Lomax 223 rear wheel problems.

[Karl Mulcahy]

The welding on the extension piece is not Citroen but it looks like a coded airframe weld compared to the one on ours.

The seam along the inside and outside of the arm itself is a Citroen weld. I believe it is done by a special method unique to this application. I have cut several arms open and it is invariably a perfect weld with 100% penetration and no flaws. Looks like shit outside though. For kit cars it can be lightly dressed with a soft pad on a grinder and given a smear of body filler before 2K paint. I know the preferred method for a Lomax is a very heavy application of black bitumen underseal but that hides the advance of corrosion as well as looking unpleasant.

[Ken Hanna]

Karl,
100% in agreemant with your comments and would add that I've never known a suspension arm to fail due to a problem with the welding joining its halves, since failure of the parent metal remote from the weld is the usual problem on those cars which are pushed to the limit, such as on Raid Australia
.

The welds on some earlier suspension arms looked like this...
.
Manual weld on suspension arm? by slcchassis, on Flickr

[Ken Hanna]

Whereas the later ones seem to have been 'submerged arc'?
It may look as rough as a badger's back end, but it's well up to the job...
.
IMG_3822 by slcchassis, on Flickr

[Mendip.Wursel]

Just a note in that you say is it "looks like I would have to remove the bodywork to slide the arm off the bearing".... I have removed the whole rear arm assemble under my Lomax without having to cut the bodywork to the side. There was space to just drop it out from below. From memory there was only about 4no bolts holding everything in place.

[Rocketman1955]

I have a spare 223 rear arm that has deformed at the weld to the extension piece just behind the brake backplate.
Both track and camber are affected.
The extension piece is still parallel with the axle tube and the arm itself looks ok.
I would rather repair the arm than scrap it.
Does anyone still provide a re-work service to cut, re-weld and reinforce the stub axle that will be a durable fix?
Thanks,

[CSC1540]

If its any help there is a LOMAX 223 -- REAR SUSPENSION CONVERSION ARM on ebay number 165395086546


Ray

[AlanM]

I have a Lomax 224 with doors. Personally I prefer a body without doors and recently I purchased a door-less NOS (New Old Stock) Lomax 223 kit dating from April 1990 along with a huge amount of parts. The kit had never been built up as such. I purchased it off the original buyer who, believe it or not, purchased three 2CV donors before he bought one with a good chassis.

He modified the chassis to take the single rear wheel, fitted the rear swinging arm, and lay the body on the rolling chassis and there its sat for the last 30 plus years.

The modified Lomax swinging arm has never been used on the road and is completely original. The drum rotates freely. Although I have stripped down the rolling chassis and removed the rear axle tube complete with swinging arm I haven’t stripped the swinging arm off the axle tube.

The rear axle assembly modified for the 3-wheeler 223, complete with swinging arm, brakes and modified tie-rod banjo is for sale at £75.

The chassis is £50 and if anyone is after a body with doors the cost is £300.

Potential buyer to collect from Peterborough, or I might be willing to deliver locally for an agreed price.

Alan

[Rocketman1955]

This is an interesting thread regarding integrity of 223 rear arm extensions. As a recent owner of a 223 and an ex-engineer, the reports of in-service changes to rear wheel alignment are a concern.

The source of these conversions needs to be established before the integrity of the design can be established. However, a web search for 223 chassis / rear arms only shows direct welding of the extension piece to the rear of the backplate/stub axles. None of them I can find show any reinforcing webbing unless specifically added by the owner later.

Pictures of mis-aligned wheels suggest it is the weld to the stub axle/back plate that is deforming.
My own Lomax as purchased had 2deg+ tracking to the left (see photo) – good for French round abouts, but not some UK junctions! It had 2 large triangular vertical webs between the extension piece and the brake backplate. The wheel camber was less than 0.5deg. (top tipped to the right of the vehicle - RHS active arm). So the webs have kept the wheel ~ vertical, but the weld has allowed the wheel effectively to turn to the left. Again the deformation is at the weld behind the backplate.
The car had done in excess off 30000miles since conversion including continental touring with a trailer; so heavy use, presumably on the original arm.
I have now replaced the original deformed arm.

The replacement arm (origin & duty unknown, but it had been on the road) runs true in tracking with a ~1deg camber top to the right. It has done about 1000miles since being fitted and has not deformed, or maybe I have not hit any big enough potholes yet!

As a contingency for failure I do not think just getting another replacement arm is the answer – it will most likely fail in the same way.
My fix would be to rework an arm, reweld the joint and weld 3 triangular gussets at 120deg spacing to the back of the backplate to maximum the diameter and along the length of the extension piece.
That should totally constrain the stub axle alignment.

Gussets/webs were mentioned earlier in this post – does anyone have a road proven fix?
I still need someone who can rework it!

[AlanM]

Interesting but it poses another question. I remember reading, in I think the eighties, that a Lomax option was twin rear wheels set close together. At the time that appealed to me and I think that if I had bought a Lomax at that time it is an option I would have chosen. Evidently it was discontinued as it wasn’t eligible for the cheaper 3-wheeler road tax.

Years later as the owner of Mungo (a 224) I cannot see how a standard body would be long enough at the rear end to hide two rear wheels, even though set fairly close together; was the body longer?

So why would I have gone for what is effectively a 3-wheeler with four wheels? The simple answer is I always thought the single rear wheel arrangement looked a bit weak (the Pembleton has a similar arrangement but the rear axle tube is modified and re-located while the swinging arm remains virtually standard) however I appreciate that a Lomax retains a standard chassis. The second reason is I just like to idea of double rear wheels at the back, for a Continental tour etc. it would carry as much weight as a standard 2CV which means you could fit the ‘Daddy’ of all boot racks. Third I just like the look of two rear wheels; if you’re going to be different you might as well go the whole hog!

Finally if any member has, what must be a very rare beast, I would love to hear about it and your impressions of the car.

Alan

[moon monkey]

There are currently 6 twin-rear-wheel "mock" 223s you can view in the register.

https://www.totalrewind.org/lomax

Search for "mock" in the "Notes".


Here's are some photos showing more details of the rear:

https://www.totalrewind.org/lomax/photo ... 23%20b.jpg
https://www.totalrewind.org/lomax/photo ... ar_223.jpg