DOCSLIB.ORG

Anti-Roll Bar Mount

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Anti-Roll Bar Mount CATALOGUE Edition 1.27 European Polyurethane Technologies Group Ltd. This page has been intentionally left blank. Contents: 4 Why Powerflex polyurethane bushes 5 Universal bushes - introduction 6 How to use the catalogue 7 Universal bush listing 8 Bump stop and exhaust mount bush listing 9-59 Vehicle application listing 60-61 Footnote register 62-74 Suspension layout diagrams 75 Bush identification chart 7 Union Buildings Wallingford Road Uxbridge UB8 2FR England Tel: (+44) 01895 460033 Fax: (+44) 01895 520095 www.powerflex.co.uk [email protected] Page 3 of 75 WHY POLYURETHANE SUSPENSION BUSHES? Polyurethane has been with us as a specialist plastic for some thirty years and recent advances have now made it possible to engineer very special properties into this exciting material. Suspension bushes are some of the most highly stressed components fitted to vehicles. They undergo enormous strains and in the most arduous of conditions with no maintenance or lubrication Standard bushes are manufactured from a rubber compound containing natural products. This material deteriorates with age becoming softer and more pliable. It starts to resist the forces placed on it less and less, allowing greater movement of suspension components. The result - less control over suspension geometry, accelerated tyre wear, braking instability and poor handling. This is the single biggest reason you can instantly tell the difference driving a three year old car compared to a showroom new one. However, even new cars will benefit from POWERFLEX bushes. Because of their superior design they offer much more effective control of the suspension components than standard rubber items. With the technological advances in this material it has been possible to overcome the common problem associated with harder bushes which is increased noise. By correctly engineering the polyurethane compound, bushes can be made 25-30% stiffer than new rubber ones but with exactly the same noise absorbing properties POWERFLEX FOR PROLONGED TYRE LIFE POWERFLEX FOR IMPROVED PERFORMANCE POWERFLEX FOR INCREASED SAFETY Page 4 of 75 PRODUCT INFORMATION FOR POWERFLEX MOTORSPORT UNIVERSAL RANGE OF BUSHES POWERFLEX Motorsport bushes have been developed to fulfil the demands of motorsport engineers and specialist car builders, both amateur and professional. These bushes are manufactured solely with performance in mind for those who demand the very best. They are available in a range of universal sizes enabling the engineer to design and manufacture the component to the bush or modify the bush to the component. They are supplied in a black Shore A, 80 material, which is durable enough for high stresses but does allow the slight deflections and misalignments, which occur during suspension movement. There are three types of kit available. The 100 Series kits consist of three components, the 200 Series, two components and the 300 Series, two also. 100 Series: Two “top-hat” polyurethane components and one stainless steel sleeve. The sleeve is supplied over-length and with a pilot bore only. The sleeve can then be machined to length and drilled to the correct bolt size for fitment. The 200 Series kits are two POWERFLEX “washers”. The 300 Series consists of two universal anti roll bar mounts. Typical applications for the 100 Series range are: - Swinging arm location. - Wishbone ends. - Shock absorber “eye” mounts. - Engine steady bars - Axle location Typical applications for the 200 Series range are: - Body panel spacers - Shock absorber top mounts - Vibration absorbing washers - Shock absorber travel limiters Typical applications for the 300 Series range are: - Anti-roll bar mount This range of bushes has been developed so that additional machining to size can be carried if required. Page 5 of 75 HOW TO USE THE CATALOGUE 6 easy steps to find the correct Powerflex bush for your vehicle; 1. Find the correct vehicle listing starting with Make, Model and series. 