Outrigger problem
Discussion
Hi,
Would like to have some views on an outrigger issue. The outriggers of my car were recently replaced. It was a full body off job. Discovered that the mounting points on the new outriggers meet the body flush at the front but not the centre or rear. The problem is worse is the rear. The company that did the repair inserted a rubber pad between the bottom of the mounting point and the body to fill the gap. Looks like the rubber pad was not thick enough on the near side and tightening the fastening bolt was resulted in a hole in a section of the floor.
Presume the issue is the result of not correctly lining up the outriggers and the obvious solution is body off and start again. Wonder if anyone has come across this issue and if there are any less radical ways to fix the problem.
Would like to have some views on an outrigger issue. The outriggers of my car were recently replaced. It was a full body off job. Discovered that the mounting points on the new outriggers meet the body flush at the front but not the centre or rear. The problem is worse is the rear. The company that did the repair inserted a rubber pad between the bottom of the mounting point and the body to fill the gap. Looks like the rubber pad was not thick enough on the near side and tightening the fastening bolt was resulted in a hole in a section of the floor.
Presume the issue is the result of not correctly lining up the outriggers and the obvious solution is body off and start again. Wonder if anyone has come across this issue and if there are any less radical ways to fix the problem.
Bodies are suposed to sit on rubber / dense foam pads to level body and take up the GRP [in]tollerances. Just need to find the high point. Fit 'thin pad'. Then level up the others. Very simple.
Damaging the tub by not doing this is pretty slapdash.
Damaging the tub by not doing this is pretty slapdash.
Edited by mk1fan on Sunday 25th June 20:46
Hi, I can’t be categorical. But, all I have seen used are 6mm rubber pads, these are big enough to cover the whole plate. They are the same in all places. The body is pretty flexible and sits down on them all. I have seen this on two Griffs and a Vixen, where I have specifically looked.
The body shell is not tightened down hard, those bolts are strong enough to swing the whole car from, each of them. Torqueing them to any 'normal' torque would break any fibreglass. They have nyloc nuts and are tightened very loosely.
If the outriggers are not level, you have a problem with the quality of the work. Sounds like you need to chat to the garage.
Best
Nic
The body shell is not tightened down hard, those bolts are strong enough to swing the whole car from, each of them. Torqueing them to any 'normal' torque would break any fibreglass. They have nyloc nuts and are tightened very loosely.
If the outriggers are not level, you have a problem with the quality of the work. Sounds like you need to chat to the garage.
Best
Nic
I doubt very much if your original outriggers sat perfectly level and especially after years of rotting away. Pads were often used by Tvr on older models and indeed many cars with separate body/ chassis use them as standard.
Are your door shut lines good and have even gaps? This is all that matters.
You have to accept that it’s not reasonable to expect the outriggers to sit perfectly level considering the amount of welding that goes into creating them. Some warping is inevitable imho.
The body flexes a lot when you remove it and I very much doubt if the four corners are perfectly level in any case. this is not an exact science IMO.
The issue here is not the use of pads but the pad in the picture above which is clearly not cut to shape and not offering enough support.
The body weight is mostly taken on the 4 lugs on the main frame of the chassis. It’s a good job going by the state of the average original riggers which are usually rotten and offer very little support and have been like that for years.
I deliberately used 3 mm body pads on mine reasoning it would absorb some of the vibrations that transmit through the floor plates into the floors and also make it easier to clean / jet wash the area. Shaking and slight movement breaks down the powdercoat on the plates the body mounts to and starts the rusting process far to soon so I reasoned the pads would grip better between the GRP and steel.
And indeed I had to use a 6 mm pad on one corner. All it takes is a drop of say 3 mm on one side and you’ll need to use a pad to level up.
Tvr not using pads on later models starting generally from Chim/ Griff production is why you often saw poor door shut lines on early cars after they have settled. Lazy/ not cost effective to piss around using pads.
It’s why the doors have the cut outs at the front, it hides the usually poor lining up and as long as the lines look good where the lock locates they just never bothered levelling up the body.
In all honestly I don’t think you can expect the body and replacement riggers to be perfectly level.
I fully agree with what Mk1fan says.
