Ornella came to visit my workshop

[mr-reno-139]

pretty sure most of you are familiar with this car formerly owned by malcolm
turns out the new owner lives about 50 miles from me in worthing and arrangements were made for me to change drive shaft as possibly the longer ones has been fitted by mistake
different drive shafts were used after 1969 when the caster angle and other suspension components were change to eliminate the spring loaded steering rack
although i have worked on many renault 4s over the years it is quite a while since i worked on a car built in the sixties and not too familiar on spotting the different parts used
on jacking the car up with the wheels hanging down rotating the front wheels results in the cv joint rubbing on lower wishbonemaking me suspect that the recent replacement shock absorbers are too long any thoughts from anyone
the last picture shows how far the wheel hangs down when jacked up under front cross member no idea why the pictures came out sideways

 

[angel]

Judging from the shaft length that is exposed, they look longer, indeed. Do you have any clues about their make? These early R4s have narrower bottom eye width, so it's not possible to fit shocks from later models.
Funny thing is that, last week, I fitted a pair of Allinquant front shock absorbers that looked shorter at first sight, but worked OK once installed.

 

[mr-reno-139]

was hoping you would read this angel as you have had a lot more experience with the older cars
shock absorbers were fitted after it left malcolm supplied by De franzose something is definitely a miss how long do you think a fully extended shock absorber should be i have got 14 inches in the picture sure you can convert that to millimetres
fnl dug out my early workshop manual which has all the identified dimensions on suspension components to make sure you don't fit the wrong ones however when the car was with me the book wasn't :-(

 

[mr-reno-139]

a problem with the driveshaft hitting the lower shock absorber bracket which is listed as different shape

 

[malcolm]

Here's a picture of the suspension when it left here. There weren't any clearance issues that I remember.



The driveshafts are the type with two cardan joints at the outboard end and looked like the ones in the first picture of your post here: http://www.renault4.co.uk/forum/threads/drive-shafts-for-1965-lhd-r4-ornella.6876/#post-41805 The boot in your photos looks new. Could that be the problem? They don't need boots at that end.

The damper length on later cars is about 14 inches. No idea if earlier cars had a different length.

 

[mr-reno-139]

thank you for your input malcolm wondered why the wishbone is now different on the car your picture shows later wishbone mine shows the earlier 7 degree
agreed about the outer joint not needing anything other then dust cover but something is clearly wrong as shaft hits lower shock absorber mounting bracket also if they shocker was shorter which can be simulated buy jacking lower arm up shaft rotates without hitting lower arm i have got a video but would need to post it separately as forum won't accept it

 

[malcolm]

That must be an earlier photo. The car came with early upper arm on one side and later on the other which made for interesting behaviour over bumps, not helped by the dampers which were a bit soft. I changed that arm back to the early type.

Is the funny shaped boot with a tear from somewhere else? There isn't a joint there. Easiest way to load videos is to link them from youtube.

 

[Cyprus Andy]

Am I missing something or is the Shock absorber on one of these photo's upside down ?

 

[mr-reno-139]

YouTube link
R4 drive shaft clearance problem:

thanks for rotating pic andy :-)

 

[mr-reno-139]

wondered whether someone has fit a rear shock absorber by mistake and checked my new stock with a tape measure rear shock absorbers15 inch
fronts which are for later cars measure 14 inches centre to centre fixing point same as what is on the car maybe early cars are supposed to be shorter and been fitted the wrong ones
has anybody got early shock absorbers around to measure the length of genuine ones preferably
will up load photos when i have got wifi available tonight

 

[Andy McGhee]

I'm not sure whether this'll help, but I've unearthed three different NOS pairs of shocks. The blue ones are for early 4s (part # 8.557.912 - sorry, can't find a 77 00/01 equivalent), and the yellow ones are R6/4GTL shocks (7700585326). When fully extended, they're very similar in length - as you say, around 14"/35.8 cm.
The black ones look like the ones in your picture - Delphi Hydro D225 1909; they're definitely slightly longer - around 36.5 cm.
All measurements approximate!
All the best

 

[jonigel]

Hello
I have just measured a 1965 model with original shocks and they come out at 14 " but the outer u j is exposed and the inner gaiter is inside the chassis rail,yours does not look right. Also the shock looks wrong could it be for the rear?
Good luck

 

[mr-reno-139]

done a bit more thinking If you look at the workshop manual pic attached on my first post it shows the top shock absorber mount has been moved further up on the bracket bolting to the chassis legs by about 9 millimetres when it went to 13○castor angle
if we assume all genuine shocks are 14 inches as full extension that means the lower arm is prevented from hanging down as far which is when the clearance disappeared on ornella
the workshop manual also shows the hubs and steering arms different and follows on that a different lower arm is used to fit hexagonal torsion bars
unfortunately the car is now 50 miles away I am pretty sure the later cv type shafts would clear lower arm but then length is wrong and the book says don't fit wrong shafts
These are what found to measure in my stock all for much later cars the long shock is a rear one

 

[malcolm]

I've fitted a pair of driveshafts with cardan joints on the Rodeo (eBay cheapy and the right length). They are reconditioned rather than new and the rubber covering the cardan joints also fouls the lower wishbone when the suspension is on full droop. It's OK when the wheels are on the ground. I've got the later 13 degrees suspension and an 850cc with dog leg gearbox.

I wonder whether driveshaft reconditioners like to fit whatever rubber they have lying around over the cardan joint. I might remove the rubber from mine if it causes problems.

 

[mr-reno-139]

Funny you should reply on this thread as ornella is back at my workshop for a 3 week stay to get her sorted
If it wasn't so slow resizing pics then loading one at a time on here I would of started Ornella came to stay ☺as a new post by now
Lots of discovery and some engineering to follow shortly

 

[JonathanT]

Phew!!! WHAT an intense thread. My goodness Ornellas new owner really is getting a first class job with so much effort and thought gone into it. All I can say is well done all!! Brilliant work

 

[mr-reno-139]

As soon as I've got this weekend out of the way I will reveal what has been going on but my photo gallery on my phone is full of rodeo pics to resize as well
Don't forget jonathan this started Oct last year and malcolm has now got similar problems with clearance issues and attached his findings to my older post

 

[malcolm]

It'll be good to know what you have found. That rubber boot in your first photo that is split and pulled back isn't supposed to be there, so no wonder that rubbed itself to bits. The grey cover underneath looks OK.

 

[mr-reno-139]

Early R4 shaft clearance problem part 2:

i will reply briefly on here as posting links is easy this was the result of fitting a new shaft on passenger sidewith the long shock absorbers which resulted in the suspension arm hanging too low

 

[malcolm]

They say in the Haynes book of lies in the brake adjusting section that the driveshaft might foul the chassis on full droop. That's not to say the dampers aren't too long as the driveshafts don't foul there on the Rodeo.