Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ride height

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Ride height

    Simon, I think you're right about the raised gearing - it should directly match the increase in rolling circumference.

    As Steve says further up, this will - in theory - also result in an overall reduction in acceleration. However, in practice, I don't think this will be a problem.

    How often do you perform standing starts, thrashing your car through all the gears to the redline?! Even if you do, all the slightly raised gearing will mean in practice is that you'd stay in a lower gear for slightly longer. Ok, the 'edge' may be removed if you try a high speed overtake in TOP gear, but - even if this is noticeable - all you'd need to do is drop a gear. And I doubt you'd even need to do that.

    What's you car like at the moment? Does it cruise comfortably at 70mph? Or is it more like my 4-speed Pinto engined Berli used to be - cruising much above 60mph was very tiring, with the engine revving a lot higher than it needed to?

    Simon, assuming your existing tyres are 165 width (I don't think you've mentioned this dim?), a rough calc suggests to me you currently have a total wheel/tyre edge-to-edge diameter of about 21.5". Say you swapped these for 15" wheels with 185/65s. This set-up would have a dia of just under 24.5" - a 3" difference, so the car should be sitting a whole 1/5" higher!

    Gearing would change by, I think, about 14%, so whatever top gear speed you currently get at 3,000 rpm (what does that give you at the moment - over 70mph?) should be delivered at around 2,600rpm. That is like a whole added gear, so you couldn't expect acceleration in the higher gears to be as before, but cruising should be a lot more relaxed - and most likely more economical too.

    Accelerating in lower gears, you'll simply find you'd be staying in each gear for a little longer. I doubt you'd notice any reduction in acceleration up to, say, 50mph - you'd just be changing up a little later (no bad thing).

    As Steve also mentioned above, with these cars being significantly lighter than the donor, the tyres end up doing a lot more of the 'springing'. Fit low profile tyres if you want ultimate road holding, I guess, but at the expense of comfort. Low profile tyres will also be more 'twitchy' on uneven road surfaces, of which we have a few.

    So, I think an upgrade to larger wheels and tyres would provide many more benefits than simply increased ground clearance!

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Ride height

      All interesting stuff. The attached picture shows the calculation from the Minty site showing a 5.2% difference in circumference. So, we haven't all arrived at the same figure but I think it is clear that 15" wheels with 65 profile tyres will help my gearing (as you say, Donnie, not comfortable above 60mph) and Bryan's ride height issue.

      Had a quick look at the Minilites on the Midland Wheels site. Not cheap are they?!
      Attached Files
      Roadster MKII LWB. Built 1988. Marina 1.8TC based. B Series 1950cc engine fitted with twin SU HS4 carburetors and unleaded, big valve head. 4 core Austin Maxi radiator. All Marina 1.8TC running gear including 4 speed gearbox. Minilite style 15"wheels fitted with tall tyres to increase gearing for more relaxed cruising.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Ride height

        Simon, what width and profile tyres are you considering - and currently have?

        My calcs (tho' they could of course be wrong!) were based on going from 13", 165 wide, 65 profile to 15" 185 wide and similar profile. Bear in mind that not only are the actual wheels 2" greater dia, but the tyre height is greater too since 65% of 185 is a little more than ditto% of 165.

        And you can always go wider still - 195 would be pretty standard - and 70, 75 or even 80 profile...

        195/65 15 tyres will be about the cheapest and easiest to get hold of as they're very common. Should you wish to go 'higher' (I'm planning 75s for my NG) then you might need to look at tyres designed for small 4x4s such as the Rav4/landrover/etc. These tyres come is various 'hybrids' combinations designed for both road and off-road use. You can get ones which are almost completely designed for 'on' road...
        For tyre profiles above 65

