Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[05omegav6]

500 mile update:

More spirited lane driving, and some fast dual carriage way work. The car still rolls a bit due to the shocks being past their best, but there is absolutely no yaw whatsoever .

This is where the bushes really differ from the standard ones. The only lateral movement of the back end is brought about with liberal application of steering lock and right foot 

[TheBoy]

500 mile update:

More spirited lane driving, and some fast dual carriage way work. The car still rolls a bit due to the shocks being past their best, but there is absolutely no yaw whatsoever .

This is where the bushes really differ from the standard ones. The only lateral movement of the back end is brought about with liberal application of steering lock and right foot 

Does the flatter ride make it more skittish?

[Lazydocker]

I know mine need replacing soon (along with the rest of the suspension ) so I'm now seriously considering these

[TheBoy]

I know mine need replacing soon (along with the rest of the suspension ) so I'm now seriously considering these

Indeed, me too, but I want to drive one first I think.  My concern is it may start to become too stiff, reducing the 'handling'.  I also wonder why GM put voids in their's?

But I am really interested...  ...those brand new Lemforders in the garage could be going to landfill

[05omegav6]

Does the flatter ride make it more skittish?

Possibly, but I currently have a mix of tyres front (Autogrips ) to back, and the plod set up is designed for heavy duty abuse rather than outright performance    like I said it does still roll abit so the effect is probably a bit more subjective than fitting, say, a set of track coilovers

I know mine need replacing soon (along with the rest of the suspension ) so I'm now seriously considering these

Indeed, me too, but I want to drive one first I think.  My concern is it may start to become too stiff, reducing the 'handling'.  I also wonder why GM put voids in their's?

But I am really interested...  ...those brand new Lemforders in the garage could be going to landfill

If you can wait until the 14th, I'll pop up to Oxford with it . By then it will have 17"s on it with brand new tyres and I should have replaced the rear shock top mounts by then as well

[TheBoy]

TA - as it looks like mine haven't collapsed completely (although jury still out ), it can wait

[feeutfo]

Voids allow the rear subframe to articulate. It's basically a hinge in the middle where the hinge is the rear subfrom blocks to dif. Mild four wheel steering in effect. The side load on the car makes the outer edge of the bush flex into the void hole. This allows the rear wheels to follow the line if the front wheels more accurately.

Problem is its too flexible for spirited driving. Fine for the executive comfort of the design brief, but throw it into a corner and the play is taken up with an alarming sensation of sideways movement IMO. It leaves you with a "wtf was that" feel. Did it slide? Did it tram line? Did something brake at the back... No its only bush play again. Sigh...

The Carlton bushes, although they refused to stay fitted, gave a very satisfying firm feel from the rear of the car.



A thought occurs though...(o-oh) the poly al has are for Monaro I believe...? These are same as Carlton, I also believe. So my concern is that they also may work loose as mine did. But as Al pointed out, his are fitted with the thicker top pad as well. So even if the bush did have a tendency to work out, it can't because the thicker top pad prevents it.

Carlton bushes are spaced differently to omega due to the height the bush is set on the centre spacer. So the bushes must be fitted as a set, not just the bush but the top pad as well. Something I didn't do when fitting Carlton bushes. Maybe they would have stayed in with the top pad fitted as well.

As I understand it though, as the bush is set higher on the centre spacer, this means the chassis will be raised from the subframe by that amount. 10mm or so I think. Not sure what effect that will have, if any.

Did I see there are very small void holes in the poly? And does this mean they are directional?

[05omegav6]

They're not voids, merely dimples, and surround the centre bush, so not directional

The triangular plates still bolt right up to the chassis, so while the front of the subframe does, as you correctly note, sit about 9mm lower, this only serves to give the trailing arms a marginally flatter radius. Don't forget that the centre bolt can only go into one position, so there is a clearly defined location for the front of the subframe.

Might rustle up a new pair of stock rear bushes, just to remove 235k of play from the back of the subframe.

[feeutfo]

Yes TB's dif blocks where completely seperated by 150(?)k.

[feeutfo]

Logic also suggests normal Carlton bushes might be worth a try with the Carlton top pad fitted.

We where working on the assumption that Carlton and omega bushes are same originally. Just with no void holes.

[05omegav6]

Logic also suggests normal Carlton bushes might be worth a try with the Carlton top pad fitted.

We where working on the assumption that Carlton and omega bushes are same originally. Just with no void holes.

Bear in mind that the stock Monaro top pad is exactly the same as the Omega one, so this poly mod applies as well to the Omega as it does to the Monaro 

If it doesn't provide a tangible improvement for the Monaro, Monkfish wouldn't sell it, so given their similarities, this upgrade should be just as valid for the Omega

p.s. are Carlton top pads still available? VX only, if at all

[feeutfo]

Something doesn't add up there, if the top pad is the same thickness and the bush is set lower there's room for it to work out. No?

[05omegav6]

Both the Monaro and the Omega share the top pad, it's about 1mm thick, quite soft, and a smaller diameter than the main bush. It had a sleeve which fits snuggly down on the main bush. The centre bolt is tight to the plate, which in turn is tight to the bush which is tight to the floor pan. The main bush is set at such a height to ensure that the subframe is tight against the top pad.

With the polys the same thing applies, the depth of the top pad is offset by the height of the central bush relative to the whole bush assembly.

Never having seen a Carlton bush, I suspect that the cetral bush is perhaps 5 mm further in to the bush, and the top pad is 5mm thicker to offset this. Hence when you fit the Carlton bush with an Omega top pad, the Carlton bush will always work out 5mm. Basically the difference in top pad thickness allows the subframe to ride up the bush

Because the poly bush and top pad are matched, this cannot happen

[TheBoy]

Yes TB's dif blocks where completely seperated by 150(?)k.

Probably a bit more, it wasn't LPG'd until 166...

...that said, who knows how long they had been like that

[feeutfo]

So how you getting on with these Al? Still ok?