2. Determine the front or rear bush location on the car. 3. Find the correct part description, paying attention to any notes such as sizes. 4. Look up the Part Reference Diagram to confirm the correct bush location. 5. Read the part number in the Part Number column. 6. Check any footnotes for important information. Ordering; Powerflex bushes contain 1 bush per part number (or 1 bush assembly for example 2 “top-hat” bushes and 1 inner sleeve) unless otherwise stated. Each bush is priced and invoiced individually, but are boxed and must be ordered per car quantity. Powerflex Product Application Catalogue Edition 1.24 10/08/2009 15:53 Part Reference Price Loc. Description - Part Note Diag. Loc. Part number Footnote Qty/car (ex VAT) BMW 3 Series E30 82-91 Front Wishbone, rear bush-concentric 10009 1 PFF5-301 2 £17.55 Front Wishbone, rear bush-eccentric 10009 1 PFF5-303 7 2 £20.85 Front Anti-roll-bar to chassis bush - 19mm 10009 2 PFF5-302-19 2 £14.25 Front Anti-roll-bar to chassis bush - 22mm 10009 2 PFF5-302-22 2 £14.25 Front Anti-roll-bar to chassis bush - 24mm 10009 2 PFF5-302-24 2 £14.25 Rear Diff mount bush 20012 14 PFR5-300 1 £21.95 Rear Subframe to chassis bush 20012 11 PFR5-305 2 £29.65 POWERFLEX - D20012 POWERFLEX - D10009 FRONT 11 14 OF 11 CAR FRONT 12 12 OF CAR DIFF 1 13 2 Footnote Register 6 PFF3-510 suits later model vehicles with the larger front bush - the OE arm is marked 8N0 407 165/166. For early model cars use PFF85-201, with OE arms marked 8N0 407 151/152. 7 PFF5-303 is an eccentric bush to suit M3 or where increased caster is required. 8 PFF5-602 suits 520 to 530 models with steel arms. PFF5-620 suits 535, 540 & M5 with alloy arms. Page 6 of 75 100 - 200 - 300 SERIES UNIVERSAL RANGE 100 Series "Top-Hat" bushes PART A BCDEFGKIT NUMBER O/D O/D HEIGHT HEIGHT O/D BORE HEIGHT PRICE PF99-101 24mm 31.5mm 32mm 4mm 16mm 8mm 75mm £15.35 PF99-102 28mm 34mm 32mm 7mm 16mm 8mm 75mm £15.35 PF99-103 30mm 37mm 32mm 7mm 16mm 8mm 75mm £15.35 PF99-104 35mm 43mm 32mm 7mm 16mm 8mm 75mm £15.35 PF99-105 1.020" 1.700" 1.260" 0.280" 16mm 8mm 3.50" £15.35 PF99-106 1.250" 1.700" 1.260" 0.280" 16mm 8mm 3.50" £15.35 PF99-107 1.500" 1.700" 1.260" 0.280" 16mm 8mm 3.50" £15.35 PF99-108 21mm 31.5mm 32mm 4mm 13mm 8mm 60mm £15.35 200 Series "Washer" bushes Two "washers" per part number PART A B C PRICE PER NUMBER O/D BORE HEIGHT PAIR PF99-201 20mm 6mm 10mm £7.65 PF99-202 25mm 6mm 10mm £7.65 PF99-203 35mm 6mm 10mm £7.65 PF99-204 50mm 15mm 17mm £7.65 PF99-205 50mm 15mm 32mm £7.65 PF99-206 75mm 25mm 32mm £7.65 PF99-110 25.5mm 0.5" 50mm £10.95 inc stainless steel sleeve 300 Series "Anti-roll bar" bushes PART A B C D PRICE NUMBER WIDTH BORE DEPTH HEIGHT PER PAIR PF99-302 32mm 12mm 22mm 30mm £14.25 PF99-303 32mm 14mm 22mm 30mm £14.25 PF99-304 32mm 16mm 22mm 30mm £14.25 PF99-305 32mm 18mm 22mm 30mm £14.25 PF99-306 32mm 20mm 22mm 30mm £14.25 PF99-307 32mm 22mm 22mm 30mm £14.25 300 SERIES BUSHES ARE PRICED PER PAIR Page 7 of 75 BUMP STOPS AND EXHAUST MOUNTS POWERFLEX UNIVERSAL BUMP STOP RANGE PART NUMBER OVERALL LENGTH OUTSIDE DIAMETER BORE PRICE SAF001 60.5mm 50mm 14-18mm £9.85 SAF005 81mm 53mm 20mm £9.85 SAF009 30mm 50mm 15mm £9.85 SAF014 60mm 57.5mm 20mm £9.85 SAF016 58mm 56mm 12-22mm £9.85 SAF017 60mm 52.5mm 12-16mm £9.85 SAF018 72.5mm 58mm 12-19mm £9.85 SAF019 19mm 40mm 12mm £9.85 SAF022 55mm 40mm 12mm £9.85 SAF024 54mm 57mm 18-22mm £9.85 SAF025 50.5mm 51mm 19-22mm £9.85 