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Ride height

          Donnie, thanks for your further comments, I'm learning all the time on this. My current tyres are 185/70/R13 and I would like to consider 185 or 195/65/15. I suppose the questions are: would there be sufficient clearance to avoid rubbing on the suspension leg, wheel arch etc on a Marina based LWB (looking at Dave Cunnington's thread above)? and how much would they affect gearing to improve cruising comfort? Realistically, I also have to consider cost so, are Midland Wheels the cheapest? Oh, and another thought - will the 15" wheels with 65 profile tyres fit in the spare wheel well?
          Roadster MKII LWB. Built 1988. Marina 1.8TC based. B Series 1950cc engine fitted with twin SU HS4 carburetors and unleaded, big valve head. 4 core Austin Maxi radiator. All Marina 1.8TC running gear including 4 speed gearbox. Minilite style 15"wheels fitted with tall tyres to increase gearing for more relaxed cruising.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Ride height

            Hi Simon.

            The funny thing is, your current 185 tyres are pretty high profile being 70s, so will actually have a marginally HIGHER sidewall height than the 195 65s you are considering for your 15" wheels. So, the actual tyres themselves won't give you any extra height!

            However, the 15" wheels should give you an added 1" lift - very useful. It'll also raise you gearing by just over 8%.

            Aren't there any modern 15" wheels that'll fit on your axles - those from an MGTF for instance? Or perhaps the old Maestros and Montegos? I just don't know.

            Do you know the spec of your existing wheels - apart from just dia and width, of course. Can you look at one very closely - it should hopefully have an 'ET' number stamped on it which is the 'offset'. Armed with this info, it should be possible to find alternatives - if they exist.

            I really can't see a 1" increase in wheel/tyre radius causing any obstruction problems.

            Will the larger wheels fit in the spare well? I dunno - is the recess 25" wide?

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Ride height

              Fair chance an email to them: http://www.mikesatur.com/ will give good info as to whether MG wheels can be adapted to Marina axles. They do hub adaptors and all sorts...

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Ride height

                Just found this:

                BMW Mini
                P.C.D. 4 x 100
                ET 35
                C.B. 57.0

                Rover MGF
                P.C.D. 4 x 95.25
                ET 35...30
                C.B. 56.6

                The 'CB' is the hole in the centre. These 'ET's are quite large and 'positive', which means the wheels fit quite far 'in' on the car, sitting well over the hubs. Some fat spacers should tweak them out nicely to suit that of our rear-wheel drive cars...

                (Treat these figures with some caution - I got them from another forum...)

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Ride height

                  http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/MG-Rover-MGF-MG-F-Triumph-TR7-Set-of-4-15-Alloy-Wheel_W0QQitemZ140400420893QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_C arsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM?hash=item20b084681d

                  Obviously not to be considered until you've done your homework!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Ride height

                    thought i'd add my comments to the pot....
                    very important to remember that both gearing and ride height are dependant on rolling radius,NOT diameter.the rolling radius is distance to the ground from the centre of the wheel,and will depend on what tyre pressures you run,the tyre size,vehicle weight and tyre sidewall stiffness which can vary a lot between different tyre manufacturers.this is the only way to work out such issues accurately,if any formula you might have needs overall diameter then double rolling radius.i have 14 inch wheels on my roadster with 185/65 tyres and they do not fit in wheel well on the rear,i made a frame to support spare with struts going through into the boot to chassis,and a welded bracket on rear bumper.Also,accel is directly related to torque at rear wheels,which is directly related to gearing,i.e 10% higher gearing = 10% less acceleration.hope this helps(or does it make it more confusing...?) final point...too large an overall wheel/tyre combo will upset steering geometry,and too low a profile will increase tramlining dramatically....both are already a little suspect in the marina suspension setup...

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Ride height

                      Andy
                      The gearing is directly related to the rolling circumference of the tyre, not the radius you describe: the distance travelled after one revolution of the tyre will be equal to it's rolling circumference.
                      Only the ride height will be affected by the radius that you describe.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Ride height

                        mike you are indeed correct,what i should have stated is that the rolling circumference is calculated from the rolling radius

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X