General Sits too high

[124spiderman]

Hi all. I'm a newbie to this site.
I have always owned a Fiat of some description, my current "collection" consists of a Uno Sting, 124 Spider CS and a 500F.
I've owned a 500N before at a time when they were ridiculed here in Australia and I remember I couldn't even give it away (late 1980's). Now when they see this current one I have everyone loves it. It puts a smile on their dial.
This one came about purely by chance. An original 1 owner '69 F. Log books, 72,000 miles with receipts tool kit original spare and wait for it...original wiper blades!
Unfortunately the owner was elderly and "parked by braille" so it has a few knocks especially on the doors but NO RUST!!
I've spent some time getting it reliable i.e brakes overhauled, lubricated everything etc. But one thing irks me...the front sits too high!
I don't want to lower it or modify it in anyway as its very original but can anyone shed why its sits so high up front, I mean a good 4-5 inches from top of tyre to wheel arch. (PS It has original spec michelins, replaced at some time)

 

[oopsadaisy]

Wow - what a find!

and by the way, welcome to the forum!

I love the expression 'parking by braille!'

Any chance you could post a photo?

It would be nice to see a picture of your car anyway.

Then perhaps we could advise if it looks 'abnormal'

 

[Bambino]

They do normally sit fairly high. The photo of the white 500 is a side shot of mine prior to stripping. You can see considerable air space both front and rear.

I'm told that they can be safely lowered about 3cm or so (~1 1/4") without either affecting the look of the car or having anything foul on the chassis, though I guess you should check with your local regulatory transport department before doing anything.

I don't know who owns the red 500, but it looks to have been lowered a bit and I'm also told that when adjusted like this, they handle even better

When I rebuild mine I intend to lower it by about that much.

Chris

PS: Post some pictures sometime.

 

[panda1408]

The red one is my Dads, we are not aware that it has been lowered, I thought they were all that height However the tyres do rub on the inner arches on full lock so maybe it has, they are 135s though, don't 500s have 125s as standard?

 

[Bambino]

Standard wheels on the 500s were 3 1/2"x12" and shod with 125 tyres - very narrow and tall by today's standards. The wheels had a 4x190mm stud pattern to fit over the drum brakes. The pictures I've seen of 500s seem to show a variable ride height with some sitting quite high like mine and some lower like your Dad's. In the majority of photos, the cars seem to ride high - see photos in any of Malcolm Bobbitt's books and in the Brooklands Road Test portfolios.

I'd be interesting to have a look at the front spring on your Dad's car. The normal leaf spring has the suspension mount 'eyes' beneath the spring line whereas lowered cars may be be fitted with a reverse eyed spring. I've tried to show this in the photos. This would be the most obvious evidence that the car had been lowered.

At the rear, the springs can have a variable amount of the coil cut out to lower the rear - usually about 1/2 to a full loop - but without removing the springs, I'd be difficult to tell, particularly if the tyres are not standard.

Once again, I'm told that wheels fitted with tyres as wide as 145s using 4 1/2"x12" rims on a lowered car shouldn't foul the body work. But then, my information may be wrong, though it does come from a firm that has been working with these cars for a long time.

After all of that, your Dad's car is a very nice looking machine and would be close to what I'm hoping to do with mine.

Chris

 

[124spiderman]

Here are the photos you requested. as you can see, it sits a little too high up front? But looking at others now, it seems that this is the norm. I have seen period publicity photos and they do sit lower although these photos show the cars with white walls and this could be deceiving.

Wow - what a find!
'

Any chance you could post a photo?

It would be nice to see a picture of your car anyway.

Then perhaps we could advise if it looks 'abnormal'

 

[oopsadaisy]

Nice looking car!

However, I must confess it does look a little higher on the front end than our car.

I assume you have had a look at the front spring set up?

What does everyone else think?

 

[124spiderman]

Actually, having looked at Chris' photos (white one) It is similarly set up if not identical in height.
BTW: What did you mean about the spring set-up?
Is there a certain way they should be adjusted as I am not aware of any adjustment method on the 500 or 600 other than reversing the longer bottom leaf

 

[panda1408]

I'm thinking early cars had higher suspension than the later ones??

 

[oopsadaisy]

BTW: What did you mean about the spring set-up?
Is there a certain way they should be adjusted as I am not aware of any adjustment method on the 500 or 600 other than reversing the longer bottom leaf

No - sorry if I confused you - there is no adjustment.

I was just wondering if perhaps a non-standard front main spring may have been fitted.

 

[Bambino]

Here are the photos you requested. as you can see, it sits a little too high up front? But looking at others now, it seems that this is the norm. I have seen period publicity photos and they do sit lower although these photos show the cars with white walls and this could be deceiving.

Fill the tank with petrol (if you can afford it), sit a couple of people in the car and see how far the front suspension descends. A lot of the publicity shots may have had an extra 150kg or so helping to flatten the front leaf spring.

BTW, the red Fiat in the background looks like a nice (?) 124 Spider.

Chris