9 replies to this topic

[3VILC]

I have just aquired a 1968 Riley Elf MK3, the wet suspension system is well and truely knackered so thinking about replacing with dry. From what information I have found so far dry suspension will fit a wet front subframe without too much difficulty apart from changing the upper arms, but if you try and do the same with the rear it will not ride correctly as the dry subframe has shaped spring seats which help change the spring rate as the cone squashes, does this sound correct? So this leads me to my next question, my cousin has a '78 mini parts car which I can get for free/cheap once he's taken all the rust cuts he needs from it, is there any reason this rear subframe wouldnt bolt up to my 68? The front looks different where it attaches to the floorpan/firewall so I can see that one won't work but the rears should be the same I think?

 

Many thanks,

Clive

[nicklouse]

The rear frame all mount the same. Yes the early fronts were solid (directly) mounted the later ones used rubber mounts. Change over was about 76.

 

rear radius arms and front top arms had different positions for the knuckle joints in the dry and wet  versions. As well as having different mounting bolt sizes for the #hock positions.

 

wet front subframes need the locating tags removed to allow the dry rubbers to fit.

[3VILC]

Excellent thanks thats what I wanted to know :) I could even be looking at bolts for something else, very bottom of the firewall (inside car) 2 bolts either side. I was assuming they were rear of subframe but could be steering rack? The Riley has 1 on the firewall and 1 on the flat of the floor, the '78 they are both slightly higher up on the firewall

[nicklouse]

Yep that is the difference between the solid and rubber mounted front frames. Also on the front crossmember you have two small headed bolts each side while the later car has one big bolt each side and rubber mounts at the front to the front panel.

[3VILC]

Cheers, been a few years since I've been under one. But think I'm about to get an intimate knowledge by the time I've got this car back on the road

[GraemeC]

You'll probably also find the top mounts on the cross member are different.

 

So to cut it short - the front subframe will not easily swap, but yours can be converted by knocking back the tabs inside the towers and by swapping the top arms

The rear frames are straight swap over, or again can be converted in the seat platform and then fit dry radius arms.

 

Personally - I would swap the rear rather than convert (if the alternative one is good) and sell yours - wet subframes and arms are still sought after by people trying to return cars to original spec.  The hydro units can be replaced or repaired but its not cheap.

For the front it would be nicer to replace it and keep the hydro frame un-molested and sell it, but an early dry frames are getting harder to find. 

[mab01uk]

Useful 'How To' link on converting wet to dry suspension:-
http://www.calverst....rom-wet-to-dry/

 

Hydrolastic Displacers

"MiniMail have developed a way of putting a new hose on hydrolastic units . We offer (when available) refurbed used units that have been pressure tested,checked and repainted with new gaiter and a new hose .  These are done on an exchange basis . For a guide as to what might be suitable for re-hosing , see download (scroll down) below. We also have used units from time to time that we pressure test and sell as they are. £84 surcharge on old unit till returned."

£108.00 incl. VAT

https://www.minimail.co.uk/parts/

Edited by mab01uk, 30 November 2020 - 10:07 AM.

[mab01uk]

I have just aquired a 1968 Riley Elf MK3, the wet suspension system is well and truely knackered so thinking about replacing with dry. From what information I have found so far dry suspension will fit a wet front subframe without too much difficulty apart from changing the upper arms, but if you try and do the same with the rear it will not ride correctly as the dry subframe has shaped spring seats which help change the spring rate as the cone squashes, does this sound correct? So this leads me to my next question, my cousin has a '78 mini parts car which I can get for free/cheap once he's taken all the rust cuts he needs from it, is there any reason this rear subframe wouldnt bolt up to my 68? The front looks different where it attaches to the floorpan/firewall so I can see that one won't work but the rears should be the same I think?

 

Many thanks,

Clive

 

Bringing up the rear. 

"Again, as with the front, the hydro rear ‘frame can be modded to take the rubber springs. Same mods, but very, very much easier. However I don’t advise this unless the Min’s used solely for normal road use, carrying two people in the front, minimal luggage, and totally standard wheels/tyres and standard ride height only. Why? because that curious metal cone shape on the dry type acts as a variable spring platform - progressively increasing the spring rate as more load is applied. Carrying more load than the minimal amount mentioned above will have the tyres bashing the wheel arches. Trust me in this, that’s all the explanation you’re going to get, as it’s a bit complicated (not enough room here for full dissertation)."

https://www.calverst...rom-wet-to-dry/

 

 

[whistler]

You can have your hydro displacers re-hosed and tested by Ian Kennedy in Telford. Save you having to convert to dry. He's done 6 of mine (4 fort he car and 2 spares).

Very quick turnaround. He can also repair/replace at his premises as a full service.

https://hydragasandh...e.com/about-us/

[3VILC]

Thanks for the replies guys. I had been reading the Calver guide hence I was wondering if the dry rear frame I can get my hands on would bolt up to the earlier car. I am in New Zealand so the cost of trying to repair the hydro system would be fairly prohibitive. I can likely get whats left of the '78 for around NZ$100 which i need some rust cuts from anyway so anything else i can use is a bonus 🙂