I’d now expect the company who did the body off to
1 Repair floor where bolt runs ( easy fibreglass repair from inside the car)
2 Fit a correctly cut and sized body pad as yours just looks like some old lump of rubber stuffed in there.
Record the repairs and keep an eye on shut lines over time. It won’t take long to show if the body is not sitting level.
Are your door shut lines good and have even gaps? This is all that matters.
You have to accept that it’s not reasonable to expect the outriggers to sit perfectly level considering the amount of welding that goes into creating them. Some warping is inevitable imho.
The body flexes a lot when you remove it and I very much doubt if the four corners are perfectly level in any case. this is not an exact science IMO.
The issue here is not the use of pads but the pad in the picture above which is clearly not cut to shape and not offering enough support.
The body weight is mostly taken on the 4 lugs on the main frame of the chassis. It’s a good job going by the state of the average original riggers which are usually rotten and offer very little support and have been like that for years.
I deliberately used 3 mm body pads on mine reasoning it would absorb some of the vibrations that transmit through the floor plates into the floors and also make it easier to clean / jet wash the area. Shaking and slight movement breaks down the powdercoat on the plates the body mounts to and starts the rusting process far to soon so I reasoned the pads would grip better between the GRP and steel.
And indeed I had to use a 6 mm pad on one corner. All it takes is a drop of say 3 mm on one side and you’ll need to use a pad to level up.
Tvr not using pads on later models starting generally from Chim/ Griff production is why you often saw poor door shut lines on early cars after they have settled. Lazy/ not cost effective to piss around using pads.
It’s why the doors have the cut outs at the front, it hides the usually poor lining up and as long as the lines look good where the lock locates they just never bothered levelling up the body.
In all honestly I don’t think you can expect the body and replacement riggers to be perfectly level.
I fully agree with what Mk1fan says.
I’d now expect the company who did the body off to
1 Repair floor where bolt runs ( easy fibreglass repair from inside the car)
2 Fit a correctly cut and sized body pad as yours just looks like some old lump of rubber stuffed in there.
Record the repairs and keep an eye on shut lines over time. It won’t take long to show if the body is not sitting level.
Edited by Classic Chim on Monday 26th June 10:00
Belle427 said:
I'm no expert but any bolt fixing the body to chassis should be tightened fully surely?
To allow this to be done properly the gap must be cock on or packed accordingly?
The floor area here is actually very thin so though I largely agree, they should be nipped up rather than cranked tight as it will just crush the fibreglass. To allow this to be done properly the gap must be cock on or packed accordingly?
It’s why I think pads are a good idea, they help to reduce body slip/ movement at these points.
Edited by Classic Chim on Monday 26th June 10:24
On tightening:
There is a growing trend in workshops to use power tools for everything. And evidently without torque limitation. In the pursuit of speed (and doubtless with a generous sprinkling of laziness thrown in) the operator deprives himself of sensitivity and feel, consequently fasteners get overtightened all the time.
It took me a while to realise this as personally I only ever use powertools to undo. What finally brought it home was the number of Fords I was seeing where the plastic nutserts that the undertray screws into were consistantly stripped... only little 5mm screws, with a really coarse thread (2.5mm pitch!) so no excuse, but today's limp-wristed techs are clearly incapable of using a manual screwdriver and hence power-drive those screws in, stopping only when they realise that the screw hasn't! Damage done.
There is a growing trend in workshops to use power tools for everything. And evidently without torque limitation. In the pursuit of speed (and doubtless with a generous sprinkling of laziness thrown in) the operator deprives himself of sensitivity and feel, consequently fasteners get overtightened all the time.
It took me a while to realise this as personally I only ever use powertools to undo. What finally brought it home was the number of Fords I was seeing where the plastic nutserts that the undertray screws into were consistantly stripped... only little 5mm screws, with a really coarse thread (2.5mm pitch!) so no excuse, but today's limp-wristed techs are clearly incapable of using a manual screwdriver and hence power-drive those screws in, stopping only when they realise that the screw hasn't! Damage done.
Thanks and very helpful. A video of the underneath of the car was made when I bought it and although the outriggers were rusty the body sat flush to the outriggers on all the mounting points - and the door gaps were fine. Noticed that the gaps of the drivers side are now a little off - so it looks like the outriggers are too low at the rear on that side. Seems that part of the problem is the gap is not the same on both sides of the car but the same thickness pad had been used all round.