SAF026 65mm 51mm 10-12mm £9.85 CAD DRAWINGS AND FORCE-DEFLECTION DATA AVAILABLE UP ON REQUEST POWERFLEX HIGH PERFORMANCE EXHAUST MOUNT RANGE PART A B NUMBER HEIGHT WIDTH PRICE EXH 001 68mm 44mm £5.45 EXH 002 45mm 45mm £5.45 EXH 003 50mm 50mm £5.45 EXH 004 30mm 105mm £5.45 EXH 005 70mm 50mm £5.45 EXH 006 70mm 70mm £5.45 EXH 007 64mm 64mm £5.45 EXH 008 80mm 60mm £5.45 EXH 009 SUBARU ONLY £5.45 EXH 010 UNIVERSAL, CUT TO LENGTH 44mm £5.45 EXH 011 UNIVERSAL, CUT TO LENGTH 44mm £5.45 Page 8 of 75 Powerflex Product Application Catalogue Edition 1.27 02/11/2009 15:34 Part Reference Price each Loc. Description ‐ Part Note Diag. Loc. Part number Qty/car (ex VAT) Footnote Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo 105/115 Series 63‐94 Spider GT GTV Front Caster arm to upper ball‐joint bush n/a n/a PFF1‐301 2 £16.45 Front Upper ball‐joint to chassis bush n/a n/a PFF1‐302 2 £14.25 Front Gearbox mount, rear bush n/a n/a PFF1‐410 1 £17.55 Rear Diff mount bush n/a n/a PFR1‐305 2 £8.75 Rear Trailing arm, front bush n/a n/a PFR1‐403 2 £18.65 Rear Trailing arm, rear bush n/a n/a PFR1‐405 2 £18.65 Alfa Romeo 145, 146 94‐01 Front Wishbone‐lower, front bush ‐ 35.0mm/47.5mm/48.75mm 10001 1 PFF1‐801 1 2 £27.45 Front Wishbone‐lower, rear bush ‐ 35.0mm/47.5mm/48.75mm 10001 2 PFF1‐802 1 2 £27.45 Alfa Romeo 155 92‐98 Front Wishbone‐lower, front bush ‐ 35.0mm/47.5mm/48.75mm 10001 1 PFF1‐801 1 2 £27.45 Front Wishbone‐lower, rear bush ‐ 35.0mm/47.5mm/48.75mm 10001 2 PFF1‐802 1 2 £27.45 Alfa Romeo 147 00‐on Front Wishbone‐lower, front bush ‐ 35.0mm/47.5mm/48.75mm 10002 1 PFF1‐811 1,30 2 £27.45 Front Wishbone‐lower, rear bush ‐ 35.0mm/47.5mm/48.75mm 10002 2 PFF1‐812 1,30 2 £27.45 Front Engine mount kit ‐ V6 only n/a n/a PFF1‐813 2 £19.75 Front Anti‐roll‐bar to chassis bush ‐ 22mm 10002 4 PFF1‐810‐22 2 £14.75 Front Anti‐roll‐bar to chassis bush ‐ 23mm 10002 4 PFF1‐810‐23 2 £14.75 Front Anti‐roll‐bar to chassis bush ‐ 26mm 10002 4 PFF1‐810‐26 2 £14.75 Front Arm‐upper bush 10002 5 PFF1‐815 4 £14.25 Rear Lateral arm‐front, inner/outer bush 20001 13,14 PFR1‐816 4 £18.65 Rear Lateral arm‐rear, inner/outer bush 20001 15,16 PFR1‐817 4 £18.65 Rear TrailinTrailingg arm to hub bush 2000112 PFR1‐8182 £18 £18.65.65 Rear Anti‐roll‐bar to chassis bush ‐
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Everyone's Path Is Different
    Protecting What Moves You Everyone’s path is different. We customize your plan to fit your needs. BLUE VEHICLE SERVICE CONTRACTS Add an additional $190 to each Average Repair Costs occurrence for estimated towing Did You Know? Navigation System and rental car expenses that $2,163.87 may be incurred. • If you drive more than 12,000 miles per year, your factory warranty may Engine expire before it reaches its time limit. • Repair frequency increases as mileage increases. $9,818.42 • A vehicle service contract can improve the value of your vehicle. Fuel Injectors $530.50 Covered by the Rear-View Cameras manufacturer Hybrid Vehicle Generator $554.43 MILES $3,854.96 Covered by you Cylinder Head $4,076.43 Vehicle service contracts Electronic Control Module purchased after the Timing Belt & Chain vehicle sale require a $1,181.23 $1,571.87 vehicle inspection. Air Conditioner Compressor Transmission $1,299.30 Repair your vehicle at any licensed repair facility. $6,238.70 TIME Repair costs were calculated using a national average of $125 per hour for labor. The vehicles used in the calculation are as follows: BMW 328i 2.0L Turbo, Chevrolet C1500 Silverado 5.3L, Nissan Maxima 3.5L, Ford Explorer 3.5L V6, Mercedes-Benz CLS400 3.0L V6 , Toyota Camry 3.5L V6, Dodge Grand Caravan V6, Honda Accord 2.4L, Volkswagen Jetta GLI 2.0L Turbo, Mazda 6 - 2.5L V4. Vehicles are model year 2015. All vehicles