49 replies to this topic

[Cooperman]

In 1993 I bought an A-H 3000 in part restored form in Los Angeles and shipped it back intending to build a full-on Historic rally car.

However, before I got started on the restoration and preparation I did an event in my 'S' and caught the big Healey of Richard Hudson-Evans on a tight night road section and he pulled over to let me pass. Then, even up a steep hill with a couple of hairpins, my little car pulled away from that A-H 'tank'. So I sold my Healey and kept the Mini. Those Healey 3000's were a real handful, especially in the wet and they have even less suspension travel than a Min I, and that has little enough compared to other rally cars like Porsches, Cortinas & Escorts.

After I sold my first Cooper rally car in 1966 I bought a Cortina GT Mk.1 and that was so much better on rough and really bumpy surfaces, especially after I fitted 'Orange' front springs, export Estate rear springs and 'works' dampers, plus twin 40 DCOE carbs, a 'works' head, etc. But after the Mini it did feel big sometimes.

On Historic road rallies there is little to touch a good Cooper 'S' though.

Edited by Cooperman, 15 December 2013 - 12:26 AM.

[adam_93rio]

If you read my post, I haven't stated that this is something he should do. I was stating that I had done it, which isn't giving advice. There is no risk as when driving a car that is so low and stiff, you don't drive as if it was a standard car, you look further ahead I avoid bumps and pot holes to prevent damage to suspension components, and I wouldn't be taking corners at full speed with such stuff suspension as it would bounce across the road, and be hard to control. However if you know your car inside and out then you can drive it safely knowing it's limits

[Cooperman]

Well, you've just given all the good reasons for keeping a Mini at standard ride height.

You can only drive slowly down any sort of bumpy road, you can't corner quickly for fear of 'pattering' off the road out of control, you need to use a lot of concentration to avoid damage to suspension.

Yes, you can drive the car to its limits, pity those limits are so far below those of a properly set-up road Mini rather than a track-only car.

One might wonder what the attraction of a lowered car is, unless one doesn't mind going slowly on the roads in order to save a second or so per lap.

If you tell someone on here what you have done, without pointing out the dangers and limitations, then that may or could be taken by less experienced Mini owners as a recommendation that they might like to copy. Dangerous stuff.

Still, the dangers and limitations are now clear, so thank you for explaining how a very low car needs to be driven on the public roads, i.e. slowly and very carefully.

[Mini 360]

 

One might wonder what the attraction of a lowered car is

Looks really.  Mine is very very low and with a standard 1275, not that fast so its mainly used for pootling about town and to the occasional show.  If it were for fast back road work or track use, theres no way it would be this low.  

[Cooperman]

Just seems a pity to reduce the, by modern standards, performance of a classic Mini still further for a perceived improved look.

They are slow enough already compared to modern small cars and the only place they can be on any sort of a par with a modern car is on tight and very twisty narrow little roads.

Still, if a low car is what folks want it's their car to do with as they please. just so long as the dangers and disadvantages are fully understood.

Remember, really low race/track cars have modified front sub-frame installations to keep the suspension geometry safe.

[classicoop]

 

OP- how do you know the shocks are bottoming? Are there witness marks? The reason I ask is because when you get a 'bang' or similar from the suspension it could be a range of things. Its best to be certain of the cause before you spend a load of money on lowered shocks. Having been tubbed, I would guess it would have them fitted already. The only way to tell for sure is to drop one off and measure it open and closed (or extended and compressed if you prefer).

 

 

 

Well not really sure it's the shocks. At first I thougt it was the cones getting dislodged.

 

Anyways, the thing that made me think it was the shocks was, by simply stiffening the shocks (same ride height), the banging was almost gone (save for real heavy passengers).

 

Funny thing is the rears aren't even low. Maybe a 3-finger gap from the sportspack arches.

 

 

*********************************************

 

Why so much drama in this thread?

 

I don't really care about "performance" (I have another car for my "performance" needs). As long as it doesn't understeer excessively or snap oversteer, I'm fine. I also don't plan on driving off-road, or thru craters any time soon.

 

Ball joint - even a completely stock Mini has ball joint failures. Just needs more maintenance/inspection.

[Cooperman]

Minis don't normally have ball-joint failures. They have ball joint wear issues, but only have failures on standard height cars if incorrectly installed with insufficient shim thickness.

However, excessive lowering and removal or truncating of bump stops can allow the pin of the ball joint to travel so that the edge of the pin is pushed hard against the ball-joint cap edge. This puts a very high impact shear load onto the base of the pin which can cause failure.

