Does anyone know when the first of the beam mounted ride height adjusters first started appearing on vees? Thanks
Ride height adjusters for vintage racing
Does anyone know when the first of the beam mounted ride height adjusters first started appearing on vees? Thanks
Sometime in the early 90's.Originally Posted by DD16
I believe Steve Davis showed up with the first one at the RunOffs (Steve, please correct me if I'm wrong) and they were legalized (specifically in the GCR) the following year.
As for vintage, I don't believe the are legal in Monoposto rules.
Glenn
Why would he show up at the Runoffs with a modification to the front beam not authorized by the GCR?
Brian
Thanks Glenn. Just a shot at making it easier to adjust height. If early enough I was going to petition my local group. But it's nowhere close.
Brian,
You know, full well, that testing the limits of the current regs (as written) is how this "innovators" class has evolved over the years...and that rules are generally written or clarified after-the-fact, in response to those challenges.
Again, if I'm off about Steve introducing the adjusters, I apologize. But I do remember them causing a stir when they first showed up at the RunOffs.
Glenn
But ya know, that makes them about 25 years old - older than a lot of the cars were when vintage racing started......
I have no idea who showed up with the FIRST 'adjuster', but I can assure you that it was NOT ME. I also don't think it was in the 90's at all. Can't remember when it became "allowed", but I don't recall ANY car showing up ANY WHERE (of course I don't go EVERYWHERE) before it was specifically allowed. .. at least no car that was running at the front of Nationals.
Steve, FV80
Racing since '73 - FV since '77
My apologies, Steve.
I do remember somebody had one with a cockpit adjuster (similar to a brake bias adjuster) - they could raise & lower the front end while driving - at a Runoffs at Road Atlanta.
It caused a bit of a stir amongst competitors, similar to when Mike V. debuted his wheel discs.
Adjustable beams were subsequently made legal, but WITHOUT remote adjustability.
Again, I'm sorry I incorrectly identified you, Steve.
Glenn
I'm guessing you are running with Corinthian which utilizes the 72 GCR and the Monoposto rules.
Both would allow some creativity in setting ride height through the front shock should you decide that running front shocks with zero droop and/or a crap-ton of rebound dampening would be beneficial.
I did have a set of shocks on my FV that made Brenner's shock dyno grunt in rebound. Worked well on smooth tracks to hold the front end down. Realize that everything you do is a compromise.
Good assumption re CVAR Daryl. I'm new to FV so I was looking at an easier way to make quick adjustments to see what happens with each. Some local cars have re-curved spring packs. Apparently the springs are clamped to a flat secure surface and a loooong lever is attached to the trailing arm and the spring is twisted. This past weekend was my first with the Zink. My trailing arms were not as level as most other Zinks. While I'm overweight it's not as much as others whose trailing arms were fairly level. I was using a full spring pack. My front ride height was lower than others. My understanding of the dynamics of V suspensions is in its infancy. It doesn't do anything like "normal" cars do. I suspect there might be some binding keeping the front end down so I will disassemble the front end and re-check everything. But in the paddock the front end moves up and down freely by hand. Due to the heat in TX and OK in the summer CVAR won't race again until late Sept. Lots of time to study and inspect. I'm sure I'll go down some wrong rabbit holes.
Yes, they are rather unique, and there's lots of ways to skin the proverbial cat. Go with the tried and true around you and experiment once you are comfortable.
There's lots of knowledge and experience in the class, and most are quite willing to share. Though a Z-bar car is nothing I have any experience with but I do know they can be made to work quite well.
Funny - I thought this was just for posterity:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNhQkxL29Fk
so I showed my technique for overbending the spring.
Comments, suggestions, criticisms welcome.
Note, this can be dangerous and make sure animals and little children are not around while you are doing this!
ChrisZ
you could use weight jackers between the adjuster and the spring, and feed them with a common cylinder - especially for testing.
The discussion/argument here is as to whether or not the adjusters are legal on a Vintage FV.
I know that method is/was a common solution to the problem. I simply don't like it, perhaps ignorantly, because you are plasticly deforming the spring to have a new static position and that, at least in my mind, can't have you arrive at some predictable/consistent spring rate. It's like working on the car with a set of vice grips, a hammer and a crescent wrench. It might work, but it isn't "right".
Thanks Daryl and Chris. Don't know if I'm bold enough to do the bending but I may eventually have to do so if legal. The Monoposto rules say "A. No component of the engine, power train, front suspension, or brakes shall be altered, modified or changed, nor be of other than VW manufacture, unless specifically authorized herein". I presume that at some point in time it was decided that twisting the spring pack is not modification or changing. I just don't want to do anything that isn't in the vintage spirit.
One cause may be binding in the link-pins. They could be dry, over-snugged in their adjustment, not camber-shimmed correctly...
Yes, preload twisting the spring pack is legal...everywhere, I think.
Glenn
True, but he also seemed to state he wanted an easy way to make adjustments for what appeared to be testing.
Gotcha. I interpreted as though he was trying to find out when they were first used so that he could petition his club to allow them if period correct.