TwinKam said:
On tightening:
It took me a while to realise this as personally I only ever use powertools to undo. What finally brought it home was the number of Fords I was seeing where the plastic nutserts that the undertray screws into were consistantly stripped... .
I have this issue on my daily driver. What’s the best way to get the metal screws out of the plastic nuts?It took me a while to realise this as personally I only ever use powertools to undo. What finally brought it home was the number of Fords I was seeing where the plastic nutserts that the undertray screws into were consistantly stripped... .
Johnelliot said:
Thanks and very helpful. A video of the underneath of the car was made when I bought it and although the outriggers were rusty the body sat flush to the outriggers on all the mounting points - and the door gaps were fine. Noticed that the gaps of the drivers side are now a little off - so it looks like the outriggers are too low at the rear on that side. Seems that part of the problem is the gap is not the same on both sides of the car but the same thickness pad had been used all round.
Hopefully you have before and after pictures of your door gaps.A trip to the garage to discuss what can be done about it must be your next step.
When I dropped my body on I shifted it about until I could get the front top chassis bolts in and then the same with the 4 rear bolts that attach boot area which is very heavy, left them loose until I was happy the 4 corners sat on riggers flush. Lifted it up a few inches, placed pads on floor plates with a dab of mastic adding another 3 mm on the one rear corner that showed rigger sitting lower and dropped the body back on. At this point the door gaps at the top of the doors was rather large as the boot sags slightly.
I jacked the rear of the car up a few mm which immediately closed up that door gap then tightened the 2 rear top bolts in the boot.
Steel inserts in the fibreglass allow you to tighten these bolts quite tight.
So fixing door gap issues might require more work than just refitting a pad.
I think it will require fuel tank out to access those rear bolts. I’m no expert but doing it by myself and just a two post lift allowed me time to get these things right and I’d assume they all drop at the back until you pull up the boot and then pinch it to the chassis.
I’d noticed there was mastic all around the 2 rear lower chassis bolts when I took them out, the body there had at least 3 mm clearance away from the chassis points they bolt too even though front chassis bolts were in place so Tvr filled that gap between body and chassis with mastic! Like a big flexible washer
so when I’d jacked my boot up this gap reappeared. I used pads between the body and chassis bolts there to take up that gap before tightening them up. Released the boot from its suspending jack and shut lines stayed straight and true.
It’s a lot of trial and error and takes a keen eye to understand what’s going on.
Your Tvr expert should be well versed.
Edited by Classic Chim on Tuesday 27th June 08:15
SonicHedgeHog said:
TwinKam said:
On tightening:
It took me a while to realise this as personally I only ever use powertools to undo. What finally brought it home was the number of Fords I was seeing where the plastic nutserts that the undertray screws into were consistantly stripped... .
I have this issue on my daily driver. What’s the best way to get the metal screws out of the plastic nuts?It took me a while to realise this as personally I only ever use powertools to undo. What finally brought it home was the number of Fords I was seeing where the plastic nutserts that the undertray screws into were consistantly stripped... .
TwinKam said:
You need to exert a light downward force on the tray whilst turning the screw without exerting any upward force on it ...they are Torx head (T30), so that isn't difficult (unlike with say a Phillips head). The red plastic nutserts should then ping out easily (with a screwdriver under an edge) and the news ones simply snap in. Arm yourself with a full complement of new nutserts before you start, the screws are usually OK and reusable.
Brilliant. I never thought of pulling on the tray. I have the nuts and bolts just couldn’t work out how to get the old ones off. Thank you very much.John
Do your doors look & close ok? Also does the tension on your roof struts feel similar to before. I agree they could have made a better job of your chassis pad.
Good advice explained well, thanks. I also spent ages refitting my body best as possible before fitting my rollover bar which holds the rear of the body in its original position & luckily my roof tension is perfect, however I still slightly adjusted one of the door catches but probably because I’m a perfectionist.
The body does flex slightly when off the chassis and the roof structs went loose when the nose and boot were not supported. I now understand why there is so much adjustment in the doors & the roof tension can be adjusted by adding or removing washer/spacers behind the roof strut bolts, even the suspension has loads of adjustment.
Good old TVRs, not ideal for perfectionists.
I'll have to make this my new profile picture, sorry its not a Chimaera
Do your doors look & close ok? Also does the tension on your roof struts feel similar to before. I agree they could have made a better job of your chassis pad.
