Reply to "dickruzzindesign@aol.com"

Thanks Mike for your input.

Johnny,
Since I have always worked with drawings and I enjoy doing it I might make a three view full size drawing of the rear suspension since the pick-up points are few and simply organized. I can then, as it is currently adjusted, run it through the motions with the shocks off on the drawing twice, with the original T bar and also with a double joint bar, I will record that motion on paper. I will measure both sides and compare them as they may be slightly different.

Then I can create the required change and adjust the trailing links on the drawing accordingly. I will measure the Heims threads so I can make the required movement of the trailing links on the drawing and then translate them on the car, preserving the alignment.

With a drawing I can also move the bridge and inboard pick-up point for the upper bar toward the center of the car to see how that effects the upper hub carrier and trailing links. Maybe about five millimeters. That will also show
what happens when cornering. My theory is that camber diminishes on the left wheel if the right wheel is loaded, causing camber to increase there.

That will be an interesting study, I might engage Werner Meier who is a GM chassis engineer to review my "papers", even help me define the study plan. He is the one who spotted my bridge moving when shifting from first to reverse and he made the new bridge for my car.

After that I would drive the car and then have the suspension alignment checked and adjusted if required.

The only fly in the ointment is the fact that the Mangusta, as other low volume cars of the era, is not dimensionally perfect. When my car was aligned on a computer driven machine the technician found it to be .04% off front to rear so he compensated for that. He said that was the best he could do because the chassis was not geometrically perfect. He did a great job.

Dick Ruzzin