Front struts

pamp

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,017
Reaction score
3
Location
Comox, B.C. CANADA
This may be an ignorant question, but after looking at the excellent detail of some of the members cars, engine compartment, and admiring Andi's strut brace, and as I am about to go into engine detail and researching possible suspension upgrades...I have yet to see this upper strut (camber?) plate on other cars. Would this be specific to the '74?
100_1142.jpg

Thanks and Happy Christmas and a Merry New Year to all!
Al in Comox
 
That's the spacer that should be underneath. My book on the cars doesn't show the spacer and I'm looking at removing mine and fitting longer (stronger springs) to get more travel. Have growm tired of it bottoming out but still want the lower stance!!!
 
I can't understand how the bonnet can close with the spacer at the top.
I've just removed mine and the front bolt hits before the bonnet is closed.
Looks like I might have to cut the bolts off!!!
 
Struts

Hmm... I really saw no such part on the tradition site. Installed underneath...@##$$%&&**
As I said, I believe the suspension should be my next focus. If it has been assembled improperly, not my doing. I just want it to the best possible when I do attack!! All help is welcome and encouraged. Parts List anyone who has started from scratch as I now intend to do. First E9. I was fairly certain though that there is something wrong with the picture. I guess I should send more $$$ to Carl (thanks) and get it right. He has a lowering spring set for reasonable $$ Anyone with input on these? Rats. Every part of this car so far has been, how should I say, done by the...
Thanks,
Al
 
Last edited:
Strut spacers

This topic comes up frequently. Check the archives. Short story: the spacers were necessary to meet DOT bumper height specifications. Chuck them. You can cut the U.S. length bolts, but the shorter EUR bolts are still available from the usual sources. I've seen a bunch of cars where the hood clears with the spacers on top, but it isn't surprising to hear that some don't.
 
To begin with the stance of the e9 is nose high. Get Carl's spring set to bring it down and then get the off camber plate to improve traction in front. The camber plate that he sell cann't be seen once installed and actually raises the front 1/4 in or so. But overall stace is good. Hope this helps explain.
 
Struts

Thanks to all, that solves the mystery. I have no issues with bonnet closure but I see now it is real close on the forward most bolts. Barry, I did do an Eibach spring job some years back on a Jetta my daughter brought home (no prior inspection by Dad) that had been "Lincoln lowered" The springs had been cut and stuff was so loose un-loaded that I was afraid the suspension would fail at the first good whoopty-do. The Eibach kit did the trick for a safe lowering of the car and was reasonably priced if memory serves me correctly. Where did you source your kit, what is the shock brand, and did you do the rear as well?
Thanks again,
Al
 
This topic comes up frequently. Check the archives. Short story: the spacers were necessary to meet DOT bumper height specifications. Chuck them. You can cut the U.S. length bolts, but the shorter EUR bolts are still available from the usual sources. I've seen a bunch of cars where the hood clears with the spacers on top, but it isn't surprising to hear that some don't.

I can't completely agree with your "short" account of the spacer history. I have found them on many non-US market vehicles. This also includes US models that were made before the DOT bumper height and strength regulations, e.g., the earliest 2.8l e9's through 1972. The spacers came in different thicknesses too. Other Non-US models E3/02 had them too, even without the bigger bumpers.

It could be that the factory anticipated some other regulation or had something else in mind regarding average front end height. Could it have been a simple means of adapting to differently weighted objects residing under the hood? A lighter engine or lighter components? Different wheel/tire heights/diameters? One might expect a combination of strut and spring lengths could just as easily have accomplished this, but there are a lot of unanswered mysteries on E9's. (Fender well design that captures additional road debris rather than repelling it? Fender liners, anyone? Who knows, maybe the spacers were an answer to the Ghia folks. As the vehicle gained extra weight by collecting sand and salt, the vehicle height could be raised by removing the spacers?) :lol:

Realoem for the E9 clearly depicts the spacers, but does not provide a BMW part number - even for the Dot compliant vehicles. Notice the part identified as "15" below. In fact, nos. 15, 16 and 17 do not appear to be listed on any of the models - including the later big bumpered ones. ("guide support" 31331101663 is listed). Having explored this issue a long time ago, I believe the spacer is listed by some sources as a "Flat Washer" (part number 31331106059). In some instances, realoem indicates next to the part: "If necessary." This does not account for the different thicknesses I have seen. Compliance with bumper height regulations (if really an issue) or headlamp height (more regulations) could have been less expensively accomplished (for the manufacturer) by reducing front tire pressure. :wink:

In any case, realoem's lack of a specific listing or notation for the spacers on the E9 could be an oversight or more likely something that was considered a superseded - nonessential part.