Classic Chim said:
You have to accept that it’s not reasonable to expect the outriggers to sit perfectly level considering the amount of welding that goes into creating them. Some warping is inevitable imho.
I'd previously heard TVR chassis are not all perfect & the outrigger corners usually vary a few mm. RT Racing (TVR Central’s chassis workshop) confirmed this when I dropped my chassis off. They told me due to chassis variations they always setup the chassis jig to each individual chassis so your new outriggers are in there original positions, not a default position, this is so your body settles back into its original position, they explained if not you'll have door alignment & roof issues.Classic Chim said:
I’d noticed there was mastic all around the 2 rear lower chassis bolts when I took them out,
Do you mean the lower outer seat belt anchor bolts to the outrigger?Good advice explained well, thanks. I also spent ages refitting my body best as possible before fitting my rollover bar which holds the rear of the body in its original position & luckily my roof tension is perfect, however I still slightly adjusted one of the door catches but probably because I’m a perfectionist.
The body does flex slightly when off the chassis and the roof structs went loose when the nose and boot were not supported. I now understand why there is so much adjustment in the doors & the roof tension can be adjusted by adding or removing washer/spacers behind the roof strut bolts, even the suspension has loads of adjustment.
Good old TVRs, not ideal for perfectionists.
I'll have to make this my new profile picture, sorry its not a Chimaera
stevesprint said:
Do you mean the lower outer seat belt anchor bolts to the outrigger?
Good advice explained well, thanks. I also spent ages refitting my body best as possible before fitting my rollover bar which holds the rear of the body in its original position & luckily my roof tension is perfect, however I still slightly adjusted one of the door catches but probably because I’m a perfectionist.
The body does flex slightly when off the chassis and the roof structs went loose when the nose and boot were not supported. I now understand why there is so much adjustment in the doors & the roof tension can be adjusted by adding or removing washer/spacers behind the roof strut bolts, even the suspension has loads of adjustment.
Good old TVRs, not ideal for perfectionists.
I'll have to make this my new profile picture, sorry its not a Chimaera
Hi Steve. No I mean the gap between rear body section and the chassis. So the two bolts going into bottom chassis rails. Looking at the rear of the chassis in your picture you can just see the four threaded holes that hold the boot up and accessed from behind the Petrol tank. In between the body and those bottom bolt points. If I’d not added packing there the lower bolts would have pulled the boot in and down and would inevitably drop. Good advice explained well, thanks. I also spent ages refitting my body best as possible before fitting my rollover bar which holds the rear of the body in its original position & luckily my roof tension is perfect, however I still slightly adjusted one of the door catches but probably because I’m a perfectionist.
The body does flex slightly when off the chassis and the roof structs went loose when the nose and boot were not supported. I now understand why there is so much adjustment in the doors & the roof tension can be adjusted by adding or removing washer/spacers behind the roof strut bolts, even the suspension has loads of adjustment.
Good old TVRs, not ideal for perfectionists.
I'll have to make this my new profile picture, sorry its not a Chimaera
By jacking the rear of the boot up to close my door gaps I had about 5 mm gaps where these bolts locate so padded them. Boot stays suspended.
Basically starting from the front I dropped body on and shifted it about until the front lined up with the front chassis bolts then confirmed I could get the top front chassis bolts in ( inside car top of trans tunnel )
Then moved to the rear.
Even doors on and closed, without supporting the weight of the boot it will now likely be sagging until you put at least the top two rear chassis bolts in. I decided to take the weight off the boot at this point which is when I noticed the gaps between the lower rear bolt positions in the body and the chassis.
There must be some built in clearance from the rear Diff carrier because once the top two front transmission bolts drop in the body position is pretty much set fore and aft.
ETA. The Griffith having a shorter boot may not be as heavy compared to the Chim boot for all I know. What I do know is the rear of the car is considerably heavier than the front with bonnet removed. On a two post ramp I could feel the body wanting to topple backwards slightly until it was bolted down.
I think that’s why I actually took weight off the rear in the first place. You can physically lift it by hand with a decent grunt.
Edited by Classic Chim on Thursday 29th June 07:46
Edited by Classic Chim on Thursday 29th June 08:29
Alun, I see & thanks for explaining.