and manufacturers are registered trademarks of their respective corporations. Included With Your Coverage Emergency Car Rental Towing Trip Interruption Roadside Transferable Renewable Reimbursement Reimbursement Reimbursement Assistance Providing reimbursement Reimbursement for Food and lodging One year of Emergency You can transfer the You can purchase a for transportation when towing (up to $50) if reimbursement of up Roadside Assistance, which coverage to another new contract for your vehicle is in for a needed for a covered to $300 ($100 per day) includes towing (up to $100), private owner of the vehicle prior to covered repair.
    [Show full text]
  • Late Model Sportsman Car Specifications Updated June 4, 2019
    15112 National Pike, Hagerstown, MD 21740 PHONE (301) 582-0640 FAX (301) 582-3618 [email protected] Late Model Sportsman Car Specifications Updated June 4, 2019 CAR SPECIFICATIONS: LUCAS OIL AND WORLD OF OUTLAW LATE MODELS SPECS APPLY. The following is an excerpt from the Lucas Oil Late Model Rules for reference. BODIES A.) Nose piece and roof must match body style of car. B.) All cars must have a minimum of one half inch (1/2”) and a maximum of two (2”) inches of roll at top of fenders, doors, and quarter panels. A sharp edge or angle will not be permitted. Body roll must go from sides over interior, not interior over sides. C.) Floorboards and firewall must cover the driver’s area and be constructed to provide maximum safety. D.) Driver’s seat must remain on the left side of the drive line. E.) Front window bars are mandatory. F.) Legible numbers, at least eighteen inches (18”) high are required on each side of the car and roof. G.) No fins or raised lips of any kind are permitted anywhere along the entire length of the car. H.) Body line must be a smooth even line from front to rear. I.) No “slope noses” or “wedge cars” permitted. Noses must be stock appearing, subject to Series template. J.) No “belly pans” or any type of enclosure on bottom of cars will be permitted. Skid plate to protect oil pan is permitted. K.) No wings or tunnels of any kind are permitted underneath the body or chassis of the Page 1 of 9 car.
    [Show full text]
  • RACING FLATHEAD by Mark Dees
    *&) 8 Sgg* CAR l^Xttituwna 5»«iMa 726031/ JBfe '•>*3_s Deuces up. Two new Fords served as official cars at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway in 1932. Eddie Rickenbacker and Ibng-time IMS Vice-President, "Pop" Myers, are in the Cabriolet; speedboat champion Gar Wood is at the wheel of the Roadster. Credit IMS. fl TECHNICAL HISTORY of the RACING FLATHEAby Mark Dees D APOLOGY-We printed a short article entitled "Racing History of the Flathead Ford" in the Sept/Oct V-8 Times that had appeared in "Deuce News" as written by Randy Leech of Mission Trail R.G. Unhappily,the piece had been taken from a series authored by long-time Early Ford V-8 Club member Mark L. Dees for Petersen Publishing Com­ pany's ROD &• CUSTOM magazine in 1973. I am the one atfault —for not checking with Mr. Leech before borrow­ ing the item, and I apologize to Mark Dees and to Peter­ sen Publishing for my carelessness. In return, they have been so gracious as to permit us to reprint the entire four- part series in The V-8 Times, commencing here. My thanks to Mr. Dees and to Bob Gottlieb of Petersen Pub­ lishing for their broad-minded attitude. — Roger Neiss, editor. _^<!>>3- Dual-downdraft Winfield SR as used on the 1935 Welch Indy cars and a number of other early V-8 hot rods. Credit: Dees -10- This aerodynamic Ford-based special managed 104 mph to become 2nd alternate starter in 1934. Engine modifications, if any, are unknown. Note the 16-inch Firestone Air Balloon street" tires and wheels.
