Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 41

Thread: Roof Hinge Assembly Measurements and comparisons inc Stainless

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    East Riding
    Posts
    1,398
    With dims the definition is better in the PDF but it is 98k and the file attachment max for a PDF is 95k

    Dirk


  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    East Riding
    Posts
    1,398
    and the bracket Ill ad the dims later in the week

    Dirk


  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    East Riding
    Posts
    1,398
    Thinking about it on my drive home, the arms would be much better made from solid bar tapped M10 both ends and rod eyes used, it would eliminate the need for bushes all the welding and slots in the brackets, it would all be tweekable and would take any twisting stress out of the hinge. I also recall on the Sterling site someone not using the full length back support for the bottom ram mount, again eliminating body differences between cars or even opposite side of cars. The only reasonably questionable point then is the angle of the bend on the canopy bracket.

    Dirk

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Concord, Ca
    Posts
    1,402
    That's a damn handy CAD drawing. Thank you!
    Thanks,

    Nic.
    http://s93.photobucket.com/albums/l61/quikniq/
    CCC Sterling # 416

  5. #15
    ***Euro-Nova Supporter*** Spacenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Hampshire, UK
    Posts
    5,196
    Quote Originally Posted by MartinB View Post
    I have acquired a second 'old' set, which I'm not sure if they are from a MkI, as they do not have the ram lower mounting point (and a shorter 'side plate'), but they could also be something that someone knocked together themselves of course!
    This is a fascinating thread - I never realised there was so much variation between Mk1 and Mk2 hinges. I guess the principle reason was the move from manual canopy operation (with Austin Maxi tailgate gas springs) to hydraulic cylinders. Regarding your second "old" set of hinges, the ones on my Elam Mk1 are also missing the lower ram mounting boss and plate extension. It looks like they came from the factory like that. I suspect that the Mk1 hydraulic cylinders were not the same length as the Maxi gas rams so the hinge plates were manufactured without the mounting boss. My car originally came with an early hydraulic system fitted, the hydraulic cylinders were bolted through the fibreglass at the bottom of the ram pocket.

    I also have a set of Superman's stainless hinges, which I gave up trying to fit as the angles of the hinge bars were all wrong. That said, I hadn't tried all possible combinations of fitting the bars - swapping side to side, upside down and right way up... it was easier to refit the (pre-distorted) steel originals...

    Lauren
    only Pythagoras can save me now!

  6. #16
    Senior Member MicksRedNova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Winscombe, North Somerset, England
    Posts
    2,267
    Quote Originally Posted by islandman View Post
    Martin,

    Where did you get those original drawings you annotated ?
    Dave
    They are the ones my son did as a Uni engineering task here: http://www.euro-nova.co.uk/vb/showth...ns-in-mm/page3
    I never checked the accuracy of his measurements, and it looks like some of them are questionable. Its good that others are correcting them.
    As my hinges are now back off MicksRedNova (bent and twisted by the crash recovery d**khead) I will check the measurements myself too.

    Mick
    Last edited by MicksRedNova; 22-08-2016 at 08:47 PM.
    Club Nova Member (F-036)

    MicksRedNova2 may take as long as the original!!

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    East Riding
    Posts
    1,398
    I found the sterling forum pic



    But looking on the Sterling Web site that is how the sell their hinges



    Dirk

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    East Riding
    Posts
    1,398
    Quote Originally Posted by Nic View Post
    That's a damn handy CAD drawing. Thank you!
    If any one wants the CAD version just PM me your Email and Ill send you it, Its a bit scruffy and work in progress.

    Dirk

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    East Riding
    Posts
    1,398
    Quote Originally Posted by Spacenut View Post
    This is a fascinating thread - I never realised there was so much variation between Mk1 and Mk2 hinges. I guess the principle reason was the move from manual canopy operation (with Austin Maxi tailgate gas springs) to hydraulic cylinders. Regarding your second "old" set of hinges, the ones on my Elam Mk1 are also missing the lower ram mounting boss and plate extension. It looks like they came from the factory like that. I suspect that the Mk1 hydraulic cylinders were not the same length as the Maxi gas rams so the hinge plates were manufactured without the mounting boss. My car originally came with an early hydraulic system fitted, the hydraulic cylinders were bolted through the fibreglass at the bottom of the ram pocket.

    I also have a set of Superman's stainless hinges, which I gave up trying to fit as the angles of the hinge bars were all wrong. That said, I hadn't tried all possible combinations of fitting the bars - swapping side to side, upside down and right way up... it was easier to refit the (pre-distorted) steel originals...

    Lauren
    I think That is part of the problem whilst I never had a problem fitting the set I got from Ian I did change the pivot point for the ram on the arm about an inch lower which obviously lifted the canopy higher to match my original hinges, when I mentioned this to Ian the next time I saw him and I did start the conversation with how pleased I was with the hinges but they could be improved if the pivot point was lower, I think I got "every F*@#ER wants to improve them" which is why I stopped making them. I guess in fairness over the years there will be slight differences in the bodies and the hinges used so now getting a one fit for all might be an issue for a bulk buy. That's why I thought something a bit more adjustable in all planes would be more suitable?

    Dirk

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Dirk View Post
    Thinking about it on my drive home, the arms would be much better made from solid bar tapped M10 both ends and rod eyes used, it would eliminate the need for bushes all the welding and slots in the brackets, it would all be tweekable and would take any twisting stress out of the hinge. I also recall on the Sterling site someone not using the full length back support for the bottom ram mount, again eliminating body differences between cars or even opposite side of cars. The only reasonably questionable point then is the angle of the bend on the canopy bracket.

    Dirk
    A good idea, although possibly a couple of issues with that approach :

    1) If the bars were solid then you could not run hidden wires up inside for the wiper and electric mirrors (as I and some others do)

    2) The fact that the end joints all have tight bushes stops lateral movement in the up and down position. If "Rod Eyes" is the same as Rose Joints then it may wobble side to side when open


    Well there is definitely enough interest here to take this discussion and possible buy further, especially if we can identify the differences betweenMK1 and MK2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •