|
|
Post by snoopy11 on Nov 25, 2014 23:43:31 GMT
  Quick search on the web uncovered the attached pics. Anyone recognise the principle of how air ride works. I know it's not authentic but it's an alternative. |
|
|
|
Post by dave1800 on Nov 26, 2014 1:18:39 GMT
I agree Alexander; anyone here have ideas how to take this forward? I've already sent a note to Tony W but I think it would need some face to face meetings to convince people to take this on. I wonder how much original documntation can be found covering the material specs? Perhaps silicone rubber may be a more flexible alternative (sorry). Seriously though it may be much easier to manufacture. I see that it is now being specified for engine mountings as under bonnet temperatures are much higher than the crabs in the interests of efficiency and better sealing to limit noise.
Tommy
The air suspension looks attractive but assuming there are suitable units that could be adapted you would still need a compressor and air resevoir to squeeze in somewhere.
Regards
David
|
|
|
|
Post by threelitre on Nov 26, 2014 22:08:57 GMT
Air springs are fine - but they will need shock absorbers! Which - of course - can be fitted but need serious changes to the body work.
My father's 1800 has received 2 new displacers over the last ten years - both replaced with new ones right out of the box. A luxury I will not be able to repeat too often anymore...
Regards,
Alexander
|
|
|
|
Post by indianajones on Dec 9, 2014 22:46:48 GMT
As I agree with the sentiment that the original system needs to be retained, it's a unique feature of our cars; I think the best way forward is:
-Ensure all displacers are saved, regardless if they're in working condition or not (as mentioned earlier).
-Build up on Dr. Moulton's solutions (must be a lot of clever chaps in the club, like there are here on the board).
-Liaise with other clubs (ADO16, Maxi) to pool our resources together to make it viable.
Cheers,
Andrew
|
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on Dec 9, 2014 23:42:33 GMT
Agree, Andrew!
I think it's time to act. First thing to do would be to join forces with other clubs for Hydrolastic/ Hydragas cars. I'm sure there is knowledge around to reproduce displacers or overhaul them completely. Also, the Chinese seem able to make just about anything, so perhaps that's an alternative.
It must be just a matter of time before current displacers, used or NOS give up. After all, these parts are around 40 yrs old and include rubber parts. It's amazing they still work, but I can hardly imagine they'll continue to do so forever.
I'm pretty sure enthusiasts driving these cars would be willing to join in raising money for work leading to reproducing displacers, should someone have a good plan. I would!
In the meantime, we'll just have to keep fingers crossed, not to be met by that sinking sight when opening the garage door!
Tommy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Penguin45 on Dec 10, 2014 0:46:14 GMT
I wonder how many hydro cars are left as a real number? Realistically, not all that many I suspect. That'll be the key piece of information. You can just about forget about the Minis. As far as I can tell, they all get off hydrolastic and onto rubber cones as fast as they can, so perhaps there are only a few purists left using them. ADO16s? Massively popular car, appalling survival rate. ADO17s - 400-500 around the world perhaps? 3 Litres? Well, there weren't 10,000 to start with, so can't be many remaining. And of course, early Maxis were on hydrolastic before they changed to hydrogas, but we have the same problem - the survival rate is shockingly low.
We must also accept that the hydrogas system is significantly different from the hydrolastic one - the displacer unit is much more complex with its integral nitrogen sphere and appears to have become not only obsolete but unobtainable far faster than our own displacers.
The point I'm trying to make is that the pool of cars to be served is very small, in the grand scheme of things. This makes any form of volume manufacture prohibitively expensive, even in China. They'll make you anything you want, to any quality standard you want, but the cost key is still volume. I don't think we could do it.
You'll have to forgive me here, as I'll probably get some of this wrong......
ADO16: front displacer, rear displacer.
ADO17: front displacer, rear displacer. Rear displacer will physically interchange with the ADO16 front displacer.
3 Litre: front displacer, rear displacer.
Maxi: Front displacer, read displacer.
I think that works out as at least 7 different units. I'm pretty sure that there's no other interchange - I'll happilly be corrected. For re-manufacture, we have component diffusion and little opportunity of volume supply.
Sorry if this sounds rather negative, but I really don't see a cost effective solotion.
Chris.
