Jump to content

New shock absorbers - Any good?


Recommended Posts

I have finally got time to get back to putting the TR back together.

 

Having been told that they are made on the original machines, I decided that I would take up one of the suppliers offer on a pair of rear shock absorbers. However, having stood them upright for a few days and worked the lever up and down literally dozens of times I still get no resistance in one direction and can barely move the thing in the other. Having delved a little deeper I found that both shock absorbers are over filled and one of the cover fitting screws is a self tapper which makes me question the quality.

 

Am I missing something in preparing these for use?

Edited by Dave Herrod
Link to post
Share on other sites

From memory shouldn't there be quite a bit of resistance in both directions . Don't know about the self tappers but they don't sound rite. There's a thread on here recently with a specialists shock company recommended by someone who's ad theirs done and is a happy bunny. I'm sure the Tr shop will be reasonable and it won't be them doing the work anyways.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also keen to know too as I will be ordering replacements Monday.

 

Research on prices seems to suggest (Exchange / New):

 

Revington 52.50 / -

Rimmer 32 / 94

Moss - / 92-97

TR Shop - / 82

 

Not sure whether these are standard are uprated.

 

I am going with new Revi springs, bushes etc, so I suspect I will go with their levers too ?

 

 

Stevson Motors in Birmingham are the guys that probably half a dozen have recommended to me for re-furb

Link to post
Share on other sites

The shock absorbers sold by Moss are exactly as the originals having been built on original machinery by the company that bought out Armstrong. I had trouble with uprated ones on the TR and they were replaced with standard ones that seem fine, but on the Healey there are uprated ones that seem fine.

Edited by Ashley James
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, Hi Dave,

a damper usually damps in one direction only.

When going over bumpy ground the wheel is allowed to travel upwards only compressing the spring. If the damper was solid in this direction there would be no need for the spring and you woulod be flung from the car.

 

As the wheel drops the spring wants to push it faster than gravity allows so the damper comes into play and, wait for it - damps the recoil - incredible.

 

So with your new dampers in the verical position you should be able to lift the arm fairly easy but it would be very stiff pushing it down.

 

Roher

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dave,

visualise it another way.

The body of the car needs to stay still when the wheels are bobbing up and down.

Under normal conditions the body is settled on the springs (slightly compressed). When the wheel goes up you require ther spring to give - which it does.

If the damper took hold on the way up then the body would be lifted - not good.

 

On the way down the wheel needs to get there quickly but under control.

If the damper didn;t work the body + gravity would compress the spring too much and it would rebound upwards.

 

The damper should a have a small damping action in the upwards direction and a large action on the way down.

 

Roger

 

PS - the sencod from last paragraph explains it. http://auto.howstuffworks.com/car-suspension2.htm

Edited by RogerH
Link to post
Share on other sites

Normal shock absorbers work in both directions, I find it strange that lever arms would only work in one... :huh:

 

Tony

Shock Absorbers definitely damp in both directions, just less on the bump (up) and more on the rebound (down).

 

FWIW I'm used to rebuilding and re-valving Rolls-Royce & Bentley Shocks, which were probably copied from Cadillac, but bear a striking resemblance to Armstrongs. They're just bigger and more expensively constructed.

Edited by Ashley James
Link to post
Share on other sites

As one has zero resistance in one direction and is, at times, almost impossible to move in the other ditection , and the other is the exact opposite, I have concluded that they can both go back whence they came. I will see if Stevson can make anything of my collection of leaky worn units. Thanks for the replies. Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please familiarise yourself with our Terms and Conditions. By using this site, you agree to the following: Terms of Use.