Page 2 of 2

Re: 30 year old Nos - DJ's theory of evolution

PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 6:26 pm
by twincamman
Oi the tips already gone :roll: ed

Re: 30 year old Nos

PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 6:37 pm
by garyeanderson
ardee_selby wrote:John,



Q. Why doesn't an OP title, once modified, get cascaded down to all subsequent responses?




Not exactly cascaded, its what you "reply" to and if you don't edit the subject of the reply it carries the subject title. Well Maybe!

If you quote a reply it takes that subject and appends an "Re:"

I just deleted all of the text in the body of this post and typed in this trash,

Re: 30 year old Nos

PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 7:41 pm
by AHM
Richard,

Yes I have read this. In response I would say that for perishable components material quality and physical condition are everything.

Correct material ensures that they will perform better and last longer. Replace when the physical condition starts to deteriorate rather than when it fails.

I have 5 new tyres and I will not be using rotoflex couplings. But I will be using my genuine Ford engine mounts and genuine Girling brake hoses.

It is not a question of cost, and from experience new replacements would quickly become inferior to the good old ones.

The failure shown is I believe due to inferior manufacturing or material.

Simon

Re: 30 year old Nos

PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 8:34 pm
by ardee_selby
AHM wrote:Richard,

Yes I have read this. In response I would say that for perishable components material quality and physical condition are everything.

Correct material ensures that they will perform better and last longer. Replace when the physical condition starts to deteriorate rather than when it fails.

I have 5 new tyres and I will not be using rotoflex couplings. But I will be using my genuine Ford engine mounts and genuine Girling brake hoses.

It is not a question of cost, and from experience new replacements would quickly become inferior to the good old ones.

The failure shown is I believe due to inferior manufacturing or material.

Simon


Simon,

I wasn't casting any aspersions...hope it didn't come across as that.

Since both threads are on the same subject, hoped you would close the loop, so to speak.

As I said, it appeared to be a failure of the adhesive, rather than the rubber, and may well be down to poor manufacture. IIRC that was the case with Lotocones in the late '70's

Re: 30 year old Nos

PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 10:57 pm
by twincamman
LOOKING AT THE MOUNT COULD NOT 2 HOLES BE DRILLED AND RUBBER SUSPENSION MOUNTS [ ELECTROLAST FROM A SPRITE] BE USED IN PLACE OF THE BONDED RUBBER???I AM IN THE PROCESS OF CHANGING MY MOUNTS ON THE ELAN --WILL LET YOU KNOW -- ED

Re: 30 year old Nos

PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 11:02 pm
by ardee_selby
twincamman wrote:LOOKING AT THE MOUNT COULD NOT 2 HOLES BE DRILLED AND RUBBER [ELECTROLAST] SUSPENSION MOUNTS [SPRITE] BE USED IN PLACE OF THE BONDED RUBBER???I AM IN THE PROCESS OF CHANGING MY MOUNTS ON THE ELAN --WILL LET YOU KNOW -- ED


Ed,

WRT converting existing mounts...did you see the post from ceejay?

elan-f15/original-engine-mounts-converted-urethane-bushings-t23673.html

(BTW - The rubber glove "trick" won a "Tip of the Month" prize in (I think) Car Mechanics mag in the '60's... :) )

Re: 30 year old Nos

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 12:59 am
by AHM
Richard,

Not at all - Just my frustration with the parts situation.

I'm fed up with paying for quality and getting c**p. I've dealt with pretty much all of the specialists and sent stuff back to most. I believe they have a vested interest in selling cheap parts for the maximum margin knowing that you or the next owner will be back in a couple of years to buy the same thing again.

When was the last time anyone changed an engine mounting on their daily drive? My last car lived outside, was 12 years old, and had done 160k Miles. It didn't need new engine mounts!


Simon


There is no excuse for a failure like the one in the picture.

Re: 30 year old Nos

PostPosted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 7:29 am
by Spyder fan
GrUmPyBoDgEr wrote:You do surprise me Alan.
5 years seems rather short especially if the car, like yours is being used regularly even though not covering massive mileage.
Have the tires noticeably dropped off in performance or is it maybe because are you pushing your car harder nowadays? :wink:

I'll put some fresh rubber on mine before it goes back on the road.
A shame really because the tyres (Continental) "look" great but are 10 years old.

I must look up that thread (if I can find it) where a kind member told me what 175/60 x14 Yokohama's to go for.
Gonna' get me some nice sticky ones & let 'em wear for the limited mileage I plan to do :lol:

Back on topic; I think that the storage conditions have a big effect on how long rubber will keep.
Cool, dry & dark conditions are supposed to be good.
Do you remember when rubber was always dusted with french chalk in the days when there were no plastic bags or shrink wrapping.
Of course that was "the good old rubber" not today's supposed rubbish. :roll:


Cheers
John

John,
I'm doing 4000+ miles a year on average, so this set of tyres has covered around 20,000 miles which would normally be changeover time for most performance rubber due to wear especially on the rears, I have 5mm on the rears and 6 1/2 or so on the fronts this is a surprisingly low wear rate but I can feel that they are past their best on my favourite roundabouts, they are Yokohama C drive which is a mid range performance tyre. I have a separate set of wheels with Yoko AO48's for track days and due to the low wear rate I seem to be getting I would use them all the time apart from the road noise that the tread pattern produces which sounds like an old 4x4. The new Yokohama C drive2 tyres are getting good reviews so it's time to change.