Ride Height
My 1992 GCR says NO to adjusters. My 1998 GCR says YES to adjusters. Somewhere in between is the first time they were allowed. Best I could do.
As for the video and how the springs are bent- not sure I would do it that way, but each person has their own methods.
I, and others have an old torsion arm that has a vertical box (a square tube) welded on to the arm. The arm is installed ( it helps if the stops have not been altered) and the box is perpendicular to the floor. The beam is level and a protractor is used to measure the bend that is introduced to the spring. A large bar is inserted into the box and used to pry the spring. Be sure to install the grub screw both in the center and the ends (unlike the video) otherwise it will give you a false result. Go slow .
Another option is to remove a leaf (or more) from the stack. Be sure to "replace" the section that has been removed either by brazing a short section to each end and the middle or even taping if welding/brazing is not something you are comfortable with.
Hope this helps
Dietmar
www.quixoteracing.com
I would suggest you first find where the 'spirit of vintage' has been documented/written down for everyone to understand accurately.
Much of what made old FV's drivable at race speeds was based on the use of specifically applied 'highly' used parts. 'Very' warn link pin bushings provided us with the desired negative front camber. Front springs that were bent precisely during a 'heavy' curb impact provided the proper ride height.
These are examples of the 'spirit' of FV racing of the past.
Brian
In *MY* interpretation of the 'old' rules, there was NO MODIFICATION ALLOWED to the beam or the spring pack other than "one spring pack may be removed or replaced with a sway bar" (not technically word for word.. but that's the way I remember it). Since it IS TRUE, that the spring pack might sometimes .. sag.. or 'become slightly ADJUSTED' due to accident .. or maybe even EXCESSIVE USE... it BECAME INTERPRETED that if the spring pack was INDUCED to sag by ... abnormal methods.. it could NEVER be *PROVEN* that 'abnormal methods' were used to achieve that SAG. THEREFORE, it CAME TO BE, that "manipulating" the 'rest angle" of the spring pack came into wide spread use. It was NEVER *ALLOWED* but it was also never challenged that I know of... therefore it 'became' ALLOWED (technically).
MANY years later, it became obvious to some that allowing 'adjusters' achieved the same effect for less effort .. and could be UNDONE more easily. Someone petitioned SCCA and the NEW rule allowing "commercial" (or other) adjusters was passed into the GCR. As for Monteposto.. MY TAKE would be that adjusting the spring pack (by ANY method) is NOT ALLOWED .. although, you might well be the ONLY one with a 'standard straight stock' spring pack.. and have the highest front ride height of any of your competitors if you DON'T do it because just because it's NOT WITHIN THE SPIRIT OF THE RULES. The SPIRIT OF THE RULES, has become more and more tortured in recent years . and seems to get worse and worse every year.
By the way .. if anyone out there is trying to work with any of these "modifications", don't forget to DISCONNECT your front shocks before going through any process to adjust ride height. The shocks can have a RADICAL effect on the apparent ride height in the shop and on the track. You need to start any adjustments with NO SHOCKS in play. Don't RACE that way, but that should be your BASELINE method of setup. Shock adjustment should be a separate item from ride height although pressurized GAS SHOCKS *DO* affect ride height .. and on track performance. These things certainly GET COMPLICATED, so, if you plan to start messing with things.. do it the right way ... and be prepared to UNDO it at the track
Edit.. Brian and I were composing and posting at about the same time.. but we seem to agree on the issue.
Last edited by Steve Davis; 05.09.19 at 1:30 PM. Reason: follow up...
Steve, FV80
Racing since '73 - FV since '77
This thread exemplifies why I try not to work on my vintage Vee. I'd rather just drive it until it scares me and then back off a tad which thus far has provided mixed results, but it's still preferable to attempting the unfamiliar art of tuning a Vee.
Chris Livengood, enjoying underpriced ferrous whizzy bits that I hacked out in my tool shed since 1999.
A refresher, as long as you consider the 1972 GCR the "old" rules. Okay, not 1963 Formcar old, but pretty much the "old" standard.
The followling modifications are allowed:
5.3.a.1 "Removal of one torsion bar"
5.3.a.7 "Modification of the standard front torsion bar(s).
And the current Monoposto rules:
FV section page 7 A.1: Removal of one torsion bar and modification of either or both torsion bars.
A.3: Use of any shock absorber that can be mounted on the standard mounts, except coil-overs. Shock absorbers shall be maximum two way-adjustable and shall not have remote reservoirs.
I wonder about some custom "Coil-Unders" like a typical motorcycle fork tube.With an integral clamp mount like a triple-clamp that bolts to the "standard" mounts. Setting/adjusting ride height would be stupid simple while maintaining the desired spring rate.
"A refresher, as long as you consider the 1972 GCR the "old" rules."
My recollection, having started FV in 1973, was that we were allowed to modify the spring pack. I recall removing the split bars and brazing two short pieces in their place, and brazing all the ends together. I do not know when that rule came into effect.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote