I have just been drilling out my brackets today on the pillar drill for a capri axle.

Just wondering what people think.

I measured the axle (Atlas) diameter and it came out at 60mm near as damn it so I think its larger than the escort (Book) axle with regards to diameter(but not sure).

I am just wondering that when I cut the brackets for the (semi )circle to fit on the axle do I cut them to a depth of 30 mm or do I go deeper but still keep the 60 diameter to set the axle further back in chassis?

Ron's book shows the axles cut back one inch into the bracket on page 72 but then contradicts himself on page 73 with a deeper circular cut. I am thinking it would be best to move the axle back as far as I can in the chassis with a deeper cut as the effectively longer trailing arms created by the cut are supposed to be better and I would give myself more seating room too.

I notice big wasa's brackets seem to be set quite deep into the axle tube.

Any opinions? Sorry if this doesn't make too much sense, I have been thinking/drinking very hard today.

Basically can you look at page 72 of the locost book and then imagine using a larger axle tube. Do you make the circular cut deeper (More than a semi circle)into the brackets and if so how deep to you make it? Pages 72 and 73 both suggest that the bracket should cover half the diameter of the axle tube. Would this still be correct with the larger axle tube?

As you can tell I've never attended an engineering lecture in my life.

Many thanks.

the tubes are 60mm diameter, therefore 30mm radius. i'd make the semi circles 30mm deep.

any extra depth won't make the trailing arms longer, in fact they'd be shorter!

i'm make a diagram...

Im thinking the extra depth would push the diff backwards making the arms effectively longer.

I could be very wrong though.

[Edited on 20/10/07 by RichieW]

i see what you mean now, but there's only so far you can move the diff back before it starts to interfer with where the wheels sit, mud guards etc.

sitting it deeper into the bracket would mean the arms would need to be shorter to compensate.

if you want the arms longer, make them longer, but you'd need to set the axle less deep into the bracket to compensate, meaning its held by less welding


Description

a bit extreme, i know

I've got a standard set of arms and I'm happy with them. I'm just thinking of pushing the axle back further into the brackets compared to escort one to prevent the diff from getting in the way of room reserved for the seats.

Its really just a case of trying to keep the same distance from the diff flange to chassis tube M2 ( see page 64) with the larger diff.

The Capri diff being larger cant help but be closer towards M1 and M2 looking from the side and I dont really want that.

But I'm not sure if the springs and dampers angled slightly towards the rear from the top mount (see page 64) is a good compromise in order to achieve this.

I was just wondering anyone knew of any reasons why I couldn't do this or advice on best engineering practice.


ta

ah, i see, i can't see there'd there'd be a problem with putting the axle deeper into the bracket to maitain the same distance to the diff flange, but it won't make the effective length of the arms any longer because the effective length is between the pivot points (end of the arms)

Would it affect the suspension coming down from above much? I understand it would increase the effective poundage of the springs a little bit if they are not dropping straight down but would this affect the handling? (The angle not the poundage)


Thanks for the drawings by the way they have answered another different (stupid) idea of mine too which I've been able to keep to myself and not display more even ignorance.

i'm not sure what effect it would have on the handling to have the shocks angled back a bit... i suppose it's the same as the shocks on the front being angled. one thing's for sure, you'd have to have rose jointed shocks. they're more expensive (not much really) and some would say they'd wear quicker on a road car

mine are rose jointed all round though, in fact all my suspension is

I have just had a thought that i could fabricate a lower mounting point for the damper that is forward of the axle bracket centre line in order to make the damper truly vertical..

I reckon that would correct things.

I'd make a picture if I had any talent. Will have a think about this and reconsider when I'm sober....Bloody South Africans.......

Just go as per book but allow for the 10mm greater dia.

Dampers are best mounted so the line of action (damper centre line) passes through the axis of the half shaft.

If you want to move the axle back use longer trailling arms , this will give less rear steer effects on roll.

[Edited on 21/10/07 by britishtrident]

Cheers for that. I will keep it simple. I dont really have the talent to complicate things much.

Will have to diet and exercise away my lardy arse then in order to get room for everything to fit....

You can see how I did mine

cheers mark I 've been using your document for reference for quite a while now. Very handy.

Yep my chassis has Marks Mods

I like your seatbelt mounts by the way.

Think I will be borrowing that idea for my chassis. Cant see Newcastle sva picking holes in that design.