My LHD 1957 3.4 has the OE suspension and drums on the front brakes, I understand the geometry was not good on these, I have found a Mk 2 front suspension/non power steering. Just wonder what the consensus - plus and minus might be in fitting it?

Also to fit the Mk 2 wheels with the 12 holes as this might help with the narrow rear track?

Thanks in advance

 

As far as I know there is no difference in the securing fittings between the two subframes, but the later suspension had the geometry altered to raise the roll centre which is below the road surface on the Mark 1; not conducive to good handling as the unfortunate Mike Hawthorn found out ! So essentially you can just bolt on the Mark 2 subframe. As for the rear suspension, the track was considerably widened and the axle itself made wider. For this reason, it is not possible to fit the full cover spats, (at least that is my understanding).
Thinking laterally, why not just sell the Mark 1 and buy a Mark 2 !

 

Thanks for reply, I'm familiar with the Mk 2 in that Uncle, Father and grand father each had one, but the Mk 1 is quite quirky in design and when do you see one?

 

The Mk1 saloon racers make these sort of mods as standard. It may be worth searching some articles on their cars.

I believe a Mk2 front subframe should fit. So would a 420 or an S type. Given the advantages of the 420 in brakes and power steering, and if you're not rushed, it might be worth waiting for a 420 subframe to come up for sale. The later models all come with disc brakes. I don't know if you may need to swap/install a different master cylinder and servo.

The wider Mk2 rear axle is also a nice mod, but, as mentioned, requires work on the spats.

Is it worth the effort? Well I remember a tastefully moded Mk1 in the Netherlands JEC that had the special style of the Mk1 but could hold its own one the road against most moderns.

 

Thank you Peter.

I did consider the 420 and I know this might sound a bit a - - e about face, I don't necessarily want it to become much different than how it is, but am guessing the revised geometry will address what seems to have been an early fault, I like the feel of a non power steering car, disc brakes were anyway fitted to the last 3.4's so feel this slips nicely under the umbrella.

I think I will start off with the original rear axle which with the mk 2 wheels will provide a little extra track, I have yet to discover whether the 3.4's were ever fitted with an LSD or whether a mk 2 LSD can be fitted to the Mk 1 rear axle but I do like the quirky appearance of the narrow rear track it goes well i think with the small rear window!

Whether a lack of confidence from the feel of the narrow rear will be enough to alter that decision in the future time will tell. Overall I think this will be the limit at least at the outset of my stray away from the way it was built. I will need to look into the master cylinder and brake servo I don't yet know enough of the differences. Away from topic, I particularly like that the car has always been a manual with overdrive....

 

The replacement of the MK1 front end with a MK2 is simple and I have done it on a number of occasions on drum braked cars. Only two considerations.(1) The MK2 steering box has more turns lock to lock so you might like to stay with the MK1 box.
(2) You may need to fiddle with the brake booster. The drum braked cars had a restrictor in the output to slow down the onset of lock up. You might need to sort this out as disc brakes require higher pressure than drums.
For the record disc brakes became an option on the MK1 in late 1957. At one stage I had two MK1s which had body numbers a couple of hundred apart. The earlier had disc brakes while the later one had drums.

Anyway if you are currently on drum brakes a standard disc braked MK2 front end will improve your braking ability significantly.

Bill mac

 

Hi Bill

Thank you for advice this is really helpful especially about steering ratios and booster.

As yet not being familiar with the components, the Mk 2 system I've been offered is RHD, my car is LHD which I will keep (I have a number of LHD and feel quite comfortable) do you know whether I would be correct in assuming I can transfer the existing steering LHD box and that the sub frame is handed both ways at the mounting - from a photo is does appear so?

Many thanks

Richard

 

The front subframe is the same for LHD and RHD for Mk2s with manual steering. It looks completely symmetric. That may apply to cars with Burman power steering as well. I think the later varamatic steering cars are handed.

 

I think the subframes were standard across the RHD and LHD for non Power Assisted steering. When they went on to PAS the subframes then had a dip cut into them for the larger PAS steering box and these were sided.

 

Thanks Gents - it does look that way to me from the images....

 

Just to say I'm now awaiting arrival of a mk 2 front suspension assembly and a set of mk 2 wheels.

 

Great! The Mk2 front end sharpens handling up nicely. The Mk1 was ponderous at low speed due to wishbone spacing & angles (roll centre as Fraser says) and wayward at high speed with it's narrow rear track.

I think the day will come when you fit a wider live axle to the rear.


Coombs Racing Mk1 (Pearl Grey team car BUY 1 ~ one of their grey team Mk2's was BUY 12)

 

2.4 litre rear track for comparison (fitted with later spat):






A rather nice Mk1 with racing wires & wider rear axle:

 

That is a nicely presented Mk 1 with the wire wheels,

I'll likely go at this rear axle option in stages, it's all about feeling confidence in the driving experience. But I do like the quirky aesthetics of the Mk 1 - well for the time being....

 

Re the narrow rear end of the MK1.
Bill Pitt was a famous Australian racing driver whom I knew personally. He raced MK1, Mk2 and D types and also rallied in MK7/8 cars. He won the Australian touring car championship in I think 1960 in a MK1.
He told me that the narrower rear axle in the MK1 did not affect the handling on the racetrack and there was " a lot of "bulls---t spoken by people who wouldn't know how to drive a race car."
I have been restoring and driving MK1s and MK2s since 1984 ( about 5 of each type) and I also believe the "hype" about the narrower rear axle has been generated by people who are not really conversant with the car.
IF you want MK2 styling and handling then get a MK2. Don't try to modify a MK1.
I suggest leave the rear end "stock" and enjoy a car which is now far rarer than a MK2. My own 1957 MK1 car runs full spats and gets a lot of attention at car shows and similar occasions.
Bill Mac
1957 MK1
1960 MK2
1980 S3 XJ6
1994 X300
1996 X300
1998 X308
Ford Falcon utility
Mitsubishi Colt (shopping trolley)

 

With respect I think people like Coombs & the other British race teams & privateers were all conversant with the car. All widened the rear track ultimately & lap times improved. Hawthorn, Hamilton, Hill, Baillie etc. & the list goes on.

Exactly why the rear track was immediately widened on the Mk2 in development. (you can't deny/defy Physics)

People must do what makes them personally happy. It's their car.

 

I will be fitting mk2 front subframe along with a mk2 LSD rear axle to my mk1 this year, I like the look of the fuller arch which narrow spat but the mk1 styling