Hi,
I'm looking to gather up the bits I need to start building my wishbones (front) and plan to just buy the threaded tubes from Lolocost to accept the transit top joints rather than mess about trying to make them myself. I also noticed that Lolocost produce a bush kit with the outer tubes, tophats (made from Nylaspa) and inner tubes which would be very handy since I don't have a lathe with which to true up my own outer tubes correctly.

I had intended to buy poly bushes but since Lolocost produce this kit I wondered if this Nylaspa stuff is a good choice or not. There doesn't seem to be much information on the web or on this forum about it so perhaps that is telling me something...

Anyone using Nylaspa out there?

Cheers,
Craig.

Nylaspa? I've never heard of it. It's probably a trade name, and Nylon based by the sound of it. If that's the case, I'd go for PU.
Best to ask Lolocost what the story is with them. I'd be interested to know.

Sorry Rorty, I replied to your post on Wednesday but it's not appeared for some reason.

Thanks, yes I guessed they might be nylon based. What exactly is wrong with Nylon bushes anyway? I'm sure I saw a thread about this before but as usual I can't find it when I need it...

The deal with Lolocost is that they can supply the various bits and pieces to let you make up your own wishbones, trailing arms and panhard rod, which will cost me about £134 by my reckoning. This includes all bushes, balljoints, locknuts, pivot bolts and nuts etc.

Or, I can pay £192 and get ready made ones which seems like a good deal to me especially since it includes the trailing arms and panhard rod.

I would make them myself but I'm not happy enough with my welding and perhaps more importantly I don't really have the metalworking equipment (mainly a lathe and pillar drill) to make the bits accurately enough myself.

My welding is good enough for the chassis (IMHO) but the localised stresses going through the wishbones scares me off a bit...

I once had a suspension failure on my old Mini where the top balljoint came undone and fell apart (partly my fault btw) and if I hadn't been doing just 15MPH on a quiet road pulling away from a junction I would have been in deep trouble because the car dropped onto the sump and just spinned around.

Anyway, getting back to the point, are nylon really a bad idea or would they do okay to begin with because they seem to be quite cheap and thus could be considered a throw-away item in this Lolocost deal. I understand they are a bit harder than PolyU, which I don't mind, but what else do they lack?

Anyone out there using Lolocost wishbones?

Cheers,
Craig.

Craig1410:

quote:

---

What exactly is wrong with Nylon bushes anyway?

---

Syd,
Thanks for balancing the opinion, it always helps me to understand things better that way. After all, as you say, Nylon is not all bad.

Well I've taken the plunge and ordered my wishbones from Lolocost complete with Nylaspa bushes and a complete set of balljoints. Polyurethane may indeed be superior but it seems to be an insignificant detail at this stage in my build and they can be added later if absolutely necessary.

I'm starting to appreciate some of the advice I've been given over the last few months with regards to not getting bogged down with minute details so early in the build, after all there will be plenty of time for refinement once it's on the road!

Thanks again to both of you,
Craig.

Well done Syd! You just couldn't resist could you?
As has happened on previous occasions, your "side" of the story reflects my points, almost verbatum!
Of course, you always have to go off on one of your funny tangents though:

quote:

---

In the back of a solid axle Locost you need a bush that will move in at least two axes. Hence PU or rubber, if the lolocost bushes aren't slightly 'squidgy', then they should be avoided.

---

This is the bush material that i was asking about in an earlier post.
It would seem that it is no good for my live axle application.
Does anyone know where I can get PU bushes of this size?
Cheers

Paul

Rorty,
I've not spoken to Lolocost technical department about them. Since it is the only material that they supply and is the same material used on the Robin Hood cars then I'm sure that they think it is the mutt's nuts. I'll decide that for myself when I give it the Syd Bridge "slightly squidgy" test.

I normally research things to the n'th degree before purchase but in this case I felt that I was going round in circles and it was holding up my project too much. I suspect this won't be the last time that I have to make such a decision if I'm going to stick to my 12 month timescale...

Syd, when you say it's not suitable for the Live axle application, does this also apply to a de-dion application? I am using a 5-link de-dion axle using standard panhard rod and 4 trailing links which Lolocost also supply as part of the kit. As far as I can see, I ideally only want single axis rotation in both the panhard rod and trailing links albeit that the panhard rod will cause a slight sideways deflection in the trailing links and the trailing links will cause a slight sideways deflection in the panhard rod due to wheelbase changes. Is this what you mean when you say multiple axes and if so, do you think the movement is enough to upset the nylon?

