Alfa Romeo Forums banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi, I have an 84 alfa sprint and it is still on the original front sus. parts, it's noisy and not all that alfa ish. Are the sud and sprint front crossmember, wishbones and struts the same? And does anybody in NZ have any going cheap??
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
Does your's have inboard or outboard front brakes ? The only difference is the lower ball joints depending on your brakes.

The best place to find new ones is on flebay for the genuine bushes that I would recommend from various European country's. Or for poly bushes there's a few sites in the UK to order from.

I'm interested in what brakes are on your 84 model. My 84 has the updated head and tail lights but the older sud brakes and later twin webers I'm beginning to think they were quite rare like this in Aus/NZ.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Thanks, it has inboard discs (and thousands of dollars of receipts from the previous owner as a result) and twin 36 dellortos. I thought it'd be the same as a sud because, with out measuring, it's identical to the other 7 or so I've had.

I got poly bushes for the anti roll bar locally, but have been told that polybushing the rst can make it too harsh? Is that true?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
That's interesting you have inboards and you have the more modern wheels too.

Yep I agree poly bushes are harsh. I bought some and hated them, harsh and crashy through the body also the car tram lined on uneven roads. I was then told that was because of track tyres I'm using but then why does it not do it with original bushes ? So I'm using rubber bushes now and it drives great. There's another thread on here with poly bush opinions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
272 Posts
Hi,
Nice looking car! I'm surprised it has the inboards though. Looks like a series 2.

For what its worth I took the poly bushes off mine too as I found them too stiff and made the handling inferior. I'm happier with the original rubber bushes, though I had to go find them in the UK.

cheers

Paul
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
211 Posts
I think the only difference is the size of the anti roll bar - yours might be thinner than the suds. My outboard braked Sprint (1987) doesn't have one at all. I think the change over to outboard was around 86. My sprint looks exactly the same as yours (except for being very old and rusty) but has the 33 running gear.

Despite all the opinion against it, I'm currently putting poly bushings in my sud (in my avatar) but I'll be wanting to keep the rubber bushings (if they remain usable) in case I want to reverse the process.

I'd be more focused on updating your springs and shocks. Springs are pretty easy to come by there's guys on trademe selling new King springs that seem to work okay - though they lower it of course. Shocks are a bit harder to find - we got some that were supposed to fit but our mechanic had a real job fitting them.

Kerry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
I think the only difference is the size of the anti roll bar - yours might be thinner than the suds. My outboard braked Sprint (1987) doesn't have one at all. I think the change over to outboard was around 86. My sprint looks exactly the same as yours (except for being very old and rusty) but has the 33 running gear.

Despite all the opinion against it, I'm currently putting poly bushings in my sud (in my avatar) but I'll be wanting to keep the rubber bushings (if they remain usable) in case I want to reverse the process.

I'd be more focused on updating your springs and shocks. Springs are pretty easy to come by there's guys on trademe selling new King springs that seem to work okay - though they lower it of course. Shocks are a bit harder to find - we got some that were supposed to fit but our mechanic had a real job fitting them.

Kerry
There is no precise date for the change to inboard brakes, it was more a question of having sud chassis laying around or the new chassis. The 3rd series are all outboard. But in the second series there was a mix, and there are even user manuals to prove it.

To explain you guys i'll give the example of my two Sprint QV. They were both built in 83, the first year of production of series 2. One is from the begining of the year, therefore a very early one, doesn't even have electric watch and some odd options, and the other from the end of the year, regular qv car. This accordingly to the chassis numbers, obviously.

The early one has outboards and the "bit" later inboards, I have the user manuals of both cars, and they are different regarding the brakes, but both are representing a 2 series sprint and similar in all the rest.

