International Lancia Forums

While rebuilding the subframe on my series 2 car I have become curious about the difference between the first and second series set-ups. Apart from the second series changing at some point to pressed upper arms, and changing to maintenance free silentblocs for the arms, there doesn't seem to be any other difference, except the ride height increased by 20mm.

Given that the series 1 coupes had 145/14 tyres and this was changed with the series 2 coupes to 165/14 tyres this would account for a difference of ride height calculated as follows:

145 tyre 80% ratio 14" wheel = 588mm diameter.
165 tyre 80% ratio 14" wheel = 620mm diameter.

Difference in ride height = 16mm

This would seem to account for most of the 20mm ride height difference between the first and second series. I understand that the front spring rating was different as well.
Is this correct?

Is there any difference in the height of the rubber blocks between the end of the leaf spring and the upper arms between the two series set-ups?

Does anyone else have any detailed observations about subframe differences?

Regards


Chris

The difference in diameter of the tires is 32mm according to you calculations, which are right. Or at least about right as the height to width ratio is not exactly 80% for old fashioned tires.

The axle is 16mm higher. That is correct. However, the larger tires also need more clearance at the top. The springs of S2/3 cars therefore have more curvature. The total difference in ride height is nearer the 32mm.

Huib,

Is there a distinct handling advantage lowering the series 2 suspension to series one height? I guess this would best be achieved with a series one leaf spring. Or is this problematic in terms of wheel travel, and possible differences in the spring rate?
Lower profile tyres would also achieve a small drop, but I'm guessing the gearing will suffer, and I've never driven a fulvia with wider than standard tyres that felt as nice as the standard 165 width of the series 2.

Any recommendations on improvements to the standard, or should I leave it well alone.

Chris

If you are looking to lower your S2, here is a possible plan:
Fit 165/70 R14T tyres on the standard steel rims. This will give you almost identical rolling radius to the 145R14 tyres fitted to S1 cars, with the (dubious) benefit of lower and therefore stiffer sidewalls than the standard S2 tyres. The S1 front spring should then present slightly less problems with clearance. I say the sidewall stiffness is a dubious benefit only because it may make the car slightly twitchy and less progressive than standard. The gearing will be lower, too.
Of course, you could sell the S2 and find yourself a nice S1 instead. The purists amongst us would approve, I'm sure!

Christopher,

Removing and replacing the front leaf spring can be a difficult and even dangerous job to perform without the right set of tools. Would you prefer to try a *lower* ride height through substituting smaller or rather, less tall rubber bumpers, the rubber column located below the front leaf spring and the upper A-arm. I seem to remember some specialty spare parts created elsewhere on this website are adjustable in this regard.

If you do lower the front suspension, would you automatically balance the ride height by *relaxing* the rear leaf springs as well?

On a different note, if one wants improved handling, usually, I look for a superior tire. that doesn't have to be a different width/ratio tire, but it most likely would be. Very few tires seem available for either 145-80-14, 155-80-14 (Fulvia Berlina GTE) or even 165-80-14. And most of those tires will be rather old design wise. Not really a tire that could begin to compare with the better handling tires of today. Even a simple, not costly Yokohama tire, in a 185-60-14 size, would be light years ahead of a aging Michelin X tire. Yet, some people just don't seem to like this not-too-low-profile tire size either.

A visit to the US website, www.tirerack.com, contains a wealth of tire info as well as a simple shopping guide for what is available in the modern tire marketplace.

For me, with the S1 Berlina GTE, its a 175-70-14 on alloy wheels. The S1 Coupes get lucky, they get good ol 185-60-14s on Chromodora alloys. Works for me.....

In response. The questions were out of curiosity more than anything as I am in the midst of restoring the subframe of my car. All the components are renewed and I have only to put the spring back in. I have access to the right tools for the job, and have stripped the spring down, cleaning all the interleafing, and regreased each leaf.
The last time I drove the series 2 back to back with a 1.3s Rallye which had 185 width tyres on it I didn't like the extra weight in the steering, and as you observe the handling is less progressive.

What I would like to find one day is a set of alloys from a Safari special edition. I understand that the alloys, that look remarkably like the steel wheels were an option on this model. I can't find information on how wide those rims are, but from photos they look to be the same as the steel wheels with similar offset which avoids that 'over-tyred' look of the crommadora rims on cars without flared wheel arches..

I know purists prefer series 1 cars, but if the steering boxes are the same, the subframes are more or less the same, and the only differences are in the upper & lower wishbone bushes and spring rating/ride height, then how much difference can there be?

Chris

Chris,

I agree with you completely about over-tyred Fulvias. If you were building a competition car things would be very different, but the Fulvia is such a good all-round package that, in my opinion, it's very difficult to improve on the ride/handling/grip/balance compromise of the standard set-up. As far as I know the Safari alloys are 5", the same as the standard steel wheels.

As for the differences between the S1 and S2, trust me, they are significant! Again, it's a matter of opinion, but for what it's worth I think the S1 is the better of the two. A good S1 feels more balanced, and has a delicacy and precision that the taller, wider tyred S2 lacks. The 4-speed gearbox is nicer to use, too!

All that said, a good Fulvia is a real treasure regardless of which series! Good luck, and enjoy!

Neil

I agree with all this.

However, we fitted 165/70/14 Yokohamas to a S1 coupé. The owner was very anxious not to lose the delicacy of handling that he enjoyed but wanted grip rather than non-grip as provided by the Xs that were fitted.

He was delighted - he reported that he had all the delicacy and real grip and poise too.

Paul

I agree with you, Neil.
I have both S2 and S1 cars. The S2 is an excellent car. I would still prefer that car to any modern car, but my heart is with the S1, in particular the rallye 1.3 without the brake servo. I have two, Tina (short for Celestina) and Elena which I alternate. Total bare metal restoration of Tina is about finished. Then Elena, with which I have done over a 100.000km in the last three years, goes into full restoration.

The minimum tire size is determined by the load capacity. The enclosed volume of air determines the load carrying capacity. The 145R14 on the 4,5J14 wheels is exactly right for a sports car of about about 1200kg and a maximum speed of around 170km/h. The berlina has 155R14 tires on the same 4,5J14 wheels. Again exactly right. A bit more load carrying capacity and comfort in exchange for a bit sharpness in handling. I don't know the reason why the S2 went to 165R14 tires.

Unfortunately the 145R14 tires are no longer available. My S1 coupe's now run on 5,5J13 alloys with 165/80R13 tires. With the high mileage and frequent trips to Italy I wanted tires which are normally priced and available from any tire dealer in Europe. Fortunately the Michelin E3B 165/80R13 tires turned out to be excellent for cruising, even high speed cruising, on country roads which I prefer to freeways.

Because my S1 coupe's on 165/80R13 tires still handle better than the S2 cars on 165/80R14 tires the difference in handling cannot be caused by the difference in tire width.

I like to think that the evolution of cars at least at Lancia was aimed at better handling, safety, good feeling when driving without too much compromise up to and including the sixties. From around 1970 cars had to become smaller with more room inside, cheaper (to build and to maintain) and had more market driven things such as christmas tree like dashboards, wide tires and spoilers. Also around that time most countries in Europe started to build freeways like crazy.

It amazes me why anybody would buy a nicely balanced car like a Fulvia and then immediately start transforming it into a modern car. Buying a modern car to start with would surely be a more efficient way. Rather than mounting tires designed for high speed driving on smooth asphalt, I like to turn it around and only use roads that give most pleasure by driving on them with a Fulvia in its original configuration, at least as original as possible.

As mentioned in another posting in this thread I use 165/80R13 tires as I like to keep the 80% height to width ratio to also have good comfort.Most of the mileage I do is on French and Italian country roads, not even Route National but D, C and RF roads. I have some routes pencilled in on my 1:200.000 road atlas of France which take us through France in not much more time than on the freeway.

I did however quite a lot of test driving on an S1 Zagato of a customer on 165/70R14 Michelin E3B tires on 5,5J14 alloys. When the car came in the alloys and the tires were about the only things on the car that were in order. When I was finished with the car it was the best driving Fulvia I have ever driven, both on freeways as on country roads, even very bad country roads.

I would however hesitate to put the 165/70R14 tires on the standard 4,5J14 wheels. I would like 5J or 5,5J wheels. What wheels did you put the 165/70R14 tires on?