9 replies to this topic

[Steve G]

I'm considering what to do with the rear suspension on my Scamp and after seeing the twin engined Moke at Gaydon last week I wondered what handling difference there would be if I fitted front suspension on the back ?

Would there be a benefit to having camber change when the suspension moves or will I end up with a car that rolls excessively and has more grip at that back than it needs ? 

[nicklouse]

Ok. First things first, you are not planning on fitting a rear engine?

[Steve G]

No, no plans for a rear engine.  Thinking a bit more about this and a good example of using the same suspension front and rear is the MGF.  

I'm just thinking as I am going to have to remake a lot of the rear of the Scamp so I could do almost anything with the rear suspension. It's going to be mainly used on the road so a solid beam might not be the best way to go. 

[nicklouse]

Ok then don't look at any setup that hold up an engine as the spring rates etc will be nuts.

High lows can get around it a bit but very stiff suspension.

So no normal Scamping then?

So travel is not an issue but my solution would still be the same. A couple of steel tube A arms bolted up with rose joints and coil springs.

Or if you ha pcd the fabrication tools and skills. Make up a double wishbone set up. But then you might have a better set up at the rear than the front.

[nicklouse]

Just to add when using a front set up on the rear you have the problem of the steering ability and locking it off. The position is rather critical as in the wrong place and you will get bump steer. And then there is the flexing of the steering arms.

[Steve G]

Thanks for the input.  Standard cones on the back would be overly stiff and I doubt competition fronts and the smootheride ones would be different enough. Someone who is building a twin engined Volvo 850 has made a dummy steering rack which seems a good solution, not much help with a Mini though as the rack doesn't bolt to the subframe. 

 

A arms of some sort could be a good idea especially if the design incorperated a small amount of camber change. I will have a look at Autograss cars. 

 

Another possibly silly idea I had was to use good quality trailer or caravan braked suspension units, I don't know if there is anything saying you can't use them on a car.

[nicklouse]

You could just take a rear axel of something like a VW Caddy.

Trailers will not have enough brakes. (or my braked one would not.

But one thing to consider is different brake cylinder area will effect the brake balance.

[Steve G]

I had a look at the trailer suspension and while you can get ones suitable for Mini hubs with brakes they don't look brilliant, plus the trailing arms are too short. 

 

Not thought of a Caddy axle but like most things they will be too wide in standard form.  Another option would be the sort of rear beam you get on things like Novas, and early Golfs. Again a bit wide. 

 

It was seeing the picture of your rear suspension got me thinking. Even using Metro trailing arms would do away with the bronze bushes and allow wider wheels without spacer type drums.

[nicklouse]

Ok things to think on about with metro arms. They kick out more than Mini arms.

You will note that the outer arm mounting is well inboard of the two beam mounts to the body.

The beam was made to order with the spacing I specced. Not standard.

With the scamp you can really do whatever you want.

[Steve G]

Thanks. I went on a Google search and found a picture of a Mini and Metro arm next to each other.  I mentioned seeing someone using them years ago on a Mini and think it was on a Lancia twin cam engined Mini. They used them make the back as wide as the front.

 

Thats given me a few things to think about anyway.