| Moderated by: Greg Fletcher | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Rex Craft Member
|
Apparently the flat side of the front coil spring goes down according to recent sources I've read. Two years ago I intalled the compeition springs from Delta and I installed them flat side up. The lower supension arm had an irregular pattern that seem to match up to the "non-flat" end and the top end was flat which seem to match the flat end of the spring. At that time I concluded that the flat side needed to go up. Everything work fine during the past two years of driving. The past few months I've being installing some upgrades including new front suspension bushings. I was using the recent JH Standard which included the explode few of the front suspension including the torque specifications. That is when I noticed the flat side was shown to go down. Well, I installed the right side in this manner and was working on the left side when I decided that I didn't like the way the spring was matching up with the flat side down. I inspected the completed right side and I'm concern with the way it is fitting. At the top the majority of the rubber insulator has nothing in contact with it. The engine is out of the car but the compeition springs don't compress that much with the weight of the engine. What are the reasons the spring is supposed to go "flat-side down". Rex Craft JH#14187 |
|||||||||
|
Jensen Healey Super Moderator 
|
Mine were flat side up. The spring indexes to the divot in the lower A-arm. |
|||||||||
|
John Kimbrough Member
|
I just rebuilt my JH front end and put the springs back in flat side up. There is a groove in the lower suspension arm that fits the uneven end of the spring. The top end should fit flush against the rubber insulator at the top. You can check out my rebuild pictures, etc on my web site. John http://home.comcast.net/~jrkengr2/ |
|||||||||
|
Rex Craft Member
|
Thanks for the quick reply. My common sense was telling me the same. I wish that had been noted in the Feb. JH Standard which would have save me a little time. |
|||||||||
|
Rex Craft Member
|
Thanks for the quick reply. My common sense was telling me the same. I wish that had been noted in the Feb. JH Standard which would have save me a little time. I enjoyed your web site...neat. |
|||||||||
|
Mark Rosenbaum Member 
|
Since I wrote the article and generated the torques drawing, it's appropriate that you consider me responsible for their content, rather than Greg Fletcher. However, if there's any blame to be assigned, probably it belongs to the now-nameless draftsman at the Jensen factory who created the front suspension components drawing. While I agree that the front suspension 'looks better' with the flat side of the spring facing up, and that the factory drawings do occasionally have errors, the fact remains that the factory's drawing shows flat side down. Despite a diligent search, I have not found anything anywhere that would contradict this. In any event, I remarked upon the situation in the original post from which the article in the JHPS Standard article was taken. My car was no help here, as it had one spring flat side up, and the other flat side down. I do not know if it came from the factory that way, or if someone blundered in a long-ago suspension repair; based on the car's condition, either was possible. I did look for -- but did not find -- any significant difference in the wear patterns of the two rubber insulators. During reassembly, I checked the springs in both orientations, and elected to install them flat side down, in compliance with the drawing. Since then, though I've put only a few hundred miles on the car, I have not noticed any problems. If it really mattered which side of the spring goes up, surely something on the subject would have made it into the various internet archives, which are now at least 11 years deep. But perhaps not. I do hope to hear about any problems if they occur. |
|||||||||
|
Jensen Healey Super Moderator
|
Hi Mark, I don't believe the time and effort would have been taken to make a relief in the a-arm if there was no purpose for it. I think if you re-examine this issue you will agree that the springs are meant to be installed flat side up. Kurt Housh JH 13148 |
|||||||||
|
Mark Rosenbaum Member
|
Kurt, Perhaps you're right. While I don't recall seeing indentations in the lower A-arms that seemed suitable for round-end spring seats, it was very hot on the two days I worked on the car's front end, and I may just have been too cooked to notice. I'll take a very close look at things the next time I do anything to the front end. Mark |
|||||||||
|
Art DeKneef Member
|