29.png
 
pamp... I got my set up from Ground Control.
Shocks are Koni - 1198spgc..
Eibach 440 lbs 8" with the adj you can set the height.
camber plates
http://www.ground-control-store.com/products/description.php/II=665/CA=97
GC is not far from me.I took my Coupe up to see Jay,We put it on his lift so he could check out the rear,to get a good perspective on how to build a e30 style of setup.
Maybe Mario can jump in here with a Pic..
His Rear, true coilover were on the bench ready to be shipped out very nice setup,but you need to stiffen up the rear shock tower - wheel well area..

Jay Morris is the founder and owner of Ground Control...

DSC_0060.jpg
 
Suspension

Cool stuff and thanks for the leads. I do all my own welding so it would be nice to see the areas that need the beef as it were. I do not think I want to get back up to the cargo shelf area as the interior is done. I looked at the available rear strut brace and will work up my own design for this. I do not see the necessity of a rear mounted battery for a street car,
the newer wound cell designs are light and safe. As I mentioned on the post for the 2002 addiction, I crashed hard due to a half-shaft failure, up on two wheels as it were. So I will consider this when I look at the upper rear strut mounting as loading at this point surely looks like an issue to the bits at the lower end of the fulcrum.
Al
 
I can't completely agree with your "short" account of the spacer history. I have found them on many non-US market vehicles. This also includes US models that were made before the DOT bumper height and strength regulations, e.g., the earliest 2.8l e9's through 1972. The spacers came in different thicknesses too. Other Non-US models E3/02 had them too, even without the bigger bumpers.



Realoem for the E9 clearly depicts the spacers, but does not provide a BMW part number - even for the Dot compliant vehicles. Notice the part identified as "15" below. In fact, nos. 15, 16 and 17 do not appear to be listed on any of the models - including the later big bumpered ones. ("guide support" 31331101663 is listed). Having explored this issue a long time ago, I believe the spacer is listed by some sources as a "Flat Washer" (part number 31331106059). In some instances, realoem indicates next to the part: "If necessary." This does not account for the different thicknesses I have seen. Compliance with bumper height regulations (if really an issue) or headlamp height (more regulations) could have been less expensively accomplished (for the manufacturer) by reducing front tire pressure. :wink:

In any case, realoem's lack of a specific listing or notation for the spacers on the E9 could be an oversight or more likely something that was considered a superseded - nonessential part.

29.png
Realoem was cobbled together years ago and has not been updated since. At that time, information for parts no longer available was omitted. It is of questionable value for determining authenticity since it is missing a lot of original information and yet is not current for the situation now.

In the orange parts books, part number 15 is listed as a "scheibe fur Stutzlager" (sorry about missing umlauts!) or "washer for support bearing" and is coded for application for right-hand drive cars(!) but the applications are for:
2800CS/USA 2270244 on
2800CSA/USA 2280266 on

The part number for part 15 is 31 33 1 106 059.

If anyone needs it, the part number for the short studs for the strut bearing is 31 33 2 624 109.
 
Last edited:
Al,

I just happened to see this listing on eBay for a '73 modified with an M88 engine. It looks like they used these "washers" to construct a custom strut. Interesting use of the item in question that I've never seen before....
 

Attachments

  • !Bh8WoDQB2k~$(KGrHqQOKioEsn!zrjNqBLLwSKJVp!~~_12.JPG
    !Bh8WoDQB2k~$(KGrHqQOKioEsn!zrjNqBLLwSKJVp!~~_12.JPG
    43.5 KB · Views: 217
Struts

Erik,
Good eye. I spotted this as well but a couple of things: I do not think that lightened aluminum flat bar would be very rigid and also this arrangement would not clear a d-jet intake (I checked) Looks cool though...
Al
 
Back
Top