In any event I'll let you guys know what they are like when I get them and see how much lateral deflection they can take. I think I only need a mm or two so hopefully they will be okay.

Thanks,
Craig.

Anybody know what MK use for their bushes????

quote:

---

Originally posted by Syd Bridge

Mr. Frost-Stephenson,
Somewhere in this forum, earlier this year, you made the statement ' I am not an engineer'. Some of your statements must be making those of us reading this list, who are engineers, wonder where you get your information. You give a lot of opinions, many of which have a doubtful basis.

You show some natural ability with auto engineering. I can say, most sincerely, do yourself a favour, and enrol in a part or full time course at your nearest TAFE college, and attain the proper knowledge that forms the basis of what the engineers design from.
You, and your cars, will benefit for evermore, because you will be working from a base of sure and solid knowledge, and proper understanding; not 'seat of the pants', and what is read in books and magazines.

Cheers,
syd

I,ll be in Melbourne in August, September, I'll see you then.

---

Syd Bridge:

quote:

---

I,ll be in Melbourne in August, September, I'll see you then.

---

I have some of the robin hood bushes, crush tubes etc, and can tell you that there's nothing the least bit compliant about them. I can't think that they'd work for a panhard rod or trailing arms on a standard axle.

Kingr

quote:

---

Originally posted by Syd Bridge
.......I took some further studies when I was well past 40, and did a lot better than the youngsters, who didn't really know why they were there..........

---

Hi guys,
Well just for the record, I'm an engineer (albeit electronic) and from my experience in the electronics field I can safely say that I learned more between the age of 8 and 18 messing about with electronics projects than I ever did during the 5 years I spent at University sitting my degree. My 'bit of paper' is in my loft and has only been opened twice since I received it!

In any case, isn't the first step towards knowledge knowing that you don't have it already? And the second is knowing where to find it! 'nuff said!

Anyway, thanks for the info (Kingr) that the Nylaspa bushes are non-squidgy. Too late now though, they are on their way to me. As I said though, if they aren't up to the job then I'll just replace them with suitably sized poly bushes.

As for the suitability for panhard rod and trailing links, I appreciate why you question it but I can't help wondering why Robin Hood would use them on their own cars if they weren't suitable. I'm not naive but I don't expect that RH are stupid either. What do you expect to happen if they are given lateral deflection? Broken Nylon or broken welds?

Syd, I intend to make up a jig to ensure correct axial alignment of my wishbone mountings. What sort of accuracy do you think I need?

Cheers again guys,
Craig.

I haven't looked into it in depth, but my understanding was that the Robin Hood cars are sierra based and used the entire rear end, so therefore don't use those at the back anyway, and the lolocost chassis is IRS IIRC, so that would be movement of the wishbones confined to one axis.

Kingr

I wasn't going to rise to Syd's clearly personal antagonism. However, as Syd hides behind the annoninimity of this list (as he is perfectly entitled to), I had no option but respond here. I appologise to everyone else for having to take up this space for this purpose, and I would like to thank all those who emailed their support of me.
Syd, you show all the traits of a cowardly underachiever. You immediately attack just about every post I have submited to this forum in an elitist manner under the assumption I don't have any engineering background, or suitable "paper" accreditation. Emphasising my "natural ability" would indicate a similar failing on your part.
You probably think you are really smart, because you have me at a disadvantage when you read on my site that I went to a college (at the age of 30), and studied antiques. You don't know me, my background, my education prior to my foray into antiques, or even what degrees I formerly obtained.
You arrogantly suggest I should seek further practical and automotive knowledge through TAFE. How do you know I didn't teach one of those subjects at Poly when I lived in the UK?
I don't care to publicise my entire carreer achievements widely, especially in a forum where I might make others feel ill at ease or lead them to think I was elitist, and therefore unapproachable. My background is personal, and none of your business.
How dare you propose how I spend my recuperation. Again, it's none of your damned business.
I don't mind if you don't want to use my "forum" name (though it's probably confusing for others), as I'm proud of my name. If you are going to use my name, at least have the decency to spell it correctly.
I don't intend saying anything further about this on or off this list, so I would ask you to desist from making any further slights, inuendos or personal remarks.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Syd Bridge
He seems to have a natural ability, and would benefit enormously from some advanced engineering education, he'd probably enjoy it enormously as well, because of his interest.

---

Thanks Syd, I'll do my best with the alignment and see how it goes. One quick question though if you don't mind:

How would you suggest that I "measure" my achieved accuracy? I am guessing that threaded rod wouldn't do for measuring but would a piece of 10mm solid bar do the trick provided it was absolutely straight? I'm sure there must be a 'trick of the trade' for determining this sort of axial alignment. (You know, a bit like the 3-4-5 triangle for achieving right angles.)