We 'Mini Docs' are required only to give advice which is safe and can in no way put an owner at risk, hence the comments.

To lower a Mini the sub-frame should be re-positioned higher up inside the engine bay by modifying the body-shell. This is what is done on racing Minis and it preserves the sub-frame and suspension geometry thus keeping it safe.

Some lowering is fine, but the really low cars should have the modified sub-frame installation.

[classicoop]

Ok. I understand the safety part.

Regarding the "perceived look" comment, anyone who bought a Mini for performance/handling (stock car, non-competitive/racing), should re-think their decision. Stock to stock a lot of popular econobox will outperform a Mini in every category, be a whole lot more comfortable and POSSIBLY cost less.

Of course, if modified, anything goes.

I bought the Mini because it looks good and was looking for a restoration project. Lowering it makes it look even better to me.

**************

Back to topic

Forgot to add, I'm more concerned with the rear shocks, already bought lowered front shock mounts.

Lowered shocks are only about 10-15mm shorter. Don't the slammed Mini bottom out with them?

Has anyone tried other car brand shocks? ---- please do not argue about mis matched dampers.

I really don't want to turret the rear shock mounts. But might just come to it.

[Tamworthbay]

Ok. I understand the safety part.
Regarding the "perceived look" comment, anyone who bought a Mini for performance/handling (stock car, non-competitive/racing), should re-think their decision. Stock to stock a lot of popular econobox will outperform a Mini in every category, be a whole lot more comfortable and POSSIBLY cost less.
Of course, if modified, anything goes.
I bought the Mini because it looks good and was looking for a restoration project. Lowering it makes it look even better to me.
**************
Back to topic
Forgot to add, I'm more concerned with the rear shocks, already bought lowered front shock mounts.
Lowered shocks are only about 10-15mm shorter. Don't the slammed Mini bottom out with them?
Has anyone tried other car brand shocks? ---- please do not argue about mis matched dampers.
I really don't want to turret the rear shock mounts. But might just come to it.

Bring one of your econoboxes to my local set of roundabouts and we will see how well it 'outperforms a mini in every category'

[classicoop]

Lol i knew i'd get a challenge for that. And most probably get burned later. Just irks me that a lot of mini owners think a STOCK classic mini is a performance machine.

But seriously i really think, a 90s civic type r would beat a mini cooper s (stock vs stock)

Or if you prefer new and expensive, i doubt that a classic mini cooper s would outperform a bini jcw gp

Top of my head
Vw golf r32
Focus st / rs (st is rated at 32mpg)
Civic si / type r
Fiesta st


Not sure if still an econobox
Evo
Sti

[Cooperman]

Yes, the Mini is a 55-year old classic design and comparing it to modern cars is the same as comparing a 1920's car with a '60's Mini in performance terms.

Minis really need to be compared with other classic cars like the Ford Anglia, Cortina, Fiat 500, VW Beetle, Hillman Imp, etc., and against those cars the Mini comes out very well indeed.

Some will say, me included, that the Mini is probably the ultimate classic car as it was the technology changing design which has influenced virtually every other saloon car ever since 1960.

As Clive says, a well set-up Mini can still go well around roundabouts, but that is a function of tyre technology and low weight/agility.

How someone perceives the appearance of any classic car is a very personal thing so that is how an owner will make his/her car look. To keep the value any classic will need to be standard or have just 'period mods' and that's how it is.

However, a lot of owners come on here and ask how to make their cars go better on the road with some sensible modifications and they can be significantly improved without losing the classic status and whilst still maintaining the value.

What we have to be careful of on here when giving advice is to ensure that we only post safe advice. Of course, no-one has to take any advice offered .

[classicoop]

I totally agree, yes it was great for its time. It's just a lot of people still think it's still the best. But again modified, anythings possible.

Just the general misinformation that gets too me. Like how people just go about ranting that 10s are better handling than 13s. Without even considering tires, weight, offset and more specifically width. Lets see 10x8s handle better than 13x5s.

Or that 13s rolling diameter's larger than 10s. Lol.

Don't get me wrong, i absolutely love (and hate) my Mini even with its little quirks.

And i'm also greatful for the advice.

[Cooperman]

Yes, the issue of various wheel and tyre combinations need also to take into consideration the other engineering aspects such as suspension settings, wheel offset. etc.

