MG-Rover.org Forums banner

TF to LE suspension

10K views 25 replies 9 participants last post by  CJJ 
#1 ·
Has anyone converted their TF springs and shockers to LE500 ones?


I know the bottom bolts are different, but do you need to change top arms to accommodate the new bolts, or is their a work around?
 
#4 ·
Apologies if I haven't understood the question. My 2003 TF has just been fitted with the "Factory Soft Ride Kit" on offer from the MG Owners club. They claim this is the springs and dampers incorporated in the last few TF's and then subsequently the MG Motor built TF's (excl the 85th Anniversary).
I spoke to Roger Parker before purchase and he said it was a straight "unbolt the old and bolt in the new" with no other parts needed. Jon Norris fitted it for me and he confirmed the method.

So I don't quite understand the issue with different bolts or arms
 
#5 ·
I think the difference occurred for the 85th. That had soft (05) front springs (green banded) with original (02-05) rear springs (red banded) and Bilstein (VHS spec) dampers along with thicker anti-roll bars front and rear with upgraded mountings.
This set-up was fitted using through 'dog' bolts instead of the original simple bolts due to breakage issues that we are all aware of.
 
#7 ·
Ah, OK.


I think the new lower bolts were introduced to combat the old ones shearing, but I wasn't sure if you could fit the new suspension with the standard lower bolts.


It's good to hear you can and, as I haven't had a sheared lower bolt yet, I think I will just take the chance.
 
#8 ·
I believe that drilling the old upper suspension arm to remove the thread you can fit a stright longer bolt, 15 mm longer than original bolt. IIC the original bolt should be dia 12 mm, but this is the nominal dia,usually they are 11,92-95 so it would be fine to finish the hole with a rimer, to avoid any lash. But as you know the shock bottom rubber bush has a still bush that has to snap fit into the arm. Key point.

In such case you are not compelled to use LE500 longer bolt but you can buy high grade bolts or better Allen 12.9 or even 45H (IIC original are 10.9) it has to be stretched using the right torque according to the bolte grade, a key point will be the self locking nut. Bolt pretensioning is important.
The coupling steel bush/arm is in charge to bear the load, not the bolt, but if the bolt comes loose the coupling bush/arm will be no more so effective.
 
#9 ·
The bush definitely does do the work as the bolt to bush clearance is, er, shall we say, a rattling good fit! I believe the bolt is 12mm and the hole in the bush 13mm!!!

There has been a thread about these diameters and at least one member has 'shimmed' the bolt with custom turned sleeves to achieve a better fit.
 
#15 ·
Does it really need pre loading ? it is a bush that turns does it not ?
Does it turn freely? Or does it turn just as far as the rubber between the inner and outer metal tubes allow?
If it turns freely, independent of the rubber, then fair enough, but if by turning it puts a torsional load on the rubber then if you do not preload the suspension, the rubber part of the bush is loaded even when at rest. This can cause early failure of the bush.
I thing the bolt will clamp the inner metal tube while the outer metal tube is a press fit into the bottom of the damper.
 
#14 ·
I think what is being referred to is having the weight of the car on the wheels before tightening up the bolts.

I also don't think this is necessary where there is a spherical bearing which the bottom of these TF dampers have.

However, it is good practice if there are simple rubber bushes which could be locked in a twisted position if this was not done, eg F dampers.
 
#25 ·
Hello CJJ. Curious to know if you are abandoning the SPAX setup on your blue tf? I did mine 2 years ago. It is pretty firm with the blue springs and drives straight with no knocking anymore, but I did break a lower rea bolt about a year ago on a speed hump. I noticed in another post you seem to have resorted to putting OEM springs over the spax shocks and the SPAX springs had gone. That was my original plan but Mike Satur firmly advised against. What is your oppinion?
Good wishes. KR
 
#26 ·
I am aiming to make the TF160 more of an LE ride. I personally don't mind the ride as it is, but I would like to use the 160 more for touring and have to consider my passenger. I do prefer the LE for touring comfort, so I thought I would see if I can get the best of both worlds.


I originally replaced the springs for normal as I found the car was sitting too low for my liking.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top