    [Show full text]
  • Rover SD1 Suspension – the Macpherson the SD1 Has
    Rover SD1 Suspension – The MacPherson The SD1 has independent front suspension. Each front wheel moves individually from the other and the following types are common. • Leading/trailing link systems • Double wishbones • Multi link systems • MacPherson Multi link systems can provide the best comfort and handling. Next best is the double wishbone if properly set up. For instance most American cars use it but the geometry often leaves room for improvement. And then there is the MacPherson, giving good comfort and reasonable handling. Why then, did Rover choose a slightly inferior system? They preferred the double wishbone approach but it would not leave room to locate the catalytic converters needed for the U.S. market, plus the cost was higher. So the simple MacPherson was chosen which consists basically of a coil spring and shock absorber built into the spring leg. The leg pivots on a ball joint on the lower control arm. This can be either an ordinary A- arm or a narrow lower control arm which locates the lower end of the strut in the transverse direction and a separate member called a radius rod locating the assembly in the longitudinal direction. However on the SD1 the anti-roll bar serves a double function as the longitudinal link taking the drive and brake forces and thereby eliminating the separate radius rod. At the top, the SD1 has a roller bearing (not shown here) to allow the spring leg to turn without the spring winding up. The strut itself is the load-bearing member in the assembly. ie: - The spring and shock absorber hold the car up.
    [Show full text]
  • Rear Suspension Radius Rod Geometry
    INFORMATION SHEET # 05 - 2011 (V1 July 2011) Rear Suspension Radius Rod Geometry Introduction: During the two previous rounds of LVV Certifier training sessions (late 2010 and early 2011), one of the points of technical discussion LVVTA had with the LVV Certifiers was ‘ladder bars’ - a term given to a particular type of radius rod, that in some circumstances can create incorrect suspension geometry and bind. This Information Sheet summarises the outcome of the good feed-back and general concensus of those discussions LVVTA had with LVV Certifiers throughout the country, together with the like-minded view of the LVVTA Technical Advisory Committee. The Information Sheet also provides an overview of how such radius rods are to be treated by the LVV Certifiers until such time as the Suspension Chapter of the Car Construction Manual has been next amended. It is important to note that this information sheet focuses only on rear suspensions, as the use of the type of radius rod systems covered within this information sheet as they apply to front axles is dealt with separately within the Suspension Chapter of the NZ Car Construction Manual. Types of radius rods in question: Radius rods should always be designed and fixed so as to maintain correct geometric operation during full suspension extension and compression. There are three types of radius rods that have been traditionally fitted to modified and scratch-built vehicles, where maintaining correct geometry is very difficult, if not impossible. These three systems are as follows: • One system is ‘split radius rods’, which is a term given, usually to 1920s through 1940s Ford-based cars and pick-ups, where the OE radius rods that originally triangulated from the diff housing into a central pivot point on the chassis, are opened out, or ‘split’ and connected to the vehicle’s chassis side-rails.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA Time Trial (NASA TT) Official 2017 National Rules December 27, 2016, Version 14.1 © Copyright 2016