Very interesting you had 5mm gaps at the back of the chassis with the bolts behind the fuel tank, mine was the opposite & needed the boot low as possible to widen the door gaps and to get the roof tension the same as before. My back bone was not repaired and therefore all went back together roughly in its original positions without any pads. I guess Chimmy boots would be heavier, but I was more worried about my body tipping left or right as it was hanging centrally with wooden battens across in-line with the wheel arches, it was fairly stable hanging but would have toppled over if I opened a door.
John, sorry to hi-jack your thread.
Very interesting you had 5mm gaps at the back of the chassis with the bolts behind the fuel tank, mine was the opposite & needed the boot low as possible to widen the door gaps and to get the roof tension the same as before. My back bone was not repaired and therefore all went back together roughly in its original positions without any pads. I guess Chimmy boots would be heavier, but I was more worried about my body tipping left or right as it was hanging centrally with wooden battens across in-line with the wheel arches, it was fairly stable hanging but would have toppled over if I opened a door.
John, sorry to hi-jack your thread.
How interesting.
I was using a 2 post lift so once I’d raised my rolling chassis up to body which was suspended using 4 truck type axle stands, then remove stands once body sits on chassis, then I could simply lower the lot with the lift to my preferred working height. The chassis and body are now suspended using the 4 legs of the lift on each outrigger corner so my car felt secure when I scrambled inside to line up trans chassis bolts.
In fact that was quite easy as my body lined up with those difficult to get at bolt holes with very little effort.
I decided those bolts had to go in first due to the difficulty of access. Left them loose and just lifted the body around a little to line up the front and rear bolt holes.
The corner positions are sort of dictated to by the main chassis bolt positioning.
When my chassis was taken off my body was stored on a frame. I had to support the rear of the cars body as without support door gaps opened up quite dramatically. A good 10-12mm at the top, my gaps are around 4-5 mm normally.
This was a similar case when body was re mounted and boot not propped up.
I’m pretty sure it had to be lifted slightly to get the bolts in.
I added rubber packers between chassis and bottom rear chassis bolts at this point just to help.
I’m sure the top bolts nipped up closed the door gaps anyway but it just made sense as there was evidence of lots of mastic in that area on the body I’d long since scraped off.
I was using a 2 post lift so once I’d raised my rolling chassis up to body which was suspended using 4 truck type axle stands, then remove stands once body sits on chassis, then I could simply lower the lot with the lift to my preferred working height. The chassis and body are now suspended using the 4 legs of the lift on each outrigger corner so my car felt secure when I scrambled inside to line up trans chassis bolts.
In fact that was quite easy as my body lined up with those difficult to get at bolt holes with very little effort.
I decided those bolts had to go in first due to the difficulty of access. Left them loose and just lifted the body around a little to line up the front and rear bolt holes.
The corner positions are sort of dictated to by the main chassis bolt positioning.
When my chassis was taken off my body was stored on a frame. I had to support the rear of the cars body as without support door gaps opened up quite dramatically. A good 10-12mm at the top, my gaps are around 4-5 mm normally.
This was a similar case when body was re mounted and boot not propped up.
I’m pretty sure it had to be lifted slightly to get the bolts in.
I added rubber packers between chassis and bottom rear chassis bolts at this point just to help.
I’m sure the top bolts nipped up closed the door gaps anyway but it just made sense as there was evidence of lots of mastic in that area on the body I’d long since scraped off.
Edited by Classic Chim on Friday 7th July 09:28
Edited by Classic Chim on Friday 7th July 09:29
stevesprint said:
Alun
Neat you raised your chassis up to your body then lowered the lot. I also did the transmission bolts first but once safe on the ground. The rest sounds similar to yours but interesting two very different approaches to a single man lift.
I can’t take any credit for the lifting technique.Neat you raised your chassis up to your body then lowered the lot. I also did the transmission bolts first but once safe on the ground. The rest sounds similar to yours but interesting two very different approaches to a single man lift.
The rather marvellous Steve D ( Southways fame) gave me a heads up as to using axle stands and lifting the chassis upto the body.
Indeed it works very well and both dropping chassis away from body and then lifting it up again with body raised on stands a good 3 ft high made it easy to check underneath the car as I was doing it. Other than a mate on the lift button I basically did it alone with little stress.
Gassing Station | Chimaera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff