MG-Cars.net

Welcome to our resource for MG Car Information.

Recommendations

Parts

MG parts spares and accessories are available for MG T Series (TA, MG TB, MG TC, MG TD, MG TF), Magnette, MGA, Twin cam, MGB, MGBGT, MGC, MGC GT, MG Midget, Sprite and other MG models from British car spares company LBCarCo.

MG MGA - New front coil springs

Hello all. I recently finished rebuilding the front suspension on my MGA using Moss suspension rebuild kit (#264-338) and new front coil springs (#264-390). With everything now reassembled and the car sitting back on ground, the front wing wheel arch is now about 1.5" higher than it used to be.

The unsprung height of the old coil springs I removed are roughly 9-5/16", putting the highest point of the wheel arch at about 26-1/2" from the ground. According to info I found in the archives, that is just about the right height.

I didn't measure the unsprung height of the new coil springs, but with them installed the same point on the wheel arch is now 28" from the ground.

This looks a bit odd to my eye, but from what I found in the archives, others are successfully using these springs (same springs as Twin Cam, MKII Deluxe, and MGB-GT). So my question at this point is whether I can realistically expect the front springs to "settle" as much as 1.5" once I start driving the car?
Andy Bounsall

Here's what the front wheel arch looked like before.



Andy Bounsall

And here's how it looks now. (Different wheels, yes...but the same tires).


Andy Bounsall

One of the best ways to lower the front end back down, is to deepen the spring pans. Much better than cutting the springs.




k brown

Andy, did you keep the lower a-arm pivot nuts loose until you dropped the car back down? If you tightened it all up while still on jackstands, the rubber bushings will stay in that position and add more "spring" as they are stressed more when lowered. This will result in you what you are seeing.

Chuck
C Schaefer

Andy,
It should look better when you put the engine back in.

LOL, sorry, couldn't resist. It does look very high, can you refit the old springs, or should I say are the old springs undamaged? If they are not damaged or badly pitted I would paint them up and refit them. Send the new ones back to Moss, together with the pictures.

Neil
Neil McGurk

Andy,

You cannot use the front coil springs from a mga twin cam on a pushrod MGA. The Twin Cam engine is much heavier than the pushrod engine and the pushrod car would sit much higher at the front.
Details are at:

http://www.angelfire.com/amiga/mga/index.html

Note there is an error in some MG part number publications. They forgot to change the part number of the springs for the MGA Deluxe back to the pushrod number when it replaced the Twin Cam. Some publications show the Deluxe with Twin Cam springs and this is incorrect.

Mick
Mick Anderson

Mick has it right - if you want a higher rate spring you can get them, but otherwise go for the proper spring meant for your car to get correct6 ride height.

Why did you select the Twincam springs?
Bill Spohn

I found my research. You shouldn't really have a problem with the 264-390 springs you chose. I think that I chose the same springs after I thought my fronts were sagging a bit from age. They were originals. And yes, now sits a bit higher than the older originals but not as high as your photos. When I took my orignals out, the free length was still at spec.

Here is some research that I did when I was chosing springs. It is a compilation of catalog pages and info I found on here on the NET.


C Schaefer

Chuck, nuts on lower A-arm pivots have not been tightened yet.

Neil, the old springs aren't badly pitted, but I decided to replace them because they were diferent lengths - by about 1/4", and the shorter one has 2 stiffeners on it. (See attached photo).

Mick & Bill, the Twin Cam/Deluxe/B-GT springs are what Moss is supplying as the "correct" replacement part for all MGAs. The new springs have the number BHH 1077 on them.

I think you must be correct Mick. Although I didn't measure the new springs, they aren't noticably longer than the old springs. They do seem to be MUCH stiffer though. When jacking the car up under the spring pan, the new springs didn't seem to compess very much before the frame started to lift off the jack stands.

Thanks for the info Mick and Chuck. I'm not entirely sure I know what all the numbers mean, but I'll spend some time trying to make sense of it all.

I have emailed Moss to ask about this. I'm interested to hear what they have to say.

So, for those of you who have replaced the front springs on pushrod MGA, which springs did you use?



Andy Bounsall

Andy,

The correct Moss part number for the coil spring for the pushrod MGA is 264-100. Their catalog and website shows this part as Not Available (NA), which has been the case for many years. The part you purchased, 264-390, is definitely indicated as the Twin Cam application, and has been mentioned, it's much stiffer.

Both a recent Moss catalog (MGA-103, Fall/Winter 2007) and an older one (MGA - 0310, 2003) list the early MGB spring (264-375) as a replacement for 264-100. Note that their webpage for the MGA front suspension doesn't mention this. However, the spring for the early MGB (264-375) is listed as available on the Moss MGB webpage and in their MGB catalog (MGB-76, 2007). Perhaps there is some informtion about using this MGB spring as a replacement on Barney Gaylord's MGA Guru website. You might also consider contacting Cecilia at Scarborough Faire (Pawtucket, RI (mgaparts@aol.com, 401-724-4200)to see what they have available or recommend.

Note, the fact that the two original springs you removed have different free lengths doesn't necessarily imply that one will sit lower than the other when loaded. Springs often develop a shortened free length, but also an increased spring rate, after prolonged loading.

Steve
Steve K

k. brown, you say "deepen the spring pan" - can we have a photo of that please.
Love the lower look and racy windscreen!
Barry
BM Gannon

Andy,

I was just looking at the table Chuck posted. Based on that I would think the T/C (264-390) spring would have only raised the car about a quarter of an inch compared to the pushrod spring (264-100). Also, it seems that the early MGB spring (264-375) is considerably longer, and the later MGB spring (264-380) is longer still. I wonder if you got a 264-380 instead of a 264-390?

