Technical Panda mk3 rear axle on mk2

[koalar]

That's interesting, thank you koalar. I was very impressed with the lack of bodywork rust on my Panda, especially compared with the Mazdas of similar vintage I'm used to (which are killed by rear sill and wheel arch rot).

Is there anywhere else on the body they are particularly prone to rust? I'm familiar with the coolant return pipe, rear axle, springs, brakes and front wheel arch mud trap.

Presumably Dinitrol or similar sprayed inside the access holes for the rear sills would be good to keep it at bay.

The rear sills are normally the first place. If there good everything should be okay.

chassis legs under the bonnet. There's a weld line and drain hole that start to bubble but don't seem to rot away.

not affect my cars but the scuttle would be worth checking. They fill up with rotting leaves if the cars been parked under trees.

there's a mud trap behind the front inner wheel arch. At the front edge

 

[koalar]

Ford told Fiat that they would not accept the original 500 axle for the Fiat built Ka. Fiat accordingly added the ARB and softer springs and used it on both cars. So much for Fiat pushing the boat out for the original version.

still narrower at the rear as the front was increased also

Front 1,481
Rear 1,461

And that's on much wider tyres

I am not saying its dangerous. I haven't spent years studying automotive design.

having been in the car when someone passed me going backwards and at one point we were bonnet to bonnet almost waving to each other before they smashed into the Armco

I would err on the side caution and swap like for like.

 

[DaveMcT]

All cars will crash when driven badly. I have seen some ridiculous swerves and cuts across on motorways - usually a BMW grabbing an exit from the posh people's lane.


I would rather have a 500 spec axle in the 169 track width but that does not exist. However, the straight swap 500 axle rides and handles considerably better in all weathers on all surfaces. The wider track could in theory affect directional stability, but I cannot detect any bad side effects and would say the car tracks more accurately after the conversion. The bump skipping, body rolling back end of the old axle was far more likely to swap ends.


After 15,000 miles I can't find any negatives. Even the kids said the car is nicer to ride in.

 

[MrMagoo]

Perhaps a caveat here, you do so (use the 500 axle) at your risk.

 

[Pugglt Auld Jock]

Being the owner of a 2010 Panda (169) Dynamic Eco with an Ok but raggedy rear axle I've read this - and several other - posts about using the later axle in the earlier cars.

It's a very interesting subject and I'm not sure which way I will go when/if our axle needs doing. I do wonder though if anyone has approached their insurance company to see if they are happy for the later axle to be used on the earlier cars?

 

[koalar]

Being the owner of a 2010 Panda (169) Dynamic Eco with an Ok but raggedy rear axle I've read this - and several other - posts about using the later axle in the earlier cars.

It's a very interesting subject and I'm not sure which way I will go when/if our axle needs doing. I do wonder though if anyone has approached their insurance company to see if they are happy for the later axle to be used on the earlier cars?

Depends on the insurers. Some are fine with winter tyres as long as you inform them. Some charge a small premium even though they may technically be safer.

The main thing is if its spotted and not declared. Unlikely unless it looks spotless on a 15 year Old car.

here a few surcharges from one insurer

Turbo/Supercharging
132%

Transmission or Gear change
63%

Exhaust changes
26%

Air Filter
25%

Wheel arches
41%

Complete body kit
57%

Spoilers/Skirts
23%

Light changes
12%

Tinted windows
16%

Replacement of seats
27%

Roll Bars/Roll Cages
41%

Dashboard changes
16%

Uprated brakes
36%

Suspension
25%

Alloy wheels
8%

LPG conversion
15%

Bonnet Vents
6%

Air conditioning
13%

Front Splitter/Rear Diffuser
8%

Intercooler Upgrades
23%

Fuel System Charges
18%

Specialised paintwork
15%

Stripes & badges
9%

 

[Pugglt Auld Jock]

Depends on the insurers. Some are fine with winter tyres as long as you inform them. Some charge a small premium even though they may technically be safer.

The main thing is if its spotted and not declared. Unlikely unless it looks spotless on a 15 year Old car.

here a few surcharges from one insurer

Turbo/Supercharging
132%

Transmission or Gear change
63%

Exhaust changes
26%

Air Filter
25%

Wheel arches
41%

Complete body kit
57%

Spoilers/Skirts
23%

Light changes
12%

Tinted windows
16%

Replacement of seats
27%

Roll Bars/Roll Cages
41%

Dashboard changes
16%

Uprated brakes
36%

Suspension
25%

Alloy wheels
8%

LPG conversion
15%

Bonnet Vents
6%

Air conditioning
13%

Front Splitter/Rear Diffuser
8%

Intercooler Upgrades
23%

Fuel System Charges
18%

Specialised paintwork
15%

Stripes & badges
9%

Thanks for that Koalar. What an interesting list. None of it particularly surprises me except for the change of transmission. Wonder why that attracts such a large premium?

 

[koalar]

Thanks for that Koalar. What an interesting list. None of it particularly surprises me except for the change of transmission. Wonder why that attracts such a large premium?

no idea ? I had a car which had a limited addition body kit from the factory. That was plus 25%

I would have thought a brake upgrade was a positive


guess it looked upon as you are more likely to drive faster


its not on this list which was the first I found but roof rack also attracts a premium but I stand to be corrected as thats from memory and its not what it use to be