Identifying shocks and ride height

[mgcjag]

Hi Darryl......the 8in springs only have 7 coils.....i can see in you original photos that you have more than that so i think your on the longer springs. .......I would remove one of the shocks to see if the spring perch distance between perch and top/bottom mount eye is the same as original type shocks as this will impact on ride height....Steve

[Maikel]

Hi,

what did they say about my C18977 springs they delivered with my GAZ?

[dlgis]

Hi Steve, yes will do, just as soon as i can get it up on a ramp

And sorry Maikel I didn’t ask about the C18977 springs. Try a Live Chat with them, seems to work well

[abowie]

Standard springs are 10 1/4" high.

[Allrand]

According to the 3.8 Service Manual the standard length for early cars is 10.1" and 10.5" for later cars.

[mgcjag]

I think we may have to re evaluate this thread......especially what is the correct look for ride height.....Maikels photos posted above to me look correct as is the photo and drawing that Phil posted ........Darryl hasnt yet posted a good side on of his car......your car may feel to low by hitting road bumps etc but how does it look....will throw this early photo in as a comparison..however it is taken from a slightly raised angle.......Steve

[TGN]

I think this one is probably a better view

[mgcjag]

And this is where oppinions differ......this from original Jaguar documentation posted previously in a post above...looks very similar to the press photo above of the OBL car......Seve

[TGN]

We really need pictures of ones fresh off the line for how they looked, rather than how they may have wanted them to look in a press photo or on display.

I would usually only use the measurement of ground clearance for conformity in racing, it’s either legal or it isn’t.
Tyre pressures (and sizes) can make a reasonably discrepancy in ride height when measuring to the IRS. I would normally only measure from the centre or a rim edge to an arch.

What I do know is my car does like to drag it’s exhaust at any given opportunity but that’s hardly surprising

[mgcjag]

Hi Trevor....as iv said previously there are no rear measurements in the service manual for S1/S2 cars.....the technical drawing posted previously is as good as you will get.......Steve

[Allrand]

I think this one is probably a better view

That's agood looking stance, by my accurate measute 2 fingers above the wheel rim to arch st the rear, 3-4 at the front.

[TGN]

Steve I know there isn’t, but you were promoting gathering information measuring from that height.
And the exhaust and bumper height measurements will also suffer from the same variable.
But rear arch height may suffer similar issues from hand built cars, previous poor repairs and large amounts of body filler.
I think you probably need two measurements recorded to begin to get some accurate data. Probably floor to centre of wheel and floor to wheel arch.

[mgcjag]

My attempts to gather information quite a few years ago failed misrably with only a few members prepared to post info........the measurements i was trying to obtain were tbe same way as shown in the S3 service manual....irs to ground.......personaly i think that quite a few think there rear is too low where if you look at early photos and the technical drawing you can see how low original cars actually were.......Steve

[TGN]

People are lazy. Me included. I looked at the back of my car and the available space and thought I can’t be bothered.
You won’t need much data to give better measurements provided the body is as it should be.
Once you remove the tyre size and pressure issues, you get left with a measurement of 8.25” minimum depending on opinion too 8.25” plus Randall's two fingers to be within tolerance. lets call that 2"

[TGN]

We only need to find a car which we can all agree on, is the maximum aesthetically acceptable height.

Assuming we’ve all accepted the minimum is level with arch and top of rim.

[mgcjag]

Hi Trevor...will leave that to you to organise then.....
Steve

[dlgis]

I can’t take good side view at the moment as the cars in my garage with too much stuff/cars a round it. These are the best i can do but they’re very close up.






And here’s a pic of the car on the previous shocks before the previous owner replaced with Gaz. The ride height looks broadly similar pre and post Gaz.

[dlgis]

At last I’ve got a damper/spring off the car to see what exact part they are. The dampers are Gaz GS6 2098 which appears to be the correct adjustable damper (fixed platform) for a series 1, and the spring is C18977 (with an SNGB sticker on it). I believe that was the standard spring being sold before the part was changed to C25939.
The spring length on the C18977s is 10.25” and the eye to eye on the damper is 340mm/13.5” when built up. I believe i was told a while ago by SNGB that their c25939 springs are 11” and I’m rechecking that with them.
So given how low the car sits immediately a bit surprised that it appears to have a correct Gaz damper on it. What difference would it make to road height if i fitted the 11” springs (3/4” longer)?

Thanks

[Allrand]

Depends on the spring grade & wire dia, but probably less than 1/2"

[dlgis]

Hi Randall, i thought i read somewhere that if you increase spring length then the ride height would increase by a factor of approx 1.5 (all other things being equal). So wouldn’t that mean a 3/4” (19mm) increase in spring length increasing ride height by around 28mm?