johne

Might have been a bit stronger if the wiggly reinforcer was somehow welded to the vertical face as well as the top and bottom.

Is it really that long ago I posted about this? Anyway I got around to doing a bit more paint removal on my second chassis and found these cracks around the rear lower wishbone mounting hole, from 12 o'clock to 2 and 5o'clock to 7. So, I thought I'd cut out the corresponding area on the original chassis to use as a replacement section and - as the other two pics show - the inside shows evidence of a dent, but the outside seems flattish apart from the imprint of the shim and the roughness in the bottom left, I assume it's been filled with weld. Maybe I've not been very observant, but is this a common problem area (I know, it's a 50 year old car), or is it maybe related to the quality of the roads in NZ - more unsealed roads and potholes - so far that's 3 damaged areas at the rear lower wishbone mount on 2 chassis. My latest plan is to cut out a repair section from the middle of the spare chassis and fit that. John.

Might be worth checking that both rear half shafts are the same length. Later cars should have the longer shafts and more negative camber on the rear wheels. One MkIV that I bought had one of each - though it was only a parts car, so I didn't experience what it was like to drive.. John.

It's a MkIV, swing spring, so I guess it does.

Hi Pete and Colin, I've got a spare chassis that I could remove one from. I just thought I'd ask in case there were new bits around somewhere that could save me a bit of cutting, and also the more bits I take off the spare chassis, the more it turns into a scrap chassis!

HI, does anyone know if any suppliers stock the bracket that's welded to the chassis and which the anti roll bar clamps to, for a mkIV Spitfire. From the Canley Classics website it looks like part no 155309 and is shaped like a squashed M with four holes in it. Thanks, John.

It's ok, I won't. Just want to find out where I'm starting from, then I might be able to work out where I'm going.

Just been thinking about the height of the chassis from the ground and realised that it doesn't really matter as long as it's level side to side. Having the front or rear higher should only move the intersection points along the centre line if it's all straight. John.

Hi, I'm part way through dismantling a late MkIV Spitfire and have just taken the front suspension apart. The rhs looked perfectly normal with respect to the number of shims behind the wishbones, but the lhs had about 1/2" of shims on the rear arm and 1/4" on the front and they were quite a variety of shapes and thicknesses! I was wondering if this was down to the fact that someone had tried to align all 4 wheels with the currently fitted mixture of rear half shafts (short on the right and the correct longer one on the left). But, I think I'll check the chassis isn't twisted before I go much further. Looking at the diagram in the ROM and Haynes shows a plan view with diagonals which should intersect nicely on the centreline of the chassis. They give locations (A and E) for setting up the chassis to be horizontal with heights from the ground, but there is no side view to see where the heights are measured from. Is point A one of the front over rider mounts, is E the body mount or shock mounting hole? Thanks, John.

Thanks for the encouraging replies, but I think I'll see if I can find a better chassis which has not been so obviously repaired, that way hopefully I'll avoid any possible questions and subsequent strip downs when I get to the re-registration inspection - I had a similar experience when I imported my Stag, there were obviously some repairs, which had passed an MoT in the UK and continue to pass the equivalent WoF in NZ, but the stricter initial inspection meant that the paint on the underside had to be removed and the welding inspected. John.

Here are a couple of photos. The first one hopefully shows the increased width of the chassis due to the plate welded on the outside and the second shows the bowed inner repair. I guess the best solution is another chassis.

The bits of Spitfire piled up in the garage.....

I'm away from the car for a few days but I should be able to get a photo next week.

Hi Pete, The patch on the outside of the rail only extends as far forward as the rearmost two hole bracket - the one which holds a narrow plate with two threaded holes - for the suspension tower, though the patches on the other 3 sides are a little longer as they don't run into the two hole bracket. On closer examination the plate on the inside of the rail is bowed so I'm not sure that the nut holding the wishbone bracket would sit flat and so end up bending the threaded stud, but otherwise the weld quality looks good (as far as I can tell without destroying it to check!) I recall reading somewhere in the dim and distant past that there is a reinforcing bulkhead inside the main rail in the area, the other rail inner face has a small change in section just in front of the wishbone bracket which would seem to support this thought. Again, of course, I've no way of checking what the repaired side is like without taking it apart. Thanks for the quick reply, John.

Hi, I've just been looking at the nice shiny painted chassis of the MKIV Spitfire that I bought as a collection of boxes a few weeks ago and have found that one of the main rails has been patched from just in front of the front outrigger up to the bracket for the suspension tower. All 4 sides of the chassis rail have been patched so the lower wishbone rear bracket will be on the outside face of the patch and will be sitting 2 or 3 mm outboard of where it should be and that's if the patch is flat against the original rail. I'm thinking that this will twist the lower wishbone and try to pivot the trunnion forwards and it would take an unfeasible number of shims behind the front bracket to even the wishbone out and if I did that the trunnion would then be too far out and ruin the suspension geometry that way. I'd like your comments and suggestions, do you think it's as serious a problem as I do and what could be done to correct it.? Thanks, John.