Jump to content

Effect Of Herald's Longer Wheelbase


Recommended Posts

Was looking at a swing spring conversion to a Mk1 Herald for the GRP body project. I've read of the need for the heavier front sway bar, but will the longer wheelbase and even more flexible chassis of the Herald negate some of the sway bars effectiveness?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you say Mk1 Herald...... do you mean it actually has the Mk1 chassis?  They really are very feeble and suffer breakages in scary places, even with 948 engines.  Would strongly suggest holding on for a later chassis.........

 

To answer (sort of) your actual question, I suspect that the lighter body and lower C of G will mean that the standard ARB would be ok.  I know that when I tried a thicker ARB on my Herald without the swing spring (just lowered) it really spoiled the handling and gave horrible understeer.

 

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the thoughts Nick.

Not sure what chassis is what really. Herald I've agreed to buy has a 1200 engine and drum brakes and is a Saloon. I suspect that this does not help ID it.

I intend to substantially brace and stiffen the chassis. I recall that you have said before that they are feeble - how specifically are they different?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunate day yesterday - found oil in coolant  of VW T4 fun-truck. Anticipating added expense meant that I have pulled the pin on buying the Herald and spare chassis for now - if anyone wants the details of the seller I'm happy to pass them on.

Nick from what little I have read on the Mk1 chassis the suspension mounts that bolt to the chassis seem less well supported than the Mk2 chassis - they do not have the inner sheet support. As a consequence the fatigue cracks may be from this as much as the reduced chassis metal - the lack of support would mean added movement and 'work' and hence fatigue - a theory anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neil, 

 

Which engine in the T4 and does it have an oil/water oil cooler?  I think all the TDIs (1.9 or 2.5) and 2.5 petrols have them, possibly the 2.0 as well.  If so, the oil cooler failure is reasonably common but a fairly cheap fix.  Biggest hassle is getting the oil out of the cooling system before it kills all the hoses.

 

I think your chassis problem summary is accurate as far as it goes.  I've seen nasty pics of the main rails cracked/snapped just behind the rearmost front wishbone mounts and also around the diff mounts.  The Mk2 effort is very different and much stronger.  There's at least one pretty helpful thread on the CT forum.  Bill Davies (Rarebits) is an expert on these.

 

Cheers

 

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick, it's a 2.5 petrol running on LPG - a bit of a workhorse but doubles as race car tow car and family truck. They're a prick of a thing to work on, you really realise how well Toyota doe engine bays after a head gasket change on a T4.

I was going to flush the coolant etc, but now I'll wait and get the heat exchanger.

Re the Mk1 chassis - I'd be interested in how the chassis would respond to a tunnel and some bracing to the top damper mount - are there are suspension geometry changes between them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there is any doubt on the heat exchanger failure, the check I've used in the past is disconnect and link the water pipes, then run the engine.  In my case, oil appeared in the water pipe stubs almost immediately.  Of course, on a MK2 Golf, access isn't too awful......

 

Don't really know the answer on the chassis/suspension geometry.  I think the front turrets are different (due to chassis fixing and engine mount arrangements) but the rest the same.  I've never owned one or really even seen one so I'm just reporting what I've picked up from reading.  People like Bill Davies (Rarebits on CT) and Andy Mace (Herald 948 on CT) are the experts.  Me, I'd hold out for the later chassis, though I suppose the question does arise as to which one your tub was intended for.  I also wonder if your fibreglass tub might be rather stronger than the notoriously floppy Herald shell.

 

Cheers

 

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

difficult to say if it is stiffer - GRP does not age well, what with ester loss and micro-cracking, plus the previous owners cutting it about a fair bit.

Good idea you have given me, I'll measure the chassis gaps in the floor of the body. The issue I have is that Herald chassis of any kind are quite rare - let alone ones without rust and I need most of a car to make the conversion - a vitesse would be ideal but they are rare. The front turrets are different, with the Mk1 lacking the central bracing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...