How common was the dry front end and hydro rear? Does it effect performance and if so does it increase or lower it? What are the advantages if any? Last but not least what model's would you find this setup on and was it factory fitted?

Never factory fitted. A Mini was either all-dry or all-hydro.

But why would you want to anyway? Hydro is designed to work as inconnected front to rear.

_________________
Brett Nicholson
Greendale (near Ballan) VIC.
1971 Morris Mini Moke
1966 Austin Mini
1965 Morris Mini Traveller
1973 LR Series 3 88
2007 LR Freelander 2

Well apparently thats what I have..... so in other words best to convert the rear then at some point and have dry all round??

Wasn't ever factory fitted to any car, maybe a modification and prob for lazyness, would be found on a mini that someone has purchased a complete sub frame with motor and it was dry and they put it in blocking off or crimping the hydro line, so the rear would still hold fluid.

Is it good? nope, but i have seen it before.

_________________

*Reasonable pricing
*I come to you..
Jay: 0431404607

My 2 cents:
AFAIK Hydrolastic is a sealed unit with dampened displacement front to rear and vice versa. One sealed system either side. Just like other fluid systems - there are no moving mechanical parts to wear out.

Having the rear blocked off from the front may still give you some movement via the compression of the low preasurised sealed fluid line and diaphram unit, but I would seriously suspect that it would be a rotten road holding alternative to simply replacing/reconnecting the proper hydrolastic system.

Even if changing from 'wet' to 'dry' (as lots of owners seem inclined to want to do) is to get better 'performance' from a mini, hydraulic systems have been used in big money engineered competition cars for decades with great success (sorry the Citroen owner comes out in me now).

Sounds like yet another butchered car to me.

Be brave and give it back what it was intended to have. If you really dont like the hydro - then it seems an easy weekends work and a few rubber blocks to the change it to static suspension.

Q: Are there really that many cases of unreliable hyrolastic systems in BMC products:?:

_________________
YDO005 1965 stock standard MORRIS MINI DELUXE

just thinkin about it, i recon it wooldent be too bad, spastic up the front and dry at the rear , wooldent it handle better?

the spastic on my delux is all over the shop....

_________________
-jamie-
1963morris 850
1965 solid side van
1994 rover racecar

It's a 74 model Clubman what was the factory fitted suspension for this model?

dry !!!!

thanks mike, well I'll eventually get around to changing it and thanks

No! It could be either. 74 was the changeover year! It depends when in 74 it was built.

If there are no hydro pipes under teh floor above the back subframe or sticking out of the bolt on covers at either end of the floor, it's likely it started life as dry.

My bet would be it started luife as Hydro and someone has replaced teh complete engine/gearbox/front sub as a unit at some point and simply blanked off the hydro pipes somewhere.

_________________
Brett Nicholson
Greendale (near Ballan) VIC.
1971 Morris Mini Moke
1966 Austin Mini
1965 Morris Mini Traveller
1973 LR Series 3 88
2007 LR Freelander 2

I'd pay that one too.

_________________
YDO005 1965 stock standard MORRIS MINI DELUXE

Yep - third that. No doubt some backyard butcher who failed to appreciate the engineering masterpeice of floating on fluid

_________________
1967 Cooper S - new front bearings to do.
1965 Cooper S shell - Slow progress. No time or money!
1966 Deluxe- next rustoration!
Mk 2 & XJ6 Jags. Less said the better.

who knows at the end of the day all I know for certain is I want it all to the same. I'll check out exactly whats going on over the weekend.

so you have a new mini?

_________________
speed costs....how fast do you want to go...

I will bow to better knowledge. I thought the change over to dry was earlier than 74.

Zach - I actually prefer a wet car. The are softer in the ride etc and with a set of shockies fitted all the way round they handle well. They won Bathurst floating on fluid.

I also maintain that a normal person on the road and at sensible speeds could not tell the difference in ultimate road holding capabilities between wet and dry. On the race track yes - but then many other factors start to come into play as well.

I think the claims of dry being better is a myth because many are simply frightened of the wet system being fragile. Its normally not the case.