf thicknesses are mismatched 4mm on the front and ~7mm on the rear.
I'm thinking that a reset would be the best bet, but I'm unsure of who in Sydney does it.
What sort of cost is a reset?

So the leaf swap would be temporary, just thinking the thicker leaf might restore a bit of camber whilst I figure out what to do.

Sorry - meant centre bolt holes - fixed now.

OEM for a SWB is 9 leaf front and 11 leaf rear (but only 4.2-4.8 mm thick leaves). If you have 7 mm thick rear leaves they are LWB or aftermarket. Either way they will be stiff as a board.

A reset shouldn't cost more than $80 per pair if you R/R the springs. EDIT: make sure they temper the springs after the reset.

[Ozdunc]

Yeah the rears are after market and were ridiculously stiff. I've gotten round that by swapping the leaves around. I can get full articulation now with a little weight in the rear.

Sorry to be dumb but whats does R/R mean?

[isuzurover]

Yeah the rears are after market and were ridiculously stiff. I've gotten round that by swapping the leaves around. I can get full articulation now with a little weight in the rear.

Sorry to be dumb but whats does R/R mean?

Remove / Refit

[Ozdunc]

Cheapest I could get round here (Sydney northern beaches) was $330 the pair to reset with me doing the r/r.

Got 3 quotes. Most expensive was $450!!!

[isuzurover]

Cheapest I could get round here (Sydney northern beaches) was $330 the pair to reset with me doing the r/r.

Got 3 quotes. Most expensive was $450!!!

Crazy. For that price you could pay shipping up to Bayside springs in brisbane where I got my last reset done.

[jerryd]

Crazy. For that price you could pay shipping up to Bayside springs in brisbane where I got my last reset done.

Evan charged me $180 to do my front springs, including pressing in new bushes which I supplied.

He certainly knows his stuff and I'd recommend him :)

[Ozdunc]

Well, I went and paid the money and got the springs reset.
It was done by EFS ( which I think is Carrolls Springs).

Fitted them and the springs came up about +10mm over stock. V.happy.
Left em sitting for a few days as the weather was a bit ordinary, then went for a short drive and remeasured.
The springs had sagged to -20mm on the drivers side and -10mm on the other. Which was a bit disappointing, but Bill is driving nicely and I no longer hit on the bumpstops over speedbumps.
I went and had a chat about the sagging but was told there's no guarantee for resets, and I could get an extra leaf added for an extra $$$.

I've swapped the springs over to try and even to get the drivers side to seat higher than the passenger. This worked then I went for a ride and the drivers side was still lower than the passenger :(
I'm wondering whether I'm over tightening the shackles? I've now tightened the bolt until the shackle is tight against the bushing, then backing the bolt off 1/4 turn, then tightening the locknut tight against the shackle outer whilst holding the bolt still. Hopefully this will allow the shackle to move freely without any excessive side to side movement.
I've yet to go for a drive since doing that as a bit of Landcruiser maintenance got in the way:wasntme:

If that doesn't work I might have to go a get some 9 leafs from Paddocks/Craddocks

[JDNSW]

.......
I'm wondering whether I'm over tightening the shackles? I've now tightened the bolt until the shackle is tight against the bushing, then backing the bolt off 1/4 turn, then tightening the locknut tight against the shackle outer whilst holding the bolt still. Hopefully this will allow the shackle to move freely without any excessive side to side movement.
I've yet to go for a drive since doing that as a bit of Landcruiser maintenance got in the way:wasntme:

If that doesn't work I might have to go a get some 9 leafs from Paddocks/Craddocks


Assuming you are using standard rubber bushes with steel inner and outer sleeves, this is incorrect procedure. The shackles must be tightened so as to prevent any movement between the inner sleeve and the shackle pin - all movement must be accommodated by flex within the rubber. This will mean, of course that there is no side to side movement. Doing as you describe will lead to a very short life for both the bushes and the shackle pins, and will very likely need new shackle plates as well next time (although these can be reversed to present an unworn face to the bush).

John

[isuzurover]

...

I'm wondering whether I'm over tightening the shackles? I've now tightened the bolt until the shackle is tight against the bushing, then backing the bolt off 1/4 turn, then tightening the locknut tight against the shackle outer whilst holding the bolt still. Hopefully this will allow the shackle to move freely without any excessive side to side movement.

...

NOOOO - don't do that!!!

You will wear away your shackles and bush inner tubes.

You are supposed to fit the springs with the bolts loose, put the vehicle back on the ground with all weight, then jump up and down on the bumpers a few times, then tighten the bolts fully. The shackles and bush tubes should be solidly clamped to each other.

