Jump to content
  • Welcome to 205GTIDrivers.com!

    Hello dear visitor! Feel free to browse but we invite you to register completely free of charge in order to enjoy the full functionality of the website.

Sign in to follow this  
welshpug

Coilover Rear On A Pug/citroen Torsion Bar Rally Car.

Recommended Posts

welshpug

Still unsure if you can actually fit a turret into the rear of a torsion bar equipped pug, I thought I'd post up the actual wording of the regs, and see what people reckon.

 

so;

 

Technical regs for Stage rallying, page 303 2012 Yearbook.

 

48.1.4. With the exception of cars accepted under 46.3

(see 46.3.7), and cars with modifications conforming to

their homologation papers (46.2) floor pans, bulkheads

and transmission tunnels may not be modified other

than by localised alteration to accommodate the fitting

of an alternative engine and/or gearbox and/or

differential and/or axle, seats and exhaust.

 

but..

 

48.4.1. The suspension must retain the operating

principle and utilise the mounting points as provided by

the vehicle manufacturer.

 

:wacko:

 

 

its still a trailing arm with a torsion bar...

 

Any Scrutineers about? :D

Edited by welshpug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
matt.f

Tricky one,but i would have said not allowed as your moving a suspension mounting point(where turret would be).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
welshpug

but I'm not moving any, I'm adding one ;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
brumster

I think we've been here before ;)

 

48.1.4 is under the section title "Body", not suspension. So it's saying body modifications are acceptable for those purposes (for example say you fit a larger axle to an Escort and need to modify the body panel to accomodate it). It is not a free-for-all that you can fit any axle you like. Think of it as indicating that it is acceptable to bash in your centre column to clear your Maniflow exhaust manifold. It's not about breaching any other rules in other sections.

 

Therefore 48.4.1 is the one you need to be concerned about. I would argue that the operating principle is being seriously revised if you are adding additional coil-over dampers (or just dampers). The principal operation of damping has changed.

 

I take it you're talking about leaving the torsion bars functional and just adding dampers that operate somewhere near the vertical, from turrets down to the hub carriers/end of arm?

 

For my part I would understand another competitor querying this. I know of competitors who have dumped the 205 and moved to Nova/Corsas to address the rear damping inflexibility, and likewise I know of many competitors who have forked out thousands on high-spec rear dampers to stay within regs and achieve a well-damped back end. If someone was pushing for a serious, competitive win and it came down to it, I could see someone using this as a technicality...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shalmaneser

Disclaimer: I've got no experience of this sort of thing...

 

But if you retain (say) base model torsion bars and add turrets with 'helper' springs and dampers that's OK surely. Or you could even use TBs the whole way (22mm or whatever) and just relocate the dampers.

 

A lot of the ford guys must use trailing arms or panhard bars* and that's not standard, they're adding additional suspension mounting points so wacking in some turrets and springs and dampers must be similar?

 

What you really want is remote dampers I guess but they must be thousands.

 

 

 

 

*although i don't know if they'd be racing in your series/with your regs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Batfink

Depending on brand you can get a set of three way rears for about £1200 + vat. You get more suspension movement as a lot of the mechanism is not in the main damper body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameron

Oooh, risqué topic! :lol:

 

I can see both sides of the argument, but from my point of view you aren't changing the operating principle of the suspension i.e. trailing arm, you are merely adjusting the mounting points of the damper. Sandy's car gets away with it, but he may not be able to if he came to race in a national series. I think someone needs to have a quick phone call with MSA Technical and blow the myth once and for all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
welshpug

That's my thinking Cameron, and you're right, I guess only an MSA bod could set the record straight, ish...

 

Colin's car is a hillclimb and sprint car which runs to different regs to stage rally cars.

 

However I heard that there is something in the pipeline from the boys down in Cornwall using rockers in some way and no turrets, so I'll see what they produce, if its anything like the 106 front end setup they've done recently, it'll be great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameron

Sounds interesting, is that just for the rear? I'd imagine they'd need to be in Libre to have that up front!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
welshpug

Just the rear, the front theyve done is fabricated uprights using 307/8 hubs and tubular wishbones, also done a full be conversion kit relocating engine to left side 20mm and 4 mounts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
brumster

I'll ask a scrut for you, wait one....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Turbo7379

I did know of someone who rallied a 309gti & he uprated his rear suspension by fitting the coilover shocks from a renault 21 estate/savannah! According to him they are a direct fit in place of the existing pug shock, really help control the rear end & passed scrutineering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TT205

Can of worms as ever

 

I know little of rally regs but in hillclimbs and sprints there are the 'base MSA regs' then some of the 'local regs' vary from championship to championship and some championships simply don't enforce the rules whatsoever

 

Just because a car passes scrutineering doesn't mean it is actually legal

 

There really shouldn't be ANY grey areas but motorsport regs are like looking at the sky in Yorkshire!