Anyway, I hope that you and Rorty can put it all behind you and just accept your differing opinions because I'm sure most folk on this forum appreciate the input which BOTH of you contribute from time to time. I certainly do!

Cheers,
Craig.

Syd how do you use a gun drill to align mounts?.I assume you are referring to a very long series drill.I can not see anyway that you could use one to accurately drill the mounts in situ which is the only way i can think of using one, apart from using it as a mandrel for which a bit of straight bar would be much better.I used studding which i had previously checked for straightness on a surface plate and secured the brackets with nuts and washers. Even so the brackets distorted slightly when welded and had to be tweaked slightly afterwards.
Paul.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Syd Bridge
Hello Craig,
There are a few pics of differing jigs in the photo archive, most appear to do the job well.
To align bush mount brackets, I use a gun drill.(I was fortunate enough to get a few of these at a local engineering workshop clearout.)


Cheers,
Syd.

---

Hi,
Yes I was actually going to ask what a gun-drill is...

Well I've received my stuff from Lolocost today and I must say I'm a little bit disappointed overall.

There are two crush tubes missing, one large washer missing and the mounting "bolts" which I bought from them at way over the going rate were actually "set screws". There are also lock nuts missing from the transit balljoints.

Further to that the welding is not quite as tidy as I was expecting although it does look strong with very good penetration so I'm not so worried but I am disappointed to find that everything is covered in patches of rust, especially the internal thread into which the transit balljoint screws. My final complaint is that the crush tubes are not finished at both ends and appear to be "off the saw." I was expecting square ends at least! They do appear to be slightly too long so I'm guessing that I am expected to finish them off myself...

Syd, can you confirm what clearance I should have with the nylon bushings. In other words, how long should my crush tubes be in relation to the assembled outer tubes and tophats?

I intend to contact Lolocost tomorrow and request a set of bolts to replace my set screws and the other missing parts. I will also "have a word" about the other points and will let you all know what they say... In the meantime I've ordered over £100 worth of nuts, bolts and washers of various sizes so that I won't be tempted to pay £1 each for a bolt which turns out to be a grade 8.8 set screw!! I've also ordered a micrometer and vernier caliper set so that I can measure small things properly for once...

Catch you all later, I'm off out to the garage to pretend that it's all fitted and to start thinking about making up suspension mounts

Cheers,
Craig.

Oh Syd, electronics.
Yes, I've built a few car related projects over the years. One of my most recent was a speed/time logger which connected up to my Rover Vitesse (800). It has a digital speedo cable rather than mechanical so you can intercept the signals easily. I fed this into a ubiquitous PIC microcontroller which fed an RS232 data stream into the serial port on my PC. I then wrote software for both the PIC and the PC to graph speed versus time and measure 0-60 times etc. It was quite good EIISSM.

I've also built rev counters and speedo's as well as messing about with a traction control unit. I also modified my Metro Turbo ECU which was in my mini to allow me to use a set of graphic equaliser sliders to control turbo boost levels at various RPM's. No real value in the real world but was quite fun to have such fine control over boost and thus power.

I used to work for Lucas Automotive in Cirencester where I worked on the common rail diesel project (1995-1996) when it was in its infancy. We used to supply development kits to Ford, Mercedes, Peugeot/Citroen etc for them to run on their development engines. Quite an enjoyable job I must admit.

Anyway, I digress, I'm off to the garage now.
Cheers,
Craig.

quote:

---

Originally posted by craig1410
Well I've received my stuff from Lolocost today and I must say I'm a little bit disappointed overall.

---

Syd,
Yes they are solid Nylon with very little compliance. I can squeeze them in my fingers and they go ever so slightly oval but I'm only talking about maybe 1mm ovality with quite firm thumb pressure. The crush tubes are quite an easy sliding fit and as I mentioned they are unfinished at the ends and will require some careful fettling with a flat file and some emery paper.

To get the correct clearance I will fabricate a suspension bracket, assemble it and torque it up. I'll measure clearance with a feeler gauge and try to work it down to the point where I have virtually zero clearance with zero bind which I guess is optimal. I'll then measure the crush tube with the vernier calipers and make them all to that length. Don't worry, I'll check that all the outer tubes and top hats are the same size first...

I've not built any electronics for a while tbh since I now work as an Oracle Software Consultant for a business software company but I'm fairly confident that I'll be able to help you if you get stuck.