The flat side goes up. Here's a picture of lower A-arm with the indent. Attachment: DCP_0002.JPG (Downloaded 98 times) |
|||||||||
|
Art DeKneef Member
|
Here's the picture with the spring in place. I have a picture showing the flat side down but couldn't attach that with this picture. Art Attachment: DCP_0003.JPG (Downloaded 87 times) |
|||||||||
|
Mark Rosenbaum Member
|
Art's photos look pretty convincing to me. Not at all sure how I missed seeing that, but obviously I did, and my original belief was not correct. This means: (1) The parts book and shop manual drawings show the front suspension springs incorrectly. The flat sides of these springs face UP and against the rubber insulator. (2) The comment on the 'front suspension torques' drawing about the spring flat side needs to be changed to read 'flat side up'. My apologies for any inconvenience this may have caused. Last edited on 04-03-2006 07:20 am by Mark Rosenbaum |
|||||||||
|
Harkes Member 
|
Hi Mark don't beat yourself up. Your frontsuspension torque sheet to me was very valuable. Out of my own experience Art is indeed correct stating the flat sides go up. I have installed my uprated DMS springs like Art said, not even noticing there was anything wrong in your sheet! your torque sheet will become in handy again as soon as i have my engine/subframe/suspension in (next week hopefully :) ), when i have to torque some bolts using your specs as its then under load. cheers erik, netherlands |
|||||||||
|
Rex Craft Member
|
Hi Folks, Mark, I too appreciated the torque info on the drawing. I was just frustrated when I made my original comment. I also compared to the shop manual and concluded the flat side was shown down, so, I wasn’t blaming all on you. I have since corrected the left side and now ready to button-up the loose ends and start getting the engine installed. I read several articles about the time required to install the front suspension bushings. None of what I read mentioned the problem I experienced. My problem was the left side 10-inch bolt in the top A-arm. It took 2 weekends and several weeknights to get this bolt out. The right side came out with no problem but the left side had rusted in place. This got me behind on my project and was very aggravating. After finishing taxes this weekend and I hope to make some good progress on the Jensen. Rex Craft |
|||||||||
|
Mark Rosenbaum Member
|
Rex Craft wrote: Mark, I too appreciated the torque info on the drawing. I was just frustrated when I made my original comment. I also compared to the shop manual and concluded the flat side was shown down, so, I wasn’t blaming all on you. What it boils down to is that I made a statement that was inaccurate because it was based on bad data (the factory drawing). I'm at least as annoyed and frustrated as everyone else involved. But when I'm wrong, I'm wrong, and whenever that happens I certainly hope someone points it out before I get out too far on a limb. Fortunately, due to the Magic of the Internet (tm), the mistake got discovered early enough that people are likely to make a mental connection between the early (wrong) comment and the later (correct) ones. Hopefully when this issue resurfaces at some future date, it is the correct answer that will be recalled. And perhaps Greg can print a correction in a future issue of the magazine. I figure the pointing and laughing, snide comments, and rude gestures, will die out in a year or two... just in time for my next major gaffe. :^} |
|||||||||
|
Mitch Ware Member 
|
Of course Mark's major gaffes are still more accurate than most things I say. Mitch Ware |
|||||||||
|
Richardm Member
|
Having just rebuilt the whole of my front suspension - with the w/shop and parts manual in front of me my springs are flat side down - After I fitted the first side I checked the manual and scratched my head and then did the other side - thinking all the time this can not be correct. After reading the past postings on this subject I'm now going to strip it down again and change them around, if nothing else it will look better. Also the new rubber (anti squeak ?) seats are not the same diameter as the original but aged old ones, and this makes the seating of the spring appear 'dodgy' to say the least. I was very concerned with the lack of lip between the crossmember and spring - at least with the springs flat side up it should be better. - Richard |
|||||||||
|
nvandal Member
|
Flat side up. It's the ONLY way the springs fit correctly. Norm Vandal |
|||||||||
|
timeforwalkies Member
|
Been a while since there was any talk about this. I had Huffaker rebuild my front end and just checked. To confirm, the flat side does go up. |
|||||||||