Diff Position
14 posts
• Page 1 of 1
I have just started dismantling my S4 chassis and noticed that the diff unit seems to be off centre to the right of the chassis by about 1". Any ideas why?? Also, having removed both Lotocones I noticed that the bolts holding them to the turrets have very shallow heads. Is there a reason for this?
- William2
- Fourth Gear
- Posts: 921
- Joined: 20 Jan 2013
Not knowing anything about Elans when I started the rebuild, it surprised me too. My Spyder chassis shows exactly the same offset. It isn't in fact that the diff casing that is off centre, it's the drive flange is not central on the casing, due to the position of the crown wheel and pinion. I was going to post a photo but realised I have no idea how to do it, and there seem to be no help files. I pressed the Img button but that didn't help me at all. Anyone let me in on the secret?
Mike
Mike
-
TroonSprint - Fourth Gear
- Posts: 507
- Joined: 24 Nov 2011
TroonSprint wrote:I was going to post a photo but realised I have no idea how to do it, and there seem to be no help files. I pressed the Img button but that didn't help me at all. Anyone let me in on the secret?
Mike
announcements-f32/tutorial-how-upload-photos-t27816.html?hilit=tutorial#p186541
Roger
S4 DHC
S4 DHC
- oldelanman
- Coveted Fifth Gear
- Posts: 1930
- Joined: 02 Jan 2008
Thanks Roger. I still don't know how to find those help articles. I tried searching suitable words but got nothing. Anyway, here's the photo I meant to show William. The camera is looking up the Spyder chassis from the engine bay.
Mike
Mike
-
TroonSprint - Fourth Gear
- Posts: 507
- Joined: 24 Nov 2011
The diff is in the centre, so that the drive shafts are of equal length, angle etc. This means that the pinion and hence input shaft must be offset.
It is supposed to be like that - you would have a big problem if it was in the middle!
The output from the gearbox is also offset.
It is supposed to be like that - you would have a big problem if it was in the middle!
The output from the gearbox is also offset.
- AHM
- Coveted Fifth Gear
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: 19 Apr 2004
William2 wrote:having removed both Lotocones I noticed that the bolts holding them to the turrets have very shallow heads. Is there a reason for this?
I can't see why thin bolt heads are necessary there - at least not with the original chassis set-up and standard diameter springs. Maybe it was thought necessary to avoid contact with the spring top plate as the rubber mount compressed but the plate will make contact with the vertical flanges of the seatbelt mounting plate before it gets to the bolt heads. This flange is around 13mm deep so even with a standard bolt head at around 7mm plus the lotocone baseplate at around 3mm thick the bolt head would not stand proud of the flange.
Roger
S4 DHC
S4 DHC
- oldelanman
- Coveted Fifth Gear
- Posts: 1930
- Joined: 02 Jan 2008
oldelanman wrote:William2 wrote: the plate will make contact with the vertical flanges of the seatbelt mounting plate before it gets to the bolt heads.
Not sure it is relevant but I remember machining the heads thinner on standard bolts when I rebuilt my S2, its a long time ago but I'm sure there was a reason at the time ..... also the early cars did not have the seat belt mounting plate which came later so maybe that had something to do with it.
Brian
64 S2 Roadster
72 Sprint FHC
64 S2 Roadster
72 Sprint FHC
-
types26/36 - Coveted Fifth Gear
- Posts: 3407
- Joined: 11 Sep 2003
William2 wrote:Very interesting. This also means that various chassis drawings in books such as Brian's Bible are incorrect when showing from above that the diff flange is in the middle.
Which page in B B 's book is that incorrect drawing ?
Roger
S4 DHC
S4 DHC
- oldelanman
- Coveted Fifth Gear
- Posts: 1930
- Joined: 02 Jan 2008
Page 306 in the rear suspension chapter. It as Lotus drawing which appears in the same chapter of my manual, 36T327, Section D, page 2.
I've never noticed the incorrect drawing either in all those years.....
You could also look here. It seems that the shaft centres should be parellel but not on the same plane.
lotus-elan-f19/prop-orientation-t25151.html#p163497
I've never noticed the incorrect drawing either in all those years.....
You could also look here. It seems that the shaft centres should be parellel but not on the same plane.
lotus-elan-f19/prop-orientation-t25151.html#p163497
Roy
'65 S2
'65 S2
-
elj221c - Fourth Gear
- Posts: 539
- Joined: 12 Sep 2003
Aha thanks.....I was looking in the Chassis and Final Drive sections ! I've never noticed that before either.
Roger
S4 DHC
S4 DHC
- oldelanman
- Coveted Fifth Gear
- Posts: 1930
- Joined: 02 Jan 2008
elj221c wrote: It seems that the shaft centres should be parellel but not on the same plane
If they are parallel the articulation angles will be equal and it is possible to balance the sine waves.
They aren't parallel, you wouldn't notice the difference, and there is little that can be adjusted even if for some strange reason someone might think they needed to.
- AHM
- Coveted Fifth Gear
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: 19 Apr 2004
I always understood that prop shafts should never run in a straight line, but be arranged so that the joints work a little as they spin. This is because if they are perfectly straight they will vibrate more. If you look at other installations on cars and boats, you will find this is the universal arrangement. I imagine it is better for the joints to do a little work to spread the wear on them, too. So what you have is correct.
regards
Richard
regards
Richard
- ricarbo
- Third Gear
- Posts: 264
- Joined: 14 Apr 2010
14 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Total Online:
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests