Parabolix

If I were to fit parabolix is it advisable to start with replacing the rear
first or ought one really to replace all four at once.

I have a suspicion that the springs at the back are rather tired given the
decided list to port at the rear, my recent additions have been adding some
weight so I guess I will need to do sommat about the springs eventually.


--
Larry
Series 3 rust and holes

"Larry" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> If I were to fit parabolix is it advisable to start with replacing the
> rear
> first or ought one really to replace all four at once.
>
> I have a suspicion that the springs at the back are rather tired given the
> decided list to port at the rear, my recent additions have been adding
> some
> weight so I guess I will need to do sommat about the springs eventually.

If the list to port is only at the rear, I'd check the chassis very, very
carefully! ;-)
Seriously though, replace them as a set of 4 due to the different
characteristics, it could make the vehicle unstable (relative!) to drive.
Badger.

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:49:37 +0100, "Larry" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>If I were to fit parabolix is it advisable to start with replacing the rear
>first or ought one really to replace all four at once.
>
>I have a suspicion that the springs at the back are rather tired given the
>decided list to port at the rear, my recent additions have been adding some
>weight so I guess I will need to do sommat about the springs eventually.

I think just replacing one set would give it a ride like a kangaroo.
Change all 4

Alex

Oh I know my chassis intimately and all the patches

The shockers are truly shocking, they might as well not be there, if this
were any other car I had ever had before they would have been replaced as it
is they are nought but the image of what you might find if you go diving for
the titanic

In times past my limo had air suspension, realy neat. You might think a
landie is the ultimate tow vehicle but it aint.


--
þT

L'autisme c'est moi

"Space folds, and folded space bends, and bent folded space contracts and
expands unevenly in every way unconcievable except to someone who does not
believe in the laws of mathematics"




"Badger" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Larry" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> If the list to port is only at the rear, I'd check the chassis very, very
> carefully! ;-)
> Seriously though, replace them as a set of 4 due to the different
> characteristics, it could make the vehicle unstable (relative!) to drive.
> Badger.
>
>

As I feared mucho expenso


--
Larry
Series 3 rust and holes

--
Larry
Series 3 rust and holes



"Alex" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:49:37 +0100, "Larry" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
..
>
> I think just replacing one set would give it a ride like a kangaroo.
> Change all 4
>
> Alex

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 23:07:10 +0100, "Larry" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>As I feared mucho expenso
>
>
>--
>Larry
>Series 3 rust and holes

Why not just use standard springs? Tuppence each... I reckon most
people who get parabolics and think 'wow' would be almost as happy
with new standard springs as the old ones are invariably rusted solid.


--

Tim Hobbs

'58 Series 2 88" aka "Stig"
'77 101FC Ambulance aka "Burrt"
'03 Volvo V70

Doesn't sound like anyone here has actually tried it, so i challenge you to
do it and give us a first-hand account of the pros and cons. i can't really
see it as being all that much of an issue. if you did put parabolics on one
end though, make absolutely certain that you put new shocks in that end, as
rusty old springs can, to a certian degree, double as shocks. whereas shiny
new parabolics have almost no absorbing properties.

try it out first on some slow trips, then give it a crack.

Sam.

>
> --
> Larry
> Series 3 rust and holes
>
> --
> Larry
> Series 3 rust and holes
>
>
>
> "Alex" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:49:37 +0100, "Larry" <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> .
> >
> > I think just replacing one set would give it a ride like a kangaroo.
> > Change all 4
> >
> > Alex
>
>

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 14:37:43 +1000, "Samuel"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Doesn't sound like anyone here has actually tried it, so i challenge you to
>do it and give us a first-hand account of the pros and cons. i can't really
>see it as being all that much of an issue. if you did put parabolics on one
>end though, make absolutely certain that you put new shocks in that end, as
>rusty old springs can, to a certian degree, double as shocks. whereas shiny
>new parabolics have almost no absorbing properties.
>

Well no, I havn't tried it with parabolics, but I've got a SII 109"
which somebody decided to fit mis-matched spring sets to, and the ride
is apalling.

Alex

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:10:46 GMT, Alex <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 14:37:43 +1000, "Samuel"
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Doesn't sound like anyone here has actually tried it, so i challenge you to
>>do it and give us a first-hand account of the pros and cons. i can't really
>>see it as being all that much of an issue. if you did put parabolics on one
>>end though, make absolutely certain that you put new shocks in that end, as
>>rusty old springs can, to a certian degree, double as shocks. whereas shiny
>>new parabolics have almost no absorbing properties.
>>
>
>Well no, I havn't tried it with parabolics, but I've got a SII 109"
>which somebody decided to fit mis-matched spring sets to, and the ride
>is apalling.
>
>Alex


and id do your homework on parabolics as well,

paddocks are selling them dirt cheap, but take a look at tic
engineering ( something like that, im sure someone will correct me and
put the correct web site up for me) They sell a kit and its 2/ 3 times
what paddocks charge,

i spoke to them the other week and they said that there stuff is far
far supperior and cannot be compared to paddocks.

i was gunna go the parra way, but decided coil rides what im after so
coil suspension it is.

not all parabolics do the same!!!!!!!!!!!

regards


andy

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:49:37 +0100, "Larry" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>If I were to fit parabolix is it advisable to start with replacing the rear
>first or ought one really to replace all four at once.
>
>I have a suspicion that the springs at the back are rather tired given the
>decided list to port at the rear, my recent additions have been adding some
>weight so I guess I will need to do sommat about the springs eventually.

My mate put a set of the cheap paddocks parabolics on the rear of his
2A and left the front alone on its tired original springs.

He never had any problems with the landy after this! I dont see why
you should.

The springs wear differently anyway. rear ones seem to get more worn
since they take the brunt of any heavy loads! With his new set on, the
landy was a lot better and it made it a lot more confortable and
stopped the tyres rubbing on the underside of the tub!.

however..

I've got a set of 'proper' parabolics (rocky mountain ones). I say
'proper' because mine have had a completely different effect to the
cheap paddocks ones that my mate got!

Between my landy owning mates, weve done (all on SWB 2A's and 3's):

- rocky mountain parabolics with gas shocks
- chris perfects parabolics (TIC?) not sure what he did with the
shocks!
- paddocks cheap parabolics on the back only with gas shocks.
- new normal spec springs with new standard shocks

my opionins on each:

new standard shocks and springs are the cheapest option. Didnt make
that much difference to the ride of the landy except get rid of the
unevenness/sag of the old springs. Still as rattly and bone jarring
ove bumps as ever! Had started visibly sagging again at the back
within a year or so.

paddocks cheap parabolics and cheap gas shocks:
improved the landy over the old springs and meant we could put stuff
in the back again!. They wont really take any more weight that the
standard springs do though, so it still didnt like having a lot of
crap in the back when we went away for the week and he got all the
groups kit in there.
A lot softer and less jearring than the new standard springs! well
worth considering over putting new normal springs on (since it wasnt
_that_ much more costly)
I'd consider these as being better than normal springs but not as good
as the more expensive parabolic springs.

The proper rocky mountain and chris perfect springs are a fair bit
more pricey - but you can see why!. My rocky mountain ones gave my
landy an extra couple of inches of height - which is still there 4
years later! wheras normal ones will sag again pretty speedily.

They can also take an awful lot more weight! I filled my landy floor
to ceiling with bricks and hardcore and there was still some
suspension left at the back. Doesnt seem to notice most loads!

Once the springs softened up and wore in a bit (took 6 months!) the
ride became much nicer than the paddocks springs.

With a bit of weight in the back my landy rides almost as nicely as a
coil sprung one! You have a camper conversion in the back of yours
dont you? - so i think these springs would be well suited for it.

If i were doing it all again now!-

I wouldnt even bother considering new standard springs and shocks as
it seems a waste of time. If you are on a budget go for the cheap
paddocks ones with the cheap gas shocks - consider heavy duty rear's
too.
If you have a bit more cash spare get a proper set of springs (doesnt
seem much in it between the different brands). Get the cheap gas
shocks too. You will then have more capacity to load the landy up and
get an even nicer ride which will last longer.

Hope that helps you larry!

Hmm, wheels grounding on the tub, I wondered what the noise was when I go
round corners too quick

The reason I reckon a decent set of parabolix is necessary is indeed the
extra weight due to the conversion to a camper, which is not helping a set
of springs that were sagging to begin with.

I used to have air shocks(the pump up kind) on my limo along with coils big
enough for a truck. Air suspension was fun, you could raise the back
considerably which was useful when wading fords (don't ask)

As I said in the post, the shockers look as if they have never been replaced
in 30 years so there is no way I would change the springs without seeing to
them as well.

Problem is of course the expence as I can't afford anything that is not
strictly necessary at the moment, but it is something in mind for the
future.

(along with a new engine)


--
Larry
Series 3 rust and holes


"Tom Woods" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:49:37 +0100, "Larry" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >If I were to fit parabolix is it advisable to start with replacing the
rear
> >first or ought one really to replace all four at once.
> >
> >I have a suspicion that the springs at the back are rather tired given
the
> >decided list to port at the rear, my recent additions have been adding
some
> >weight so I guess I will need to do sommat about the springs eventually.
>
> My mate put a set of the cheap paddocks parabolics on the rear of his
> 2A and left the front alone on its tired original springs.
>
> He never had any problems with the landy after this! I dont see why
> you should.
>
> The springs wear differently anyway. rear ones seem to get more worn
> since they take the brunt of any heavy loads! With his new set on, the
> landy was a lot better and it made it a lot more confortable and
> stopped the tyres rubbing on the underside of the tub!.
>
> however..
>
> I've got a set of 'proper' parabolics (rocky mountain ones). I say
> 'proper' because mine have had a completely different effect to the
> cheap paddocks ones that my mate got!
>
> Between my landy owning mates, weve done (all on SWB 2A's and 3's):
>
> - rocky mountain parabolics with gas shocks
> - chris perfects parabolics (TIC?) not sure what he did with the
> shocks!
> - paddocks cheap parabolics on the back only with gas shocks.
> - new normal spec springs with new standard shocks
>
> my opionins on each:
>
> new standard shocks and springs are the cheapest option. Didnt make
> that much difference to the ride of the landy except get rid of the
> unevenness/sag of the old springs. Still as rattly and bone jarring
> ove bumps as ever! Had started visibly sagging again at the back
> within a year or so.
>
> paddocks cheap parabolics and cheap gas shocks:
> improved the landy over the old springs and meant we could put stuff
> in the back again!. They wont really take any more weight that the
> standard springs do though, so it still didnt like having a lot of
> crap in the back when we went away for the week and he got all the
> groups kit in there.
> A lot softer and less jearring than the new standard springs! well
> worth considering over putting new normal springs on (since it wasnt
> _that_ much more costly)
> I'd consider these as being better than normal springs but not as good
> as the more expensive parabolic springs.
>
> The proper rocky mountain and chris perfect springs are a fair bit
> more pricey - but you can see why!. My rocky mountain ones gave my
> landy an extra couple of inches of height - which is still there 4
> years later! wheras normal ones will sag again pretty speedily.
>
> They can also take an awful lot more weight! I filled my landy floor
> to ceiling with bricks and hardcore and there was still some
> suspension left at the back. Doesnt seem to notice most loads!
>
> Once the springs softened up and wore in a bit (took 6 months!) the
> ride became much nicer than the paddocks springs.
>
> With a bit of weight in the back my landy rides almost as nicely as a
> coil sprung one! You have a camper conversion in the back of yours
> dont you? - so i think these springs would be well suited for it.
>
> If i were doing it all again now!-
>
> I wouldnt even bother considering new standard springs and shocks as
> it seems a waste of time. If you are on a budget go for the cheap
> paddocks ones with the cheap gas shocks - consider heavy duty rear's
> too.
> If you have a bit more cash spare get a proper set of springs (doesnt
> seem much in it between the different brands). Get the cheap gas
> shocks too. You will then have more capacity to load the landy up and
> get an even nicer ride which will last longer.
>
> Hope that helps you larry!
>
>
>
>
>
>

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 22:28:22 +0100, "Larry" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Hmm, wheels grounding on the tub, I wondered what the noise was when I go
>round corners too quick

just look under there and see if there is a shiny patch - if there is
then theyve been rubbing!

>The reason I reckon a decent set of parabolix is necessary is indeed the
>extra weight due to the conversion to a camper, which is not helping a set
>of springs that were sagging to begin with.

make sure you look at the heavy duty parabolics then (they mostly come
in 2 flavours - normal and heavy duty)

>I used to have air shocks(the pump up kind) on my limo along with coils big
>enough for a truck. Air suspension was fun, you could raise the back
>considerably which was useful when wading fords (don't ask)

You could fit them air helper thingys between the springs and the
chassis on the back. I've seen it done on a 101.

>As I said in the post, the shockers look as if they have never been replaced
>in 30 years so there is no way I would change the springs without seeing to
>them as well.

You may have to change the shocks too. normal shocks wouldnt fit on
with my springs due to the increase in height!

>Problem is of course the expence as I can't afford anything that is not
>strictly necessary at the moment, but it is something in mind for the
>future.
>
>(along with a new engine)

On or around Tue, 28 Jun 2005 20:37:38 +0100, Tom Woods
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>make sure you look at the heavy duty parabolics then (they mostly come
>in 2 flavours - normal and heavy duty)

Chris Perfect who was selling spanish ones (now I suspect from somewhere
else, in fact - they changed somewhere along the line) had several kinds of
rear springs, from a 2-leaf for light use and trialling on SWB through
2+helper, 3-leaf, 3+helper and 4 leaf, maybe not all simultaneously. The
4-leaf were super-heavy-duty for heavy 109s.


--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"Quos deus vult perdere, prius dementat" Euripedes, quoted in
Boswell's "Johnson".