 

I recently drove an MPI with 145/70 x 12 Falkens and on standard Minilite wheels. I was surprised at how very well it handled, although I do admit the road-holding in the dry would have been better on a 165/60. The reason for the excellent handling was due, I believe, to the tyre width and the position of the tyre centres being exactly as originally designed. It was, indeed, a real pleasure to drive quickly (in Mini terms that is). The steering was light and predictable with little kick-back and the whole car felt much like the early Cooper 'S'. A real 'classic' feel. Tyre pressures were 30 psi and I know the suspension was set accurately as I did the settings myself.

 

What is often forgotten is how much of the suspension work is done by the sidewall of the tyre due to the basic suspension design. That is why the 10", which has a 70% sidewall gives such a good result. With, say, a 50% sidewall the ride will become harsher despite the rolling radius being virtually identical. I have the same sort of issue on my road car which has 275/40 x 19" rear tyres. They are harsh and I don't really like them. I would prefer a 235 section width on a 17" wheel with a deeper sidewall. 

 

As you so rightly say, people rant on without considering what the engineering issues really bare. On a road car the differences between a 10" & a 12" wheel will be almost unnoticeable. But the 13" wheel was, IMHO, a 'styling gimmick' too far.

[tiger99]

I totally agree. 13 inch wheels do not look good on a Mini, nor do they help the handling. Not, on an average road, often wet, do ridiculously wide wheels an tyres do anything useful, and if the scrub radius ends up being wrong (in any case it effectively shifts with camber change on bump, especially in a low profile tyre with stiff sidewalls) it has a terrible effect on the steering feel.

 

As for lowering, I think that if the insurance companies understood the Mini as they did 40 years ago, they might want to charge an extra premium for lowered cars, since the effect is to increase the risk of accidents. I do believe that any claim arising from ball joint fracture due to removing bump and/or rebound stops can and should be refused.

 

As to the safety implications of advice given here, Cooperman is absolutely right. It is not just a matter of possibly having to live with the consequences of having given bad advice, there is a serious risk that some smart prosecutor will find a way of holding someone liable for a criminal offence in the event of an accident. The current state of health and safety law would seem to make criminal prosecution possible. I suspect that the first prosecution might be one of the monthly comics, who gave very incorrect advice about ball joint shimming, the complete idiot who wrote the article clearly having zero comprehension of basic engineering principles as well as never having read and understood the very clear instructions in the Rover manual. I have seen equally dangerous advice in Practical Classics, e.g. making anti-roll bar drop links from B&Q threaed rod, which is only cheap mild steel. A prosecution is certain sooner or later, and it will shake up motoring journalism completely, for the better, as every articl e will have to be checked by a competent engineer to avoid future trouble. I predict that half the trash magazines will just close down. The magazines are high profile targets for the legal system, as they usually have money, but it may well be that a reckless individual poster on a web forum may be targeted.

 

Discerning readers can judge for themselves who gives sound advice here, always erring (if at all) on the side of caution, and who the cowboy elements are.

But it is a never-ending task to try to keep on top of all bad advice, of which there is always some on this forum, and it is not fair that the average person is faced with needing to know when the advice is bad. I predict that eventually posts will have to be approved by a moderator before being visible in the forum. That will be sad, because it will slow the forum down and make it less useful to those in a hurry (all Mini owners sometimes!). Some will ridicule that suggestion, and it will likely be those very people who will make it necessary.

 

Yet, funnily enough, on certain US forums there is masses of incorrect and downright dangerous advice (the classic example was a calculation for the size of a channel section chassis for a 4*4 that was smaller than the box section it was replacing, with only static loads such as the weight of the engine considered), and in the US everyone seems to sue everyone else. I assume that the reason why potentially lethal advice is freely given on web forums is because there is also a right to free speech, regardless of how wrong the content may be.

Edited by tiger99, 17 December 2013 - 03:51 PM.

[Cooperman]

When I was a student some of my friends had original Austin 7's. They used to modify them in the same way as Minis get modified now. Personally I never liked them, but they were fun I guess. Some used the A7 chassis as a basis for aluminium bodies specials.

There were common mods like fitting Morris 8 hydraulic brakes, engine work to enable the car to achieve around 50 to 55 mph, suspension mods, etc.,

But I never remember anyone actually modifying an Austin 7 to make it slower round corners, have poorer road-holding on a bumpy road and likely to damage itself over bumps, or even have a risk of suspension failure. Now that's what I find strange about lowering road cars, not just Minis but any classic car really. I wonder in what way lowering makes a classic car look better. Surely classic cars are about the old look and feel of motoring as it used to be and that's what Minis are about. If you want to go fast you buy a modern car - they are all faster than a Mini.