By the way, can you recommend any good books which cover the fundamentals of Mechanical Engineering with a bias towards Motor Engineering? In particular, I'm interested in stuff about structural stresses, fastener technology, bearings, bushes etc. and any other disciplines which may be relevant to building a car.

Cheers,
Craig.

PeetBee,
Sorry if I put you off buying the Lolocost stuff, I didn't perhaps mean to be quite so harsh but I was a little disappointed as I said. I've been in touch with them today and they are going to forward the missing bits asap. They really are very pleasant to deal with and the ordering process is fairly painless which counts for something.

Working with the wishbones last night I would have to say that they really are very strong albeit they are quite heavy too. I think Lolocost use a thicker walled tube than 16swg which I think is a plus point. If I was going to build them myself I think I would consider thicker tubing too provided I could then weld it properly. As I said, their welding is not the tidiest I've seen and it looks like Mig rather than Tig but I'd say it was again very strong at the expense of aesthetics. I will post some close up pictures later tonight or tomorrow so you can all decide for yourself. I managed to sort out the rusted threads on the upper wishbones by running the transit BJ up and down a few times first with WD40, then fine carborundum paste (carefully) and then with oil, cleaning out the threads with a toothbrush and soapy water in between each. They are now almost as good as new the transit BJ screws in and out by hand (or finger) easily.

At the end of the day I bought them from "Lolocost" and not Ferrari so I don't expect gold plated perfection. I am fairly happy because I got a complete set of wishbones, trailing links, panhard rod, bushes, balljoints and nuts and bolts for less than £200 including VAT and delivery.

If I had built them myself, the raw materials would have cost over £100 and I would have ended up hiring a professional welder to weld them for me. It would have taken me several weeks part time and would have required me to make up several jigs that would only have got used once or twice.

I think I did the right thing and I'd urge you to think about it carefully before building them yourself. Check out MK or Stuart Taylor if you're not happy with Lolocost but they will cost more from either of these guys and they may not have them ex-stock (MK didn't when I rang)

HTH,
Craig.

Syd
I know the sort of drill you mean and have used them in the past, but how did you manage to accurately drill suspension brackets with one? .I assume the brackets must have been on the chassis and you somehow drilled through them all and managed to stop the drill from wandering. Have you a photo of the setup you used?. I have attempted similiar setups before, but always found it difficult to garrantee accuracy when drilling something as flimsy as a suspension bracket.
Paul.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Syd Bridge
A gun drill is not like an ordinary drill. Those which I have are like a piece of hard rod, with a carbide cutting edge on the business end, and a groove down the full length. They are used to drill deep holes, where an ordinary style drill might grab and break.
Cheers,
Syd

---

Paul,
I was assuming that the drill was just used as an accurate alignment rod, not as a drill. If it was used to drill them then maybe he just drilled pilot holes first and used the gun drill to ream it out.

C'mon Syd, spill the beans...
Craig.

craig 1410:

quote:

---

I can squeeze them in my fingers and they go ever so slightly oval

---

Syd,
Read your last post again.....you agreed with Rorty! That makes me so proud of you guys... (Just don't mention crush tubes eh?)

Anyway, thanks both of you for the posts, I think I will check with Lolocost technical department and see what material these are made of because they don't seem to be "clearly" PU or Nylon by the sounds of it.

Yes, I agree with a little bit of preload, it seems to be the right thing to do instinctively and with a little bit of suitable grease it should be virtually bind free. I would like to see the arms almost being capable of holding up their own weight with a steady sink downwards with gravity when released but I'll see what happens. Ultimately I'm looking for zero clearance with zero bind which is probably very hard to accomplish in practice.

Thanks for the book reference, I'll look it up on Amazon.co.uk shortly.

On final thing...Syd, how level do you want the technology to become before you buy a digi camera? If you wait any longer it will have been replaced by holograms or something and digital camera's will be collectors items and cost more than they do today...

I bought a 3.3 megapixel camera recently second hand for under 200 GBP. It's an olympus and works great IMHO. The pictures on my website are taken with it but reduced from 2048x1536 resolution to just 640x480 to avoid annoying anyone without broadband. I then create thumbnails which are 128x96. At full resolution with minimal compression I can get quality which I can't distinguish from a 35mm camera. Also, at 640x480 resolution I can take something like 1300 pictures on a single 128MB smartmedia cartridge. It can also record sound and can even take short movies. Also note that this is a 3 year old design!!
Go on - get yourself a camera

Cheers guys,
Craig.