Resets can settle a bit. A good resetter can account for this mostly. Did they temper the springs after resetting?

When I was supplying my own specs to the resetter I was having them set 0.5" to 1" more free camber than I eventually wanted to account for this - but mine were quite soft.

[Ozdunc]

Thanks. I'll tighten them up tomorrow.
I don't know whether they were tempered. I'm presuming so as they do make leaf springs for more modern fourbys and I'm not hearing of sagging issues.
I'm confused as to why it always sags on the drivers side regardless of which way the springs are put in. Any ideas? Fuel tank is about 1/4 full with a full 20l jerry behind the drivers seat.

[isuzurover]

Thanks. I'll tighten them up tomorrow.
I don't know whether they were tempered. I'm presuming so as they do make leaf springs for more modern fourbys and I'm not hearing of sagging issues.
I'm confused as to why it always sags on the drivers side regardless of which way the springs are put in. Any ideas? Fuel tank is about 1/4 full with a full 20l jerry behind the drivers seat.

Did you measure the free camber after you got the springs back? The drivers side should have more free camber. If they reset them to be the same then they did not do them properly.

Diana has posted the page from the Genuine S3 Manuel which shows what the free camber should be OEM.

[Ozdunc]

I didn't measure the free camber but there was definitely more camber in the spring I initially put on the drivers side. It would have been about an inch higher lying upside down on the ground.
The other thing I should have mentioned is when I pull the drivers side up it gains about 20mm and stays there as if something is binding stopping the spring reverting to shape. Hence my logic to loosen the shackles.
It's done this with both springs fitted to the drivers side.
Maybe my springs are just toast.

[JDNSW]

Thanks. I'll tighten them up tomorrow.
I don't know whether they were tempered. I'm presuming so as they do make leaf springs for more modern fourbys and I'm not hearing of sagging issues.
I'm confused as to why it always sags on the drivers side regardless of which way the springs are put in. Any ideas? Fuel tank is about 1/4 full with a full 20l jerry behind the drivers seat.

Series Landrovers have relatively long travel springs and no sway bars - combine this with more weight on the right side - fuel tank, battery, driver (with other seats often empty), most of the transfer case, steering box and relay, half the weight of the prop shafts and it is no wonder they tend to lean to the right.

John

[B.S.F.]

I kept wearing out my passenger side springs,and here is the reason why.1. The camber of the road transfers the weight to the passenger side. 2. On a single lane road the left hand side takes a hammering when you have to leave the bitumen to make room for another car. 3.When making a u-turn it's always the passenger side that ends up in the rough.These are just some of the reasons that spring to mind. I installed the springs with more free camber on the passenger side. It works for me and that's it. W.

[Ozdunc]

Well OK, not much progress on the springs, but I have a cunning plan:twisted:

I've bought 2 individual leafs from Ding*cr*ft in the UK for $10 ea plus postage. I'm hoping that adding those newer leaves into the spring pack will restore a bit more camber. They are 2nd leaf with the military wrap, so I can either replace that one, or trim them down to replace one of the others.

Might not work but at that prices its worth the experiment I think.
Cheers

[isuzurover]

Well OK, not much progress on the springs, but I have a cunning plan:twisted:

I've bought 2 individual leafs from Ding*cr*ft in the UK for $10 ea plus postage. I'm hoping that adding those newer leaves into the spring pack will restore a bit more camber. They are 2nd leaf with the military wrap, so I can either replace that one, or trim them down to replace one of the others.

Might not work but at that prices its worth the experiment I think.
Cheers

Replacing the leaf will only help if the new leaf has more free camber.

Adding an extra leaf (e.g. a full length leaf like the 3rd one down, will make a big difference, at the expense of some suspension travel).

Got a link for the replacement leaves?

[Ozdunc]

Adding an extra leaf (e.g. a full length leaf like the 3rd one down, will make a big difference, at the expense of some suspension travel).

Got a link for the replacement leaves?

Yeah, what I'm thinking ATM, is to replace no2 leaf with the new ones, see how that goes.
If I'm still blowing through the travel, I'll trim the old no2 to somewhere between 2 and 3 in length and remove no9. If thats too stiff I'll trim it further to somewhere between 3 and 4 in length and try again, until I reach somewhere I like.

Here's the link: Dingocroft Land Rover Series One Suspension Parts (http://www.dingocroft.co.uk/acatalog/Series1Suspension.html)

[Ozdunc]

Well springs turned up. Camber looks quite acute and spring thickness is 4mm so all good so far. Looking surprisingly OEM.
Might be a while before I get round to fitting them as I'm building a rear bar and spare wheel carrier for the Cruiser and I seem to have a few mountain bike races coming up.
But I'll let you know how it goes...