    ® NASA Time Trial (NASA TT) Official 2017 National Rules December 27, 2016, Version 14.1 © Copyright 2016 1 Definitions and Claims..............................................................................……….. 4 2 Sanctioning Body.......................................................................................……….. 4 3 Intent............................................................................................................. ………4 4 Purpose.......................................................................................................…….…. 5 5 Driver Requirements/Licensing..............................................................………… 5 6 The Classes...............................................................................................………… 6 7 TTU, TTI, TT2, TT3, TT4 Classing.....................................................….…….… 6 7.1 Class Eligibility………….................................................................. 6 7.2 NASA CCR Section 11, 15, and 18 Exceptions…………………… 7 7.3 Vehicle Modification Restrictions/Limitations (TT1-TT4)………... 7 7.3.1 Restrictions and Limitations for All Vehicles (Non-Prod &…)…. 7 7.3.2 Restrictions and Limitations for Production Vehicles Only…..… 8 7.4 “Adjusted Weight/Power Ratio” Calculation (TT1-TT4 only)…..... 12 7.4.1 Definitions (TT1-TT4 only)…………………….…………….… 12 7.4.2 Modification Factors (TT1-TT4 only)……..…………………… 12 7.5 Non-Production Vehicles Approved for Production Vehicle Status. 14 7.6 Example Calculations……………………………………………… 15 8 TTC, TTD, TTE, TTF Classing………………………………………………..…
    [Show full text]
  • Section 12 Suspension
    SECTION 12 SUSPENSION A. Technical Data .................... 12- 2 B. Check and Adjustment of Front Wheel Alignment ................... 12- 3 C. Front Suspension .................. 12- 5 D. Rear suspension .................... 12-11 E. Special Tool ......•............... 12-12 F. Troubel Diagnosis .........••.•..... 12-13 Ill ) ) ) ') dd ~I crJ) rJ)~ ......... 0z Suspension ...... ([ Front Damper 1 Front Coil Spring :1, Knuckle Lower Arm ~ © ' ~ Radius Rod @:. Rear Leaf Spring <J Rear Shock Absorber ...... ~ Shackle CF Rear Axle 12-2 SUSPENSION A. Technical Data (Specifications) TOE-IN .............................. -2 mm (-0.08 in) (TOE-OUT 2 mm) CAMBER ............................ 0.5° CASTER ...... .. .. .. .. .... .. ......... 1.0° KING PIN INCLINATION ................ 14.5° TRAIL .............................. 5 mm (0.197 in) (Tightening torque) Front Suspension lower arm-to-sub frame 4.0-4.8 kg-m (29-35 bl-ft) Radius rod-to-sub frame 4.0-4.8 kg-m (29-35 lb-ft) lower arm ball joint nut 4.0-4.5 kg-m (29-32 lb-ft) Knuckle clamp bolt 8mm 3.0-3.5 kg-m (22-25 lb-ft) lOmm 4.5-6.0 kg-m (32-43 lb-ft) Damper rod nut A (upper) 4.5-5.0kg-m (32-36lb-ft) Damper rod nut B (lower) 2.5- 3.0 kg-m (18-22 lb-ft) Front damper assembly-to-body (8mm bolts) 1.5-2.0 kg-m (11-14 lb-ft) Stabilizer bracket-to-subframe 2.0-2.4 kg-m (14-17 lb-ft) Stabilizer shaft-to-lower arm 4.5-5.0 kg-m (32-36 lb-ft) Rear Suspension U-bolts 4.4-4.8 kg-m (32-35 lb-U) Leaf spring bolts 4.4-4.8 kg-m (32-35 lb-ft) Rear damper assembly-to-body (Smm bolts) 1.2-1.5 kg-m ( 9-11 lb-ft) SUSPENSION 12-3 B.
