Is the hydrolastic suspension on the MK1s any good or is it common practice to convert it? Can it be converted to the rubber doughnuts and cones of the later type cars? I'm guessing the hydrolastic is not that good or they would have kept it for the later cars. I've never owned a car with hydrolastic suspension and I'm thinking about buying a MK1 to restore but I want to know what I'm letting myself in for!!

Mk1 Suspension Conversion?
#1
Posted 21 May 2017 - 11:32 AM
#2
Posted 21 May 2017 - 03:57 PM
I believe that you have to change the subframes as well, so a lot of work & expense, also have a feeling that some new displacer's are obsolete. I'm sure someone else will be more specific.
A friend used to have an hydrolastic MK1 Cooper years ago & he didn't like the way it seesawed on acceleration & braking, we added standard 'front shock absorber's, brackets etc. from a "dry" Mini & he was happy with it for club rallying.
#3
Posted 21 May 2017 - 05:03 PM
The suspension was designed to be hydrolastic from the start by Issigonis however cost and development time meant that the car was launched with rubber instead.
Hydrolastic was finally introduced on saloons only from about 1964? (My '63 is rubber). It was phased out again in the early 1970s on a cost basis, not because it wasnt any good. There is a noticeable difference driving a hydro car, the "pitching" not being to everyone's taste. This can be cured by fitting standard front shock absorbers to a hydro Mini.
The problem now is that new hydro displacers are no longer made, existing units at least 45 ish years old. I believe some people have set about refurbishing them?
If a car I was restoring came with all the hydro specific parts Id endeavour to keep it that way however Id not worry about fitting rubber suspension unless concours standard restoration is your aim?
#4
Posted 21 May 2017 - 06:38 PM
I'd suggest that if your displacers are in reasonable order, stick with the Hydro. It really is a better ride. Off hand, all parts for the Hydro are still available, except for the displacers themselves, though I read recently there is a bit of a push on to have these remanufactured.
#5
Posted 22 May 2017 - 07:52 AM
#6
Posted 22 May 2017 - 09:12 AM
I have converted a few for people, and they can be converted using your existing frames. I would recommend using a HiLo kit, but yes it can be done.
As previously mentioned, if you can still use your hydro system safely, then stick with it, they are a far better ride.
#7
Posted 18 January 2018 - 06:06 PM
I have converted a few for people, and they can be converted using your existing frames. I would recommend using a HiLo kit, but yes it can be done.
As previously mentioned, if you can still use your hydro system safely, then stick with it, they are a far better ride.
Old thread but can anyone link me to a thread where a car with 4 hydrolastic corners has been converted
#8
Posted 18 January 2018 - 10:54 PM
It is a good idea to fit Hi-Lo's to set the ride height.
#9
Posted 18 January 2018 - 11:38 PM
The car's value will be diminished if you convert it to dry. I've had both types and nothing wrong with the Hydro setup. I'd fix it up if you can...
#10
Posted 18 January 2018 - 11:41 PM
dont forget if you convert you will need dry top arms and radius arm as the leverage ratios are different.
#11
Posted 18 January 2018 - 11:56 PM
Conversion to dry doesn't seem to have much affect on the resale value. Many people prefer dry as in the long term is is seen as more reliable.
#12
Posted 19 January 2018 - 01:27 AM
dont forget if you convert you will need dry top arms and radius arm as the leverage ratios are different.
Quite.
Does anyone know the leverage ratio on the rears? I've not gotten around to measuring them.
#13
Posted 19 January 2018 - 08:15 AM
Thanks guys,
im not too worried as it wont affect the cars value its a mk3 innocenti, if anything it will add to it, im more about modernising it, it wont be concourse thats for sure its really only a toy lol, I have the Hi-Los front and rear bought also 7.5 brakes bubs etc, ill have to buy the rest of the components, id be interested in hearing how protech shocks perform , i had lowered Gaz in previous cars with negative camber and adjustable tie bars along with alloy mounts,
If anyone can list what else i need id greatly appreciate it,
Simon
Edited by miniireland, 19 January 2018 - 08:34 AM.
#14
Posted 19 January 2018 - 03:13 PM
Didn't he minis win all their world rally championships on hydrolastic? So it can't be all bad.
Protech have a good rep though I have no personal experience of the shocks. I contacted them a few years ago, they said they are built to your spec and fully serviceable.
#15
Posted 20 January 2018 - 01:53 AM
dont forget if you convert you will need dry top arms and radius arm as the leverage ratios are different.
Quite.
Does anyone know the leverage ratio on the rears? I've not gotten around to measuring them.
I think the leverage on the radius arms is the same at 5:1
I have just done a very original 66 S on hydro and we put gate valves on the front pipes, you can just see the left one the photo
With them shut it gives a better ride, less choppy especially at speed on bumpy roads.
Its smoother and less bouncy than a standard rubber setup
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users