By the way, have you heard of Kempe's Engineers Year-Book? I have an edition of this from 1986 which I picked up for nothing at a liquidation auction of an engineering company. Having only just looked on the Amazon website it costs a staggering £160 for the latest version of this book. It has a massive amount of engineering information in it but this is spread across all disciplines including Civil and Electrical engineering.

How does this book compare with Machinery's handbook? It costs about £55 and I'll buy that no problem but I'd be a bit unhappy if the Kempe's book covers most of what I will need to know already.

Cheers,
Craig.

Craig, there are different editions of Machinery's Handbook, and I suspect what you've seen advertised for 55 quid, may be a "tool box" version, though you could easily prove me wrong. I think here, the full version is something like $350.
I've heard of Kempe's, but have never seen it used, though that's not to say it's no good.
I don't know of any engineering business that doesn't have a copy or two of MH lying around.

I have 2 copies of MH...one about 50 years old that I inherited and one that is 11 years old that I bought new..

To be honest I don't use them that much now as the really frequently used stuff......tapping sizes, spanner clearance, metal gauges, screw head data, etc.. I have readily available more conveniently.....much of it embedded directly into CAD...

In fact there is probably 99% of the book I hardly look at...and I'm sat here designing machinery all day (except when on this forum..)....So my advice...which is in agreement with most is.......if you can get one cheap, great...if not save your money for something else.

Another thing I noticed my usage probably dropped off with more internet use, and accumulating a ton of manufacturers catalogues.

As usual all IMO.....

quote:

---

Originally posted by craig1410
PeetBee,
Sorry if I put you off buying the Lolocost stuff, I didn't perhaps mean to be quite so harsh but I was a little disappointed as I said.

---

Pete,
Scratch my comments about the squidgyness, they ARE NOT in the slightest squidgy!!

Sorry for my previous remarks, I have no idea what I was thinking of in retrospect. I was convinced that they were a little bit squidgy but having looked at them very closely they simply don't move even when gently squeezed with vice grips.

It is possible to dent them with a flat screwdriver quite easily but the material doesn't recover it's shape afterwards which again would suggest that it is Nylon.

I assembled one of my trailing arms onto my de-dion ears and it simply does not move laterally even when pulled quite hard so I don't think they will be suitable after all. I'm going to try to source some poly bushes for at least one end of each trailing link and the panhard rod.

Having said all of the above, I still think that the wishbone kit is worth the money, even if I do now need to buy 5 or 6 poly bushes for the back.

I have taken some photo's of the wishbones so take a look at my photo area later tonight (I've not uploaded them yet)

HTH,
Craig.

Cheers Craig,
It is the squidgyness that's important to me, so perhaps I'll think again!

PeteB

PS I think squidgyness is a far better word than compliance!

PeteB,
Couldn't agree more. Compliance is something we're supposed to do with the law...or so I'm told

Would it help if I gave you the exact measurements of the nylaspa bushes? That way you could try to source poly u bushes from Rally design or someone else before deciding on the Lolocost stuff? I'm just in from the garage but will measure tomorrow and post here. I'm going to have to do the same I think because I don't want to over stress my trailing arms with side/twist loads. The front wishbones should be very good though I think due to single axis movement.
Cheers,
Craig.

Cheers Craig, it would be interesting to see if they are the same size as Triumph Herald bushes.

regards
PeteB

PeteB,
I don't think they are but here are the dims anyway:

Inner Diameter of tophat = 14mm
Outer Diameter of tophat (the bit which fits into the tube) = 25mm
Outer Diameter of tophat (the bit which stays outside the tube) = 30mm
Overall height of tophat = 20.8mm
Height of bit which bits inside tube = 17mm
Height of the 'rim' of the tophat = 3.8mm
Outer Diameter of crush tube = 10mm

Crush tube material is mild steel and is NOT finished at the ends. It comes in lengths of 46.1mm and must be machined down to about 44.5mm for use with the wishbone eye tubes and Nylaspa bushes supplied by Lolocost.

HTH,
Craig.

Hi,
Some corrections to my last post (was too late at night I think) - Spot the difference!
Cheers,
Craig.


Inner Diameter of tophat = 14mm
Outer Diameter of tophat (the bit which fits into the wishbone tube) = 25mm
Outer Diameter of tophat (the bit which stays outside the wishbone tube) = 30mm
Overall height of tophat = 20.8mm
Height of bit which fits inside tube = 17mm
Height of the 'rim' of the tophat = 3.8mm
Inside Diameter of crush tube = 10mm

Ta Craig,
I think I've spotted the difference!
cheers
PeteB