    [Show full text]
  • LVV Standard 195-00 – Suspension Systems
    LVVTA Low Volume Vehicle Standard 195-00(02) (Suspension Systems) Page 1 of 24 Low Volume Vehicle Technical Association Incorporated Low Volume Vehicle Standard 195-00(02) (Suspension Systems) This Low Volume Vehicle Standard corresponds with: Land Transport Rules Steering Systems 2001 (Rule 32003/1) and Light Vehicle Brakes 2002 (Rule 32014) 2nd Amendment – effective from: 25 October 2016 Signed in accordance with clause 1.5 of the Low Volume Vehicle Code, on…………………………………………………by: on behalf of the New Zealand Transport Agency: on behalf on the Low Volume Vehicle Technical Association(Inc): …………………………………………………………………….……………………………… ……………………….…………………………………………………………………… LVV Standard 195-00 Amendment Record: No: Detail of amendments: Version: Issue date: Effect date: 1 Initial issue – original version 195-00(00) 1 December 2000 1 December 2000 2 1st Amendment 195-00(01) 1 August 2016 1 August 2016 3 2nd Amendment 195-00(02) 25 October 2016 25 October 2016 4 5 Note that highlighted text shows amendments that have been made subsequent to the document’s previous issue, and a grey vertical stroke to the left of the text denotes information that is of a technical (rather than a formatting) nature. © Low Volume Vehicle Technical Association (Inc.) October 2016 LVVTA Low Volume Vehicle Standard 195-00(02) (Suspension Systems) Page 2 of 24 Overview Background The Low Volume Vehicle Technical Association Incorporated (LVVTA) represents ten specialist automotive groups who are dedicated to ensuring that vehicles, when scratch-built or modified, meet the highest practicable safety standards. The information in these standards has stemmed from work undertaken by LVVTA founding member organisations that commenced prior to 1990 and has been progressively developed as an integral part of NZ Government safety rules and regulations by agreement and in consultation with the New Zealand Transport Agency.
    [Show full text]
  • Compliant Mechanism Suspensions
    Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 2006-06-02 Compliant Mechanism Suspensions Timothy Melvin Allred Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Mechanical Engineering Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Allred, Timothy Melvin, "Compliant Mechanism Suspensions" (2006). Theses and Dissertations. 434. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/434 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. COMPLIANT MECHANISM SUSPENSIONS by Timothy M. Allred A thesis submitted to the faculty of Brigham Young University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Department of Mechanical Engineering Brigham Young University August 2003 BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY GRADUATE COMMITTEE APPROVAL of a thesis submitted by Timothy M. Allred This thesis has been read by each member of the following graduate committee and by majority vote has been found to be satisfactory. ____________________________ _______________________________________ Date Larry L. Howell, Chair ___________________________ _______________________________________ Date Spencer P. Magleby ___________________________ _______________________________________ Date Robert H. Todd BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY As chair of the candidate’s graduate committee, I have read the thesis of Timothy M. All- red in its final form and have found that (1) its format, citations, and bibliographical style are consistent and acceptable and fulfill university and department style requirements; (2) its illustrative materials including figures, tables, and charts are in place; and (3) the final manuscript is satisfactory to the graduate committee and is ready for submission to the university library.
    [Show full text]
  • 1926 – AAA National Championships
    1926 1926 – AAA National Championships Championship Standings 1 Harry Hartz 2944 pts 2 Frank Lockhart 1830 3 Peter De Paolo 1500 4 Bennett Hill 1050 5 Frank Elliott 747 6 Fred Comer 659 7 Dave Lewis 645 8 Norman Batten 620 9 Peter Kreis 590 10 Earl DeVore 585 11 Leon Duray 555 12 Earl Cooper 465 13 Bob McDonogh 412 14 Cliff Woodbury 360 15 Eddie Hearne 305 16 William Shattuc 280 17 John Duff 155 18 Ralph Hepburn 148 19 Dave Evans 120 20 Ben Jones 80 21 Phil Shafer 77 22 Wade Morton 67 23 Harlan Fengler 45 24 Zeke Meyer 35 25 Tony Gulotta 15 Miami-Fulford, FL 22nd February 1926 – 300 miles (1.25 miles x 240 laps): Carl G.Fisher Trophy Pos # SP Driver Car Name Chassis Engine Laps Time 1 1 7 Peter De Paolo Duesenberg Duesenberg Duesenberg 240 2:19:12.95, 129.295 mph 2 3 4 Harry Hartz Miller Miller Miller 240 2:20:44.28 3 4 13 Bob McDonogh Miller Miller Miller 240 2:23:37.43 4 6 6 Frank Elliott Miller Miller Miller 240 2:25:11.08 5 16 5 Bennett Hill Miller Miller Miller 240 6 17 12 Earl DeVore Nickel Plate Miller Miller 240 7 35 18 Ben Jones Duesenberg Duesenberg Duesenberg 230 Flagged 8 22 11 William Shattuc Miller Miller Miller 220 Flagged 9 23 10 Dave Evans Duesenberg Duesenberg Duesenberg 210 Flagged 10 12 2 Leon Duray Miller Miller Miller 180 Magneto 11 15 14 Peter Kreis Miller Miller Miller 90 Out 12 14 9 Jerry Wonderlich Miller Miller Miller 88 Out 13 19 17 Zeke Meyer Miller Miller Miller 78 Out 14 8 8 Fred Comer Miller Miller Miller 52 Engine 15 2 16 Tom Milton Duesenberg Duesenberg Duesenberg 42 Engine 16 9 1 Ralph Hepburn Miller Miller Miller 36 Engine 17 7 3 Dave Lewis Miller Miller Miller 35 Engine 18 5 15 Earl Cooper Miller Miller Miller 34 Oil line Lap Leaders: Ralph Hepburn 1- 3 Dave Lewis 4- 24 Leon Duray 25-149 Earl DeVore 150-200 Peter De Paolo 201-240 AAA sanction 1678 Pole position speed: 141.199 mph This was the opening meeting of the track, which was destroyed by a hurricane on the 17th September 1926.
