Page 1 of 2

The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2018 7:41 pm
by The Origina lNom
Hi guys,
Pictures will be coming soon.

Re: The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2018 1:52 am
by burtonm
Intrigued about the 'teg manifold.

Re: The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2018 7:11 am
by GTiJohn
Interesting mods - pics would be good (via Flickr or similar).

The ARB bushes and new dampers should help you with steering response but won't change the amount of handshake angle you need - to do that you'd need to change the steering ratio by fitting a different steering rack. All R8 PAS racks have the same ratio and this is shared with R3. The later R3s have a different valve arrangement and reduced rack travel to allow bigger tyres to be fitted on the MG ZS versions. The 'valve under' design of the R8 steering rack makes fitting any different racks very difficult, if not impossible. The ZS gear is probably your best bet but that would need to go in with the matching ZS rear subframe which was designed purely to fit with Rover engines and so would need careful modification to fit the rear engine mount and PAS pipe runs.

Another small change worth considering is to fit the slightest shorter front suspension tiebars from the R3 along with polybushes where the attach to the front subframe. This in increases the castor angle slightly, adding a little extra weight to the steering. Remember to get the wheel alignment reset after you do this.

Re: The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2018 4:43 pm
by The Origina lNom
BurtonM
The Teg manifold is 4-2-1 similar to 416gti but has air sensor hole threaded into it.

Re: The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2018 9:03 am
by GTiJohn
I intend to try swapping over the front wishbones
It's only the forward-facing tie bars that need changing to affect the caster as the bushes in the lower arm and the lower balljoints just take up the little bit of twist.

If your lower arms are worse for wear it would be worth changing them at the same time though.

Re: The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2018 2:57 pm
by The Origina lNom
Thank you, I was told that the top wishbones on all Rover 400s had them fitted contra their markings. ie the wishbone marked as L was fitted to the RHS and visa versa.

Re: The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2018 6:22 am
by GTiJohn
The Origina lNom wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 2:57 pm
Thank you, I was told that the top wishbones on all Rover 400s had them fitted contra their markings. ie the wishbone marked as L was fitted to the RHS and visa versa.
The R8 400 is a Macpherson strut front suspension. The latter HH-R 400 has double wishbones at the front and I think the clever chassis chaps reversed the fitment of the upper wishbones as you say, on the MG variants to get more castor angle. Of course that's then a nice little upgrade you can do on an other HH-R.

Re: The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:51 pm
by The Origina lNom
Update: The ZS front springs may make the front sit too high with my 16 inch Hairpins and 50 profile Falkens. I am using Spax S032002 rear lowering springs and the rear sits very low indeed.

Re: The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:11 pm
by GTiJohn
Fitted length and rate are the 2 main variables for a spring. A spring is too short if its fitted length is shorter than needed to cope with full suspension travel as it can become loose. You'd have spotted this when you put the strut assy together.

Re: The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:34 pm
by The Origina lNom
Indeed, the ZS120 spring was only just under tension when fitted to the new shock. I think it makes the body sit 40mm over the tyre which is too much.

Re: The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:38 pm
by GTiJohn
The Origina lNom wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:34 pm
Indeed, the ZS spring was only just under tension when fitted to the new shock with the damping rod fully extended.
The standard spring on the standard shock was under considerable tension due to. its length.
Listen for knocks when driving and have a look after a few miles under your wheels to see if they move as there might be a little bit of extra dynamic movement in the damper. The matching ZS dampers might have slightly less travel than your originl damper.

Re: The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2018 1:39 pm
by The Origina lNom
Thank you

Re: The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 5:34 pm
by The Origina lNom
Update:

The ZS 120 front springs make the body sit too high. Presumably they are designed to fit 17 inch wheels not 16,

Re: The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 7:11 pm
by 220 GSi turbo
The Origina lNom wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 5:34 pm

I was reading a post that I saved from Rovertech that mentioned 2.25 was the optimum width for the exhaust pipe. Apparently this will mate up with a Rover Diesel mid section and rear box. I don't know which Diesel though ?
I would suggest that if the original Rovertech post was discussing an R8-based 216 or 416, the exhaust from a 218 or 418 diesel (Peugeot engine) was being used.

On your HH/R-based 416, you could look at exhausts from the 420D or 45/ZS diesel with the L-series engine, unless anybody knows if R8 exhaust sections will fit on an HH/R?

Re: The Hunt For Driveability in a 416

Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 8:01 pm
by The Origina lNom
Thank you.