Rear shock length 64 fhc
#1 Rear shock length 64 fhc
Hi all not had my car to long and thought I would just take the rear wheels off for a little clean copper slip the splines and to my shock! I couldn’t get the rear wheel off without dropping the bottom shock bolt to get more droop. The car would appear to be a little lower the standard and is running 6 inch rims with blockley 205/70/15’s. Took the shock off today and assembled its 13 inches eye to eye, when the spring is removed, the spring length is 27cm with a coil thickness of 11mm. I want to return the car to its correct ride height and also be able to get the wheels off without removing the shock bolt as that’s not a good thing if you get a puncture road side. So can anyone share with me what the standard shock length is and spring detail so I can get the wheels off and achieve the standard ride height.
Thanks
			
									
									
			Thanks
| Link: | |
| BBcode: | |
| HTML: | |
| Hide post links | 
#2 Re: Rear shock length 64 fhc
As far im aware original rear 4.2 shocks had an open length eye to eye of 13in....your issue is the non standard wheels/tyres....Steve..ps its been known to have to let the air out to get the wheels off
			
									
									Steve
69 S2 2+2 (sold) ..Realm C type replica, 1960 xk150fhc
			69 S2 2+2 (sold) ..Realm C type replica, 1960 xk150fhc
| Link: | |
| BBcode: | |
| HTML: | |
| Hide post links | 
- 
				
bitsobrits
 
- Posts: 545
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 2:09 am
- Location: Omaha, NE area
 
#3 Re: Rear shock length 64 fhc
Interesting. I have 205/70 Michelins on 6.5” wide rims and can remove my wheels. I have had three different makes of spring/damper assemblies over the last 20 some years since I fitted these wheels. Even ran 215/65 tires for a time. I do have to tip the wheels slightly in at the top once the wheel clears the splines, then I pull them down and out.
			
									
									Steve
'65 S1 4.2 FHC (early)
			'65 S1 4.2 FHC (early)
| Link: | |
| BBcode: | |
| HTML: | |
| Hide post links | 
#4 Re: Rear shock length 64 fhc
Hi Steve what's the length of your shocks fully extended?
			
									
									Steve
69 S2 2+2 (sold) ..Realm C type replica, 1960 xk150fhc
			69 S2 2+2 (sold) ..Realm C type replica, 1960 xk150fhc
| Link: | |
| BBcode: | |
| HTML: | |
| Hide post links | 
#5 Re: Rear shock length 64 fhc
Thanks guys for your replies, I believe shock length is the answer Martin Roby, told me 13.5 inches, the spring it’s self controls the ride height and as you can see in the image the car sits low, rims in line with arch, so really it’s two issues. Both MR and SNG sell a standard shock /spring assembly giving”standard” ride height but will that give the droop required from the shock length, what I need is someone who’s had the same issue, other than that it’s purchase one to see if I get the droop required, just the extra 1/2 inch doesn’t seem enough

			
									
									
			
| Link: | |
| BBcode: | |
| HTML: | |
| Hide post links | 
- 
				
bitsobrits
 
- Posts: 545
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 2:09 am
- Location: Omaha, NE area
 
#6 Re: Rear shock length 64 fhc
No idea without dismounting one. But as I posted, I've had three different brands, one stock, and two aftermarket adjustable perch versions, so they no doubt have varied. But with the original ones fitted, there was no issue.
Steve
'65 S1 4.2 FHC (early)
			'65 S1 4.2 FHC (early)
| Link: | |
| BBcode: | |
| HTML: | |
| Hide post links | 
#7 Re: Rear shock length 64 fhc
Rear ride height with standard shocks is a function of spring strength.
All shock length affects is the maximum droop on your suspension with the car in the air. So yes, they may affect your ability to remove larger tyre/rim combinations. But it doesn't affect rear height at rest.
To get your rear ride height correct you need a stronger spring or to fit packing pieces (sold by the usuals) between the shock absorber spring land and the spring.
There is a huge amount written on this site about ride height.
Andrew.
881824, 1E21538. 889457. 1961 4.3l Mk2. 1975 XJS. 1962 MGB. 1979 MGB.
http://www.projectetype.com/index.php/the-blog.html
Adelaide, Australia
			881824, 1E21538. 889457. 1961 4.3l Mk2. 1975 XJS. 1962 MGB. 1979 MGB.
http://www.projectetype.com/index.php/the-blog.html
Adelaide, Australia
| Link: | |
| BBcode: | |
| HTML: | |
| Hide post links | 
#8 Re: Rear shock length 64 fhc
Steve...you dont have to dismount your shocks/springs..just jack up the rear as you would to remove a wheel and measure the shock length.....Steve
PS....the easy way would be to use adjustable height shocks to get the ride height you want... but you would need to confirm their "open" length to find out if that gives e ough clearance to remove your wheels
			
									
									PS....the easy way would be to use adjustable height shocks to get the ride height you want... but you would need to confirm their "open" length to find out if that gives e ough clearance to remove your wheels
Steve
69 S2 2+2 (sold) ..Realm C type replica, 1960 xk150fhc
			69 S2 2+2 (sold) ..Realm C type replica, 1960 xk150fhc
| Link: | |
| BBcode: | |
| HTML: | |
| Hide post links | 
#9 Re: Rear shock length 64 fhc
The reality of this is that statistically you're very unlikely to ever need to change a flat rear tyre on an E type, so it becomes fairly academic.
I've had E Types towed on a couple of occasions, because of ignition problems x2 and a front wheel bearing failure.
And I got bogged once trying to do a 180 turn into a small creek I didn't notice...
			
									
									I've had E Types towed on a couple of occasions, because of ignition problems x2 and a front wheel bearing failure.
And I got bogged once trying to do a 180 turn into a small creek I didn't notice...
Andrew.
881824, 1E21538. 889457. 1961 4.3l Mk2. 1975 XJS. 1962 MGB. 1979 MGB.
http://www.projectetype.com/index.php/the-blog.html
Adelaide, Australia
			881824, 1E21538. 889457. 1961 4.3l Mk2. 1975 XJS. 1962 MGB. 1979 MGB.
http://www.projectetype.com/index.php/the-blog.html
Adelaide, Australia
| Link: | |
| BBcode: | |
| HTML: | |
| Hide post links | 