    [Show full text]
  • International Journal for Scientific Research & Development| Vol. 8, Issue 2, 2020 | ISSN (Online): 2321-0613
    IJSRD - International Journal for Scientific Research & Development| Vol. 8, Issue 2, 2020 | ISSN (online): 2321-0613 Review on Push Rod, Macpherson Strut, Double Wishbone, Active Suspension System Vishal Jaiswal1 Prithvi Raj Chaudhary2 Anmol Jadiya3 Mukul Kushwaha4 M. Maniraj5 1,2,3,4Student 5Professor 1,2,3,4,5Department of Mechanical Engineering 1,2,3,4,5Galgotias University, Gr Noida (UP), India Abstract— We all knows that suspension makes the vehicle ride comfortable and proper handling, so the purpose of the II. LITERATURE REVIEW suspension system is to provide a high level of ride quality S. Dehbari [1] in his paper “Kinematic and Dynamic and to protect the vehicle by separating vehicle's wheel/axel Analysis for a New Mac Pherson Strut Suspension System” assembly from the body. Suspension helps the vehicle at analyzed a MacPherson suspension system. They studies the cornering. The function of the suspension system is to Kinematic and Dynamic aspects of the front suspension isolate the vehicle structure from shocks and vibration due system and with help of displacement matrix were able to to bumps and irregularity of the road. Engineers are always provide vertical displacement of sprung mass and unsprung trying to relief their design in search of more comfort we mass and compared there observations with others results. have not get that comfort yet, but the latest suspension There 2D model was capable of many calculating systems are better than the previous suspensions and we suspensions system parameters such as vertical acceleration know that the manufacturers and the design engineers have applied to car body and car handling parameters like caster taken many designs when it comes to suspension design for angle and track.
    [Show full text]
  • Modern Equipment Greatly Simplifies the Wheel Alignment Process. But
    TOTAL 4-WHEEL4-WHEEL ALIGNMENT BY MIKE MAVRIGIAN Modern equipment greatly simplifies the wheel alignment process. But it’s still important to understand how alignment angles are measured, as well as their effect on driveability, braking, tire wear and handling. he old method of wheel alignment allows you to adjust and alignment, called center- hopefully correct rear axle thrust angle, line two-wheel align- then to adjust the front wheels parallel ment, should now be to the rear wheels. considered obsolete. •If the vehicle does not allow rear This method does not wheel angle adjustment, take advantage consider the rear wheel positions, and it of a four-wheel thrust line alignment Tsimply isn’t effective, because it ignores approach. the thrust direction of the rear axle. •If the vehicle does allow rear wheel A much more effective method is angle adjustment, perform a total four- called thrust line or thrust angle align- wheel alignment. ment, which considers the actual loca- Granted, a state-of-the-art computer- tion and direction of the rear wheels. ized wheel alignment system will walk a This allows you to adjust the front wheel technician through the steps, perform all angles relative to the rear wheel angles, necessary calculations and instruct the regardless of the geometric centerline. technician to adjust angles in order to If the vehicle in question features meet an OE specification for a specific rear wheel toe adjustment, you can production vehicle. However, it’s also im- achieve optimum wheel alignment using portant to understand wheel angles and the total four-wheel approach, by refer- what these angles represent in terms of ring to and adjusting the vehicle thrust driveability, braking, tire wear and han- angle to as close to zero as possible.
    [Show full text]