Lomax 223 anti roll bar

Discuss all things technical

Moderator: moderator

Rocketman1955
Posts: 80
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2018 4:31 pm
CSC Membership Number: 2163
Country: UK
Region: Essex

Re: Lomax 223 anti roll bar

Post by Rocketman1955 » Fri Sep 20, 2024 7:46 pm

Thanks for the explanation. I have only previously seen linking the rear dummy and rear active arms to enable both rear springs to support the single active rear arm to increase load carrying capacity.
Affecting handling has not been mentioned.
In a ‘straight on speed bump type contact’ with a 4 wheel car the interaction between front and rear wheels on the same side is clear.
In a 3 wheeler with the single rear wheel being in the centre there is ‘very little’ rear arm deflection / spring load applied during roll, so it should not change the preload on the front on that side significantly.
However, it clearly does or something else is happening!

When only the front spring on the non-active rear arm side was adjusted to achieve the ride height, the cylinder was fully against the front stop. In that condition, rolling towards the unlinked side is quite severe.
Presumably if both cylinders were locked forwards as you suggest, it would generate the same severe roll both right and left (assuming the front springs are both the same)

Other than fit a front or rear anti roll bar, stiffer front springs could be fitted to reduce the roll and hopefully reduce the roll differential turning right & left. (the influence of the single active rear spring on the stiffer front springs should be less significant)
Has anyone experience of Lomax 223 roll using the 80 or 100% uprated front springs that are advertised? (The car does not currently have a dummy arm to link the rear arms)

hutchii
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 3:56 pm
CSC Membership Number: 1865
Country: UK
Region: SE

Re: Lomax 223 anti roll bar

Post by hutchii » Wed Oct 09, 2024 5:47 pm

Hello Ron.
When I bought my 223 back in 2009 I quickly realised that the body roll terrified me if corners were taken at anywhere near the speed I thought should be possible! This despite the car already being fitted with what I assume was an Ami ARB.
It was a fairly simple job to attach an additional bar from a Bedford Rascal. Two bits of box section modified and welded to the front arms, and the bar 'U' bolts attached to the cross member under the gearbox.
I used modified drop links from an Astra to connect the box section to the ends of the
bar.
Hope this might help.
Cornering became much more fun!

Davidm
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:10 pm
CSC Membership Number: 2205
Country: United Kingdom
Region: Cumbria

Re: Lomax 223 anti roll bar

Post by Davidm » Thu Oct 10, 2024 8:19 pm

Ron
Do you have the half-moon rubber blocks fitted which progressively stiffen the suspension as the arms rise ?
(They are called bump stops on the ECAS site)
Davidm

Rocketman1955
Posts: 80
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2018 4:31 pm
CSC Membership Number: 2163
Country: UK
Region: Essex

Re: Lomax 223 anti roll bar

Post by Rocketman1955 » Fri Jan 03, 2025 5:48 pm

I have now had a resigned ARB made that uses the original front suspension arm fixings. The routing was quite demanding to achieve adequate dynamic clearances to the steering column and rear gearbox support. The part was made by Wiz-Parts who did an excellent job with exacting tolerances and at a reasonable price for a bespoke part - I would recommend them.
Without the ARB it was uncomfortable to drive, fortunately the handling has now been restored to its prior acceptable level!

Post Reply