REQUEST: How about taking this Mini pissing contest off-list or to an appropriate Mini forum? Thanks.
----- Original Message ---- From: Tim Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2006 11:28:39 AM Subject: Re: [F500] Puck vs Shocks ad nauseam Jay, sorry to disagree, but of this I am sure. ALL minis with dry suspension had shocks on all four corners, from day 1 of production, August 1959, until the end of production September 2000. I currently own a 1960 850 mini, built in the first 8 months of production. It came with shocks, but not much else. Over the years my brother has owned 6 minis including a 1959, and it had shocks. Only the hydrolastic cars were "shockless". Tim ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jay Novak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 5:27 PM Subject: RE: [F500] Puck vs Shocks ad nauseam > The original 850 minis did have a rubber suspension but DID NOT have a > shock. > > Thanks ... Jay Novak > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tim > Allen > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 2:12 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [F500] Puck vs Shocks ad nauseam > > > Eric, > > Your memory of the mini suspension isn't accurate. All rubber cone (dry) > suspension minis had standard telescopic shock absorbers on all four > corners. The rubber cone looks more like a plumbers helper that a cone. > The > hydrolastic (wet) suspended minis did not use shocks, but many people > added > them on the front to dampen the squishy ride(as the old BMC advertisements > said - you really did feel like you were "Floating on Fluid). The hydro > bags were not connected diagonally but front to back on each side. Many > people that raced minis ditched the hydo set up in favor of the dry. > > I don't know why I felt compelled to post mini info on the F500 site other > than I have one of each sitting in my garage. > Incidentally, the both share the same 80" wheel base, approx 55" track and > 10" wheels. > > Tim Allen > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Eric Fahlgren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 12:19 PM > Subject: Re: [F500] Puck vs Shocks ad nauseam > > >> Jan Schmidt wrote: >> >>> Some of the original Mini Coopers had rubber doughnuts for suspension, >>> also. I dont know if that was their dampeners, too? I have a friend that >> >> Bill, >> >> Most Minis did not have any auxiliary dampers, they just had the conical >> rubber springs. The Cooper S had the "hydrolastic" suspension, with a >> fluid transfer system on top of the spring membrane, which was configured >> in an "X" so that compression on one corner caused a corresponding >> lifting >> of the diagonal corner; it probably effected quite a bit of damping >> through >> friction losses in the hoses (the fluid was simply 50/50 >> water/anti-freeze). >> My mom's CS race car had some auxiliary Konis on the front when she >> bought >> it as a street car, but she ditched them when she went racing as no one >> else was running them. >> >> http://www.not2fast.com/mini/joan/ >> >> Eric > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. _______________________________________________ F500 mailing list - [email protected] To unsubscribe or change options please visit: http://f500.org/mailman/listinfo/f500 *** Please, DO NOT send unsubscribe requests to the mailing list! *** ________________________________ FormulaCar Magazine - A Proud Supporter of Formula 500 The Official Publication of Junior Formula Car Racing Subscribe Today! www.formulacarmag.com or 519-624-2003 _________________________________ _______________________________________________ F500 mailing list - [email protected] To unsubscribe or change options please visit: http://f500.org/mailman/listinfo/f500 *** Please, DO NOT send unsubscribe requests to the mailing list! ***
