Technical Rear Subframe

Currently reading:
Technical Rear Subframe

I did see them but couldnt really see how they would work, was thinking about a 166 but too many horror stories on the rear suspension prices and it would have to be the 3 litre v6 .
 
I'll ask the seller about them - they might be worth a punt at that price.

You'd definitely want the 3.0 166. My 156 is the 2.5 and, nice as it is, having had both 12V and 24V versions of the 3.0, I miss the other 500cc. I reckon you'd really feel the lack of torque in the heavier car.
 
Back on subject with an update. I wire-brushed the collars, treated them with Kurust, painted them with Hammerite and gave them a good squirt of Waxoyl (that took me back). They didn't even come up as an advisory on MOT.

I had to replace the front springs though...
 
The Tipo shares the same part nr. for the Suspension Arm Repair kit as the Multipla.

The bushings could be the same:
FSM2028.jpg
FSM2029.jpg


Then the eper doesn't look quite the same:
Tipo:
naread.png

Multipla:
naread1.png
 
Last edited:
That's interesting. I assumed that as an MPV, the Multipla had a unique chassis, or shared components with a compact van. From the look of that, it seems that the rear subframe is more or less straight from the Tipo, with the arms remodelled to provide the wider track. From the line drawings, it looks like only the bushes are different. This would explain why bushes made for a 155 will fit, and I'm sure these Tipo ones would too. I'm wondering though whether the difference is to do with vehicle weight and centre of gravity, so those made for a lighter, lower car (standard spec) would not be appropriate.

Have you replaced the trailing arm kit? I have play in mine on one side so bought the kit and gave it to my mechanic to fit for the MOT. He couldn't get the arm off to fit it. Fortunately, he had put the car in for the test before doing any work and it passed, so this isn't a great problem.
 
Back
Top