Wet vs Dry Subframe indicators
Created by: parentevan
Orig. Posting Date | User Name | Edit Date |
Oct 19, 2020 04:18AM | tothefloor | |
Oct 18, 2020 05:15PM | 1963SV2 | |
Oct 18, 2020 10:42AM | mascherk | |
Oct 18, 2020 07:51AM | tothefloor | |
Oct 16, 2020 09:47PM | 1963SV2 | |
Oct 16, 2020 04:55PM | Whee | |
Oct 16, 2020 02:52PM | parentevan |
Total posts: 664
Last post: Dec 31, 2021 Member since:Nov 1, 2012
|
Cars in Garage: 0
Photos: 0 WorkBench Posts: 0 |
Mine is a Morris too. Have had it since 78.
it’s been a long time since I owned a (junk) wet suspension Austin Mini but wouldn’t the proper place to determine wet vs dry be looking at the rear subframe because of the springs and some other differences in parts???
it’s been a long time since I owned a (junk) wet suspension Austin Mini but wouldn’t the proper place to determine wet vs dry be looking at the rear subframe because of the springs and some other differences in parts???
Total posts: 1716
Last post: Oct 18, 2020 Member since:Oct 18, 2011
|
Cars in Garage: 0
Photos: 0 WorkBench Posts: 0 |
My opinion was based on observations of my 63 and 65 UK built cars and my 64 Oz all of which had studs. (Noting that studs are a PITA; I have replaced the ones in the 65 with the proper bolts.)
My 67 edition factory shop manual has a drawing that appears to show a stud.
All my cars are Morriss (Mori ?????)
Cheers Ian
My 67 edition factory shop manual has a drawing that appears to show a stud.
All my cars are Morriss (Mori ?????)
Cheers Ian
Total posts: 1352
Last post: Mar 29, 2024 Member since:Aug 8, 2002
|
Cars in Garage: 0
Photos: 0 WorkBench Posts: 0 |
|
The Morris factory used studs on the front subframe and the Austin factory used bolts. This is generally for MkI & MkII cars although it could have changed with the introduction of hydrolastic, I'm not sure. Keep in mind that there were Austin badged cars built in the Morris factory.
Kelley
Kelley
"If you can afford the car, you can afford the manual..."
Total posts: 664
Last post: Dec 31, 2021 Member since:Nov 1, 2012
|
Cars in Garage: 0
Photos: 0 WorkBench Posts: 0 |
Ian could you please elaborate. On my 64 it’s held in by two bolts and it’s a dry suspension. According to my heritage certificate it was built October 1, 1963
Total posts: 1716
Last post: Oct 18, 2020 Member since:Oct 18, 2011
|
Cars in Garage: 0
Photos: 0 WorkBench Posts: 0 |
Quote:
Originally Posted by parentevan
Hey folks. I've got a '64 Mini and my subframe seems a little odd. Instead of a single bolt, or two bolts, I have two threaded studs. Normally, I'd assume this was a Hydrolastic subframe, but I see no indications that it is a hydrolastic sub. What other things should I be looking for on the body and subframe to determine if this is wet or dry?
Cheers, Ian
Total posts: 3346
Last post: Apr 21, 2024 Member since:Jul 20, 2002
|
Cars in Garage: 0
Photos: 0 WorkBench Posts: 0 |
|
The "Tabs" on the subframe that hold the displacers in.
Total posts: 14
Last post: Jan 18, 2023 Member since:Jul 7, 2020
|
Cars in Garage: 0
Photos: 0 WorkBench Posts: 0 |
Hey folks. I've got a '64 Mini and my subframe seems a little odd. Instead of a single bolt, or two bolts, I have two threaded studs. Normally, I'd assume this was a Hydrolastic subframe, but I see no indications that it is a hydrolastic sub. What other things should I be looking for on the body and subframe to determine if this is wet or dry?