Carburators were the same, the early one had dellorto's and the other webber's. So has usually, in alfa romeo and every other brand, it was what was available. :yes::yes::yes:

The antiroll bar should be thinner then the series 1, wich had a better bar. 33 based sprint cars also had thinner bars, the thinner applied to sprints. The ratios of gearboxes differed also with time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Thanks for that, I am leaning more towards thinking it's time to overhaul the strut assembly. I had a mechanic put it on a hoist and have a look, cost me $50 to be told replace everything. I am organising good second hand arms with ball joints and bushes included, so just need to get strut top bearings, springs and shocks.

The other thing I am doing is strut bracing the rear socks. I did this to the 33 I had and the affect was incredible. It went over bumps the same but was sublime through the corners.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Hi, I have an 84 alfa sprint and it is still on the original front sus. parts, it's noisy and not all that alfa ish. Are the sud and sprint front crossmember, wishbones and struts the same? And does anybody in NZ have any going cheap??
Between sud based cars almost all suspension parts are similar with cars of similar years. Struts might have different charges, as Sprints are heavier then suds. But you can rebuild yours or swap to koni's if u can find ones. :drool:

Ouboards cars and inboards have different struts and so on...
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
12,522 Posts
Do not poly bush this car!!!!!! Ruins the handling. Been there and done that.

And why do you want to replace the front cross member?

It is an easy job to replace all bushes on a Sud/Sprint ... buy the rubber ones, only take a day working slowly and job done.
Pete
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Do not poly bush this car!!!!!! Ruins the handling. Been there and done that.

And why do you want to replace the front cross member?

It is an easy job to replace all bushes on a Sud/Sprint ... buy the rubber ones, only take a day working slowly and job done.
Pete
I don't want to replace the crossmember but if the parts were available I would overhaul all the suspension then lift the whole lot up into place
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
12,522 Posts
I don't want to replace the crossmember but if the parts were available I would overhaul all the suspension then lift the whole lot up into place
Replacing front suspension arms as well then. Is this so you can paint them up nicely and keep the car on the road? ... that makes sense :)

Otherwise you can pull the whole front suspension off in about 30 minutes ...
Pete
ps: Be careful with the rear suspension as a Sud and Sprint do not have the same rear axle hub ... learnt that after buying one from a wrecker, painting it all up nicely before trying to fit it to the car and oops won't work. The wrecker was embarrassed about taking it back :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Replacing front suspension arms as well then. Is this so you can paint them up nicely and keep the car on the road? ... that makes sense :)

Otherwise you can pull the whole front suspension off in about 30 minutes ...
Pete
ps: Be careful with the rear suspension as a Sud and Sprint do not have the same rear axle hub ... learnt that after buying one from a wrecker, painting it all up nicely before trying to fit it to the car and oops won't work. The wrecker was embarrassed about taking it back :D
Yeah that would be the ideal scenario
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
There is no precise date for the change to inboard brakes, it was more a question of having sud chassis laying around or the new chassis. The 3rd series are all outboard. But in the second series there was a mix, and there are even user manuals to prove it.

To explain you guys i'll give the example of my two Sprint QV. They were both built in 83, the first year of production of series 2. One is from the begining of the year, therefore a very early one, doesn't even have electric watch and some odd options, and the other from the end of the year, regular qv car. This accordingly to the chassis numbers, obviously.

The early one has outboards and the "bit" later inboards, I have the user manuals of both cars, and they are different regarding the brakes, but both are representing a 2 series sprint and similar in all the rest.

Carburators were the same, the early one had dellorto's and the other webber's. So has usually, in alfa romeo and every other brand, it was what was available. :yes::yes::yes:

The antiroll bar should be thinner then the series 1, wich had a better bar. 33 based sprint cars also had thinner bars, the thinner applied to sprints. The ratios of gearboxes differed also with time.

Just to confuse things more :wacko: Mine's a November 83 build and a 33 chassis because the twin cable rear handbrake mounts are in the floor with factory rubber plugs filling the holes.
The difference with my car and alfadesiac's car is they chose to fit Webers and series 1 wheels. It might just be a case of how they used up old part stocks ?
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top