Edited by TT205

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
welshpug

needs a logbook before it even gets anywhere near an event scrutineer, so it would be legal if it gets a logbook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
brumster

needs a logbook before it even gets anywhere near an event scrutineer, so it would be legal if it gets a logbook

 

Yep, it's the log booking process that should enforce this. An event scrutineer should still keep an eye on things because, of course, people can change cars after they've log-booked them :). Of course, a log book is assigned a sporting discipline so just because it gets a log book for a sprint car doesn't mean it's compliant with regs for other sporting disciplines...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rippthrough

However I heard that there is something in the pipeline from the boys down in Cornwall using rockers in some way and no turrets, so I'll see what they produce, if its anything like the 106 front end setup they've done recently, it'll be great.

 

's something similar on an S16 up here too :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
welshpug

's something similar on an S16 up here too :D

 

Pics please! I remember seeing something along those lines on Dixon's 306 race car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mad Scientist

This is a real grey area. The guy who inspected my car for the log book said it would be fine, but the scrute I asked at the motor club said it wouldn't!

 

I guess if a car started beating others, it wouldn't be long before someone kicked off, and then you'd find out 100%.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameron

That's what worries me! If I were doing it myself I certainly wouldn't be taking anybody's word other than an MSA official, unless of course it was common practise, as at the end of the day they're the guys who decide whether or not it's legal when someone complains. Any questions I've had over ROPS requirements, for example, I've got straight on the phone to MSA Technical and asked them and I'd advise anyone else to do the same!

Edited by Cameron
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
brumster

Well something got me thinking about this at an event yesterday :) there was a 205 there with - gues what - a coil sprung rear end! I got chatting to the owner asking him if he'd ever got pulled up for it or how he managed to get it log booked like that! He made an interesting point - if it was not legal to convert a pug to coil-overs then how do all the Mk.II Escort boys get away with it? I don't know enough about Escorts to really argue the point, but I do know enough that they were all leaf-sprung originally.

 

It got onto the interpretation of the MSA wording "The suspension must retain the operating principle and utilise the mounting points as provided by the vehicle manufacturer" and I departed before it sounded like I was being an arse (I wasn't competing!), but I would consider the dampers/springs part of the suspension (yes?) and so if you add in additional mounting points - the coil-over tops - surely you are not utilising the original mounting points provided by the manufacturer? So how do the Escort boys get away with this? Also, surely the concept of the springing being provided by bars in torsion is a fundamental operating principle of the suspension, and by changing it to vertical coil springs is a fairly fundamental change!?

 

Or maybe dampers and springs are not considered part of "suspension" by definition? edit: Most of the online dictionaries I find clearly define it as the system of springs, shock absorbers and linkages :)

 

The only answer I can think of was that the Mk.II Escort was homologated with coil-overs?

 

Anyway, at some point a scrutineer gave this guy a log-book, so clearly it is possible to get a rally car log booked with coilovers. I don't think I agree with the legalities of it, but hey ho :)

Edited by brumster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mad Scientist

Maybe it was log booked before the rear was converted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mad Scientist

Just to add to this I'm pretty sure the escorts had a shock which mounted in the same place as they for coilovers, they also retain the leaf springs I think. Therefore, it maintains the principle and mounting points. Fabrication to fit proper top mounts then falls under strengthening.

 

Adding a shock where there wasn't one, chopping the inner arch up and welding a turret in doesn't really seem the same to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameron

I think you're reading too much into the rule tbh.. retaining the operating principle of the suspension means you can't go swapping from a live axle to McPherson Strut, or from trailing arms to double wishbone, rather than not allowing you to change spring or damper location. The reason I say this is that the suspension still operates in the same way as it was intended to, only the dampers and springs are more efficiently operated. If you replace the torsion bars and dampers with an upright coilover then you still have trailing arm suspension, so I think that's how it gets allowed.. it just depends whether your body mods to incorporate the new damper are legal.

 

Going from a Leaf spring axle to a 4-link is a bit grey tbh.. you're completely changing the mounting points by adding the 2 sets of trailing arms so I have no idea how they get away with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
brumster

I see your points. The Ford argument seems to stack up. Ok, my opinion has changed then - seems like it's ok to me, or otherwise there are a hell of a load of competitors out there with illegal cars and blind scrutineers ;) !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rich_p

I did know of someone who rallied a 309gti & he uprated his rear suspension by fitting the coilover shocks from a renault 21 estate/savannah! According to him they are a direct fit in place of the existing pug shock, really help control the rear end & passed scrutineering.

 

Like these?

 

http://seekpart24.com/trw/shock-absorber-jht192t

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×