|
|
|
|
Post by dave1800 on Dec 10, 2014 1:37:08 GMT
Chris I understand the point you are making but the other side of the coin to consider is that Landcrabs in good order appear to be advertised for £3,500 to £7,500 and rising so that is an investment you would not want to discard even if replacement units cost £500 up each to(re)manufacture. As has been proven the repairs to hoses which were at one time considered not practical are now routine and reliable. Probably the next issue to consider is the degradation of the internal rubber suspension components. As noted in an earlier post a member of the Austin 3 litre club is testing a home made solution. The number of units that would be required for a Chinese type comany to consider as viable for remanufacture may be as low as say 200 given modern materials, manufacturing techniques etc. The downside is that would require money up front and the difficulty in making quality assesments; it's not as simple as with the windcreens so there is risk involved and who would carry it? I am not as pessimistic (or maybe realistic?)as you but I think it is worth properly exploring the options and trying to make cost assessments so that owners can make informed decisions as to the longer (medium) term viability of their vehicles. There would still be merit, I believe, in a joint task force from across all hydolastic cars clubs even though with the one exception the sizes of displacements differ. The manfacturing techniques across all sizes would be similar and a larger pool of experts available. Maybe not discard the Mini clubs, there are still some wet suspension lovers there and a huge following across the world. Sadly there appears to be greater ingenuity and interest in engineering in the US and Oz than in the UK nowadays from what I see on the web. Longer term, back to my favourite topic, we may be able to get whole units printed. My colleague in Bristol is currently working printing titanium components and if you need convincing just look at printed variable turboYou can already order plastic parts online by sending a computer file and the technique extends to most metals and rubber. What I think we need to consider now is how we go about this. My initial thoughts are to initially contact all the relevant groups and find people with the right engineering skills and contacts. Ideas!!! David |
|
|
|
Post by indianajones on Dec 10, 2014 7:45:48 GMT
Both Chris and David had valid points I had in my head while I was typing my post "The cost of making new units\parts is going to be expensive" but then thought "The price of crabs have firmed a bit, even my example is worth over $3500 (in my opinion)". Depending on the actual cost it might be viable, it might not. We just have to be realistic, like Chris said.
David also raises another fair point; Owners will need to know, as if the repairs can't be done or will cost the Earth, then once it breaks, is that it?
Edit: In terms of ideas, do we possess a guide\shop drawings to show how the original devices were manufactured?
-Andrew
|
|
|
|
Post by threelitre on Dec 10, 2014 21:51:18 GMT
Alex Moulton's archive should contain all information needed and it should be accessible - I do not see serious problems regarding the access of data.
The numbers of these cars in total is not really high, the 3 litre being the worst case with about 150 cars or wrecks remaining. The 3 litre is also special in that it does hardly share any component apart from some body panels and trim with any other car - the Hydrolastic units are unique to the 3 litre.
With regard to the units fitted to the other cars, there is less variation than you would think. I may be wrong, but I think there are two sizes of units - the 1800 has them both fitted (discounting Mini and 3 Litre). The major difference to attain spring and damping rates is the cone at the bottom - realtively easy to interchange. There will be (Mini and 3 litre apart) only 2 sizes and shapes of rubber spring as well as retaining rings to manufcture. So clubbing together is well a good thing to do. I feel that the interest of keeping Minis on Hydrolastic is raising significantly.
Hydragas is different, I would not say more complicated. If the lower diaphragm needs to be remade, Hydragas owners will surely have high interest. They may have different dimensions, but finding a company to make them to measure will be a first major step. The retaining rings are also very similar, but not the same.
I do know, that I will stick to Hydrolastic - anything else would be like a Citroen onn coil springs ... ;-)
Regards,
Alexander
|
|
|
|
Post by cytosperma on Mar 10, 2015 0:06:20 GMT
has any one tried using air bag suspension in the rear trailing arms to help support the displacers, you can put in different pressures A chap in Aust.has done that for his car there is plans available on the 1800 website.I guess Leyland all those years ago should have used shocks as standard to help alleviate sudden knocks.I had 2 displacers go like that on rough roads 30 odd years ago when the cars were not that old,just blew out[not hose]
|
|
|
|
Post by Penguin45 on Mar 10, 2015 0:48:10 GMT
Interesting point, Cyto. I wasn't aware of using airbags as additional support to the suspension, although it had crossed my mind that an active air system could be engineered to replace the hydro system. They could both be set up as "bags in containers" from a purely practical point of view.
For the moment, I'm considering the LOCI rear rubber reinforcement set-up, which should be available again soon.
Chris.
|
|
|
|
Post by dave1800 on Mar 10, 2015 9:02:44 GMT
Maybe part of the problem was that they were proud of the fact there were no shocks and advertised it widely, although I believe Sir Alex recognised the benefits. David I guess Leyland all those years ago should have used shocks as standard to help alleviate sudden knocks. |
|
|
|
Post by dave1800 on Apr 5, 2015 1:45:12 GMT
For anyone here who is not yet a member of Tony C's excellent Australian Austin 1800 website here I would like to inform you that in the april 2015 Newsletter 9for members only)there is a lot of excellent detailed practical information about the hydrolastic suspension, fluid and pumps. Well worth reading. David |
|
|
|
Post by alonei on Jul 12, 2015 4:24:48 GMT
I have read the article and it doesn't mention what are the materials he was using or I just missed it. I did some research and I think he was using a DEVCON product called Flexane 80 For the primer he used DEVCON FL-10 for metal, and for the rubber FL-20 it looks like a brilliant stuff not just for this but even to do your own mounts and stuff problem is.....EXPENSIVE  Hope my 2 cents helped |
|
