mk1-forum.net

Word on the street says that the old bottom arms weren't conical from both sides, but parallell. Are these hard to find, and what was the bore in them. Anyone in the know?

pre 1964 ones where like this

Thanks. Does anyone have any and would like to measure the ID of the parallell hole?

Vegard wrote:Word on the street says that the old bottom arms weren't conical from both sides, but parallell. Are these hard to find, and what was the bore in them. Anyone in the know?

The parallel bore size is 7/8"I.D. [22.2mm] The castings carry the same part number for both sides, only handed by which side the taper for the swivel pin was machined. They look like this :-

Vegard wrote:Word on the street says that the old bottom arms weren't conical from both sides, but parallell. Are these hard to find, and what was the bore in them. Anyone in the know?

Putting on my cruel head, one might thinking you were thinking of fitting Uniball inserts in a limited modification racing class.

He hey, that'd be illegal!!

Anarok moment - can you explain more about this???

can you explain more about this???

If you are referring to the "sneaky" modification.

It has been said that some less than entirely scrupulous Appendix K competitors have been known to fit a spherical joint to the head of "standard" bottom arms & then cover these with cut down standard rubber bushes at either side to hide them. This has the advantage of stiffening the suspension up whilst still looking like the "standard" rubber joints that are required as part of Appendix K rules.

I am however sure that Vegard is simply asking the question so he can differentiate very early arms from the later tapered ones

'Stroke pulling' and motor racing go hand in hand. I've seen and heard of some brilliant 'cheats' over the years, remember its only cheating if you get caught!

Like the " low " broadspeed dolimite sprint , special body XJ12 jag and the saloon TWR raced that was " wider " than std