Steve
Steve K

Note too - based on the table Chuck prepared - that the 264-385 seems an even better match in free length and spring rate than the 264-390. On the Moss website it lists the 264-385 as a lowering spring for the 1975-1980 MGB. Perhaps you could return the ones you installed for a pair of the 264-385's.
Steve K

Steve, I was working from the online info on Moss's website since I don't have a recent catalog handy. The springs I rec'd have BHH 1077 silk screened on the part along with a sticker baring the Moss p/n 264-390. According to LBCarCo search, these 2 part numbers correspond.

I had noticed that the 264-390 springs were marked as TwinCam & Deluxe on the Moss web page. Before placing the order, I trolled through the archives here and found several discussions where folks had said they used the TwinCam/Deluxe/B-GT springs.

Obviously these are NOT the correct springs for my car. Are they mis-labeled? Did I order the wrong part? I'm quite confused at this point! Hopefully I'll get a reply from Moss tomorrow that'll help to straighten this all out.
Andy Bounsall

Andy,

I'll be interested to learn what you find out. I'm still using the original springs in my 1600 MkII, but have wondered what I would do if I needed to replace them.

Steve
Steve K

I spoke to Scarborough Faire. The early MGB springs that Moss had been offering as a replacement for the pushrod cars were not correct and will not work in the MGA. The end result is the car sits way too high. They don't offer the MGB springs as MGA replacements anymore, so I'm guessing they mislabeled the part. Call them and ask for the right lengths, if they won't help you or can't call SF and she can probably give you the correct measurements. She's aware of the problem since we were just talking about springs.

I've seen firsthand TC/GT springs on the A and it looks fine. Probably helps to have new rear springs at the same time too.

Mark
Mark J Michalak

Andy,
The wishbone bushes on my 1600 Mkll had gone, so when I replaced these (with V8 ones) I replaced the springs as well (there had been a slight lean to one side at the front). I used part no AHH5789 from Brown and Gammons - interestingly these are described as 'coil spring MGB GT 65-74 MGA' The ride height doesn't seem to have been affected. Chuck is right about the wisbone pivot bolts - do not tighten until wheels are on the ground. Cheers, Adrian B.
A Bennett

Andy,
I had the same trouble with '72 BGT springs and took them back out. Here's my solution and it worked out great. Go to the MGB performance section on the Moss website and select -1" Chrome bumper lowering springs. It gave my A about -1/2" stock ride height and a nice stance. My suspension was all rebuilt and seemed to sit higher too, same way with the back as well.
SJS Steinhauer

Personally, I've always felt the A were way under sprung. I run 600 and 650 springs in my street car. Makes a gigantic difference in handling. 900 and 950 in our race cars.

k brown

> It gave my A about -1/2" stock ride height...

SJS, do you mean that with those springs, the front end of your car is about 1/2" BELOW stock?
Andy Bounsall

I'm not sure if Brown & Gammons stocks them, but they list five different front springs for the MGA from 408 lbs/in.--9.28" free length to 600 lbs/in.--7.75" free length.
David Werblow

Yes. With the MGB lowering springs, I am 25.75" at one side and 26" on the other. My car had a hard front end hit years ago plus the front quarters have about 1/4" slop in the hole slots. My personal taste wanted the front end down a little anyway, looks good.
SJS Steinhauer

No reply from Moss yet to my email on this subject. Guess they must be busy?

I have exchanged emails with Cecelia at Scarborough Faire and they apparently do carry the correct AHH5546 springs for the pushrod MGAs.
Andy Bounsall

I used Moss 264-395, found in the preformance section of the MGB catalog. Work great. Lowered the nose by 1" below stock and they have a slightly stiffer rate.
Steve
Steve Meline

Thanks Barry - Will be attending to Boomer today, will take a photo for you. Thank you for you kind words! Here is a photo of "The Pile", my 1957 vintage racer. We were accepted to the Monterey Historic Race last year.


k brown

Modifying the spring pans to suit non-stock springs that are too long is a crazy and expensive way to tackle this.

Just buy the correct springs!

I have no idea why Moss offers all the stiffer, lower MGB springs as performance options when they can't be bothered getting a stock pushrod MGA spring wound for them by the same supplier, but anyone needing the right part can contact Octagon in Vancouver, as they get them from England. I believe the part is AHH-6451 but would have to dig out my catalogues, which I can't do right now as I am at work (although obviously not working....).
Bill Spohn

My thanks to Andy for bringing this to our attention. It looks like we have an incorrect recomendation in the catalogs that needs to be changed ASAP.
The original spec. springs had been unavailable for many years and the substitutes seemed to be functional, but apparently with this feedback we need to go back to the drawing board.
If original spec springs are available I will get them sourced, if not we will look into what it will take to get them manufactured.

Kelvin Dodd
Global Sourcing Engineer
Moss Motors, Ltd.
MGA owner
KJ Dodd

Thanks for taking action on this Kelvin. It's good to know that Moss Motors listens when a customer reports a problem with a part.

In the mean time, I've ordered a pair springs from Scarborough Faire. Cecelia says they are "the correct AHH5546 coil springs (Our #K50), that are made in England". I'll report back with the results when they're installed on my car.
Andy Bounsall

This thread was discussed between 04/03/2008 and 14/03/2008

MG MGA index

This thread is from the archive. The Live MG MGA BBS is active now.