Printable Version | Subscribe | Add to Favourites
New Topic New Poll New Reply
Author: Subject: Trailing Arm IRS?
Jermyn

posted on 2/2/05 at 04:23 PM Reply With Quote
Trailing Arm IRS?

Has anyone set up a Trailing Arm Type IRS such as what is found on Triumph TR6s?

I have access to multiple aluminum rear trailing arms from TR6s. Since they are readily available to me I figured I'd ask.





If life is a race do you want to be the first one to finish?

View User's Profile E-Mail User View All Posts By User U2U Member
britishtrident

posted on 2/2/05 at 05:07 PM Reply With Quote
Not a good idea
View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
mangogrooveworkshop

posted on 2/2/05 at 06:36 PM Reply With Quote
quote:

I have access to multiple aluminum rear trailing arms from TR6s




Sell them on

and use the money to buy some bones and uprights from gts...........thats the way forward

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Peteff

posted on 2/2/05 at 06:44 PM Reply With Quote
Location Stateside, Raleigh, NC

Postage might be a bit of a stinger





yours, Pete

I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
MikeRJ

posted on 2/2/05 at 06:48 PM Reply With Quote
I suppose a semi-trailing system as used by the Sierra and BMW wouldn't be so bad (is this what the TR6 has?), but a fully trailing system on the driven wheels would make for "interesting" handling due to the large camber change.

That said, a tried and tested solution such as a Live axle, De-dion axle or proven IRS from e.g. MK would save a lot of grief.

[Edited on 2/2/05 by MikeRJ]

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Jermyn

posted on 2/2/05 at 08:36 PM Reply With Quote
I don't really know the difference between the 2. check out the pics and you tell me. Rescued attachment TRS-035.gif
Rescued attachment TRS-035.gif






If life is a race do you want to be the first one to finish?

View User's Profile E-Mail User View All Posts By User U2U Member
Jermyn

posted on 2/2/05 at 08:37 PM Reply With Quote
Heres another pic. Rescued attachment chassis_build2-8.jpg
Rescued attachment chassis_build2-8.jpg






If life is a race do you want to be the first one to finish?

View User's Profile E-Mail User View All Posts By User U2U Member
JoelP

posted on 2/2/05 at 09:07 PM Reply With Quote
camber change in roll

good wheel poise in bumps, but as the car body rolls, the wheel will gain (or lose, depending on the side) camber. hence reduced grip on corners.

this setup is much like the sierra setup. which i used...

edit - unless you set it up with static camber (pos or neg, cant remember which, but leant in at the top!) and accept poor tyre wear.

[Edited on 2/2/05 by JoelP]






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
The Shootist

posted on 2/2/05 at 09:29 PM Reply With Quote
Go DeDion!!

Simple, easy to fabricate, and fits with almost no change to the book or any other live axle plans. All the unsprung weight advantages you get with IRS, but without the fancy geometry requirements + if you really must fiddle, the link angles can be played with to give anti dive responses.
View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
britishtrident

posted on 2/2/05 at 09:33 PM Reply With Quote
Camber change in roll is fine if the angle of the pivots in plan view is about 21 to 25 degrees real problem is it goes to toe out on both roll and bump.
They can be set up to work quite well in the dry but on a get or greasy surface woop outs goes the tail -- not so bad on a car like the old Tr that have a high polar moment of inertia are nose heavy and want to understeer so it no big deal ---- but on a Locost you will be into the bushes or worse in the blink of an eye.



[Edited on 2/2/05 by britishtrident]

[Edited on 2/2/05 by britishtrident]

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Jermyn

posted on 3/2/05 at 02:50 PM Reply With Quote
Point taken. My real motivation in asking about this kind of setup was to take the stresses off the B-post from the typical trailing arm type setup.

I thought maybe this way I could reduce the section by the driver/passenger enough to make a 6" triangulated sill so I could have a full size door. I'd pretty much have to re-engineer the whole chassis and move toward a mix of ladder-space frame to make it work.

Maybe at that point I'd be better with a solid rear axle?

Or.....From what I understand, doors are a pain in the arse anyway. Besides, do I really want to compromise the handling just because I have to climb in and out of the car?

Nevermind my rambling here... I'll probably just stick with De dion and forego the doors





If life is a race do you want to be the first one to finish?

View User's Profile E-Mail User View All Posts By User U2U Member
britishtrident

posted on 3/2/05 at 04:54 PM Reply With Quote
In any event semi-trailling arms won't reduce the loads on the chassis ---indeed following the Triumph set with regard to spring location would put much greater loads on the pivots and spring abuttments.

What you have to pay attention to when designing a chassis is torssional stiffness something that a ladder chassis even one as massive as the TRs severely lacks.

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member

New Topic New Poll New Reply


go to top






Website design and SEO by Studio Montage

All content © 2001-16 LocostBuilders. Reproduction prohibited
Opinions expressed in public posts are those of the author and do not necessarily represent
the views of other users or any member of the LocostBuilders team.
Running XMB 1.8 Partagium [© 2002 XMB Group] on Apache under CentOS Linux
Founded, built and operated by ChrisW.