I recently did a front suspension refresh on my CATS equipped '01 XKR. I replaced upper wishbone fulcrum bushings, top shock mounts, bottom shock bushings and the spring-assist/rebound cushions on the struts. During the project I noted some variations between the car and the parts lists/shop manual that puzzled me. 1) All the data I have shows a single packer (MJA 2182 AA) between the bottom of the spring and the spring base pan....my car has two packers? 2) On top of the two packers, my car also has a weird 'castellated' white nylon gizmo (see att.) that I can find no reference to or part # for? Both sides of the car are identical. The white gizmo appears to be intended to improve location of the spring on the base pan....which it may do... but it also stops the bottom of the dust bellow/gaiter from slipping over the middle of the spring pan. I reassembled both struts as I found them and everything seems to be working fine, so far......less that 500 miles. Questions; Is this set-up specifically related to the CATS option? Is there additional data available that describes the function of white gizmo and gives its part#? Any enlightenment the Forum can offer would be much appreciated.


Two packers plus white 'locator' gizmo under each spring.

2 x MJA 2182 AA spring packer

With no white gizmo the packers slip easily over dust gaiter which seats fully down on spring pan.

The castellated 'gizmo'. One tab missing from this one....driver side. All 6 tabs present on pass side.

Gizmo fits very snugly over spring base pan.

With gizmo in place gaiter cannot fit on spring pan.

 

I cannot access my car right at this moment so not sure about the "gismo", don't remember it.
however the bellows on my car is attached at the top onto the lower projection of the top mount along with the bump stop. No attachment at the bottom.

 

It appears to be assembled as it should be. The gaiter doesn't attach to the white ring. I'm in the middle of doing this myself. Putting on new springs and shocks to alleviate my droopy front end. TM

 

Interesting, would you have a look at the top spring seat and see how much wear you have.
I'm playing with a new system for the front top mounts and have noticed a fair amount of wear in that seat and made a neoprene pad but would like to find a real spring seat.
Thanks.

 

Not sure exactly what you are looking for regarding top strut mount wear but attached are a few pics showing the conditions as I took things apart. I should preface this by saying a lot of the work I did was preemptive rather than reactive. As a long time lurker on this Forum I knew what areas of the car could (would?) be problematic, so during the pre-purchase inspection and test drive the suspension was an area of particular focus. The visual strut inspection showed the top mount 'donuts' were deteriorating but weren't terminal. The damper rods were still more or less centered in the top plate but the bump stops had disintegrated, the seals on the bottom strut mounts had gone and the gaiters/bellows were torn up. I noted a significant passenger side 'clunk' on road bumps highlighting some sort of problem. As the strut mounts weren't shot I thought the culprit(s) were likely bad bushings in the bottom strut mount and/or top wishbone fulcrum. As can be seen in the pics, there was a bit of everything going on, hence the strip and refurb. Hope all this is of some use to you.


Deteriorating top donut, torn gaiter and destroyed bump stop.

Upper spring seat showing wear but the coating still intact

Damper rods still centered.

Trashed bushing in lower mount.

Loose bolt in lower mount had wallowed out the lower wishbone (A arm) mounting plates. Got replacement plates from Jaguar Heaven in CA.

Lower strut mount bolt. Hammering on the lower wishbone mounting plates due to under torquing - primary cause of suspension clunk.

Top wishbone bushings looking fine.

Looks can be deceiving.

For some reason pass side much worse than driver side.

After seeing price of OEM mounts and hearing horror stories about aftermarket knock-offs, took a chance on these URO units. Time will tell!

Didn't like the button head rivets preventing the mount from laying flat under the shock tower.

Drilled URO rivets out to replace with flat head like OEM and discovered the plates were already countersunk for flat head, but button head had been used.....!


​​​​​​​

 

Wayne, Sorry for the delayed response re: wear patterns you asked about on my upper strut mounts, but I've been sifting through all your posts on the work you have been doing on what appears to be a fundamental weakness in the OEM design.....Wow! Hat's off to you for what has clearly been a major R & D effort. Before reading all your posts I had been ready to install a set of URO after-market knock offs, after being scared off the OEM replacements by price. But, after seeing what you have been working on I decided to dig deeper into my new and old parts and now find myself wondering if I should go ahead and install the URO units in the knowledge that they will likely need replacing again in short order, or throw the old ones back in and wait to see what comes from your development efforts? I split both open both the old OEM (+/- 30K miles) and new URO units to better understand the problem you have been working to resolve, and immediately saw the issues (att.). Right now I'm inclined to hold fire until you get some feedback on your prototype units. If you do decide to take up the donation offers that have been floated you can certainly count me in for a contribution.......fascinating project.

 

Thank you for showing all your efforts and adding fuel to rush to find a solution.
That new URO one was still a shock to see how little concern on the assembly. If you need to but the car back together and already have them, I would do as you did and try and get those right. Should last a good bit. Again, thanks for showing your effort, top and bottom part. Just shows "Houston we have a problem".
Better get my ash on the on the ball.

 

Thanks for the tip Wayne. BTW, I think you're absolutely on the right track with your experimentation with different materials. Beyond the shape and placement of the non-metal members, to ensure positive location of damper rod end and spring, finding material(s) with the right elastic hysteresis will yield the best results. As you have already observed, the stresses imposed on the center donuts and the outer cushion ring are somewhat different and it may be that a single durometer material for both applications might not be optimal? I wonder if any potential exists for vacuum/resin casting by modifying a set of housings to use as prototype molds? It occurs to me that Jaguar corrected the problem of spring movement on the base pan with a cast nylon containment ring, but opted for a less durable (rubber?) coating on the top seat, presumably more worried about NVH transmission issues than longevity?


Additional packer and containment ring to improve spring base location?

Nylon containment ring.

Rubber(?)coated upper spring seat.

 

We sure are on the same page with the issues.
A couple of days in the shop together might have us near completion on this project.
​​​​​​You don't happen to be headed towards the Carolinas any time soon??
I do want to try the 1/16 inch sheet to see if a spring will fit with it down the sides of the vertical on the seat. Not a lot of room there.
We almost need to combine these threads as you are showing all the problems I'm talking about. I will direct those that show the most interest to have a look at your progress.
If I can find some local 4-7113 pads I will get you out a set, no luck at Advance or Autozone today. Otherwise I have to get a order up, and if Gial can give us some positive results, I'll order enough for ten sets. O'Reilly's told me two weeks when I went in there earlier. I'll order direct to Energy Suspension.
Again, waiting on parts.

 

Pity you're so far away, I'd really enjoy spending a few days brainstorming possible solutions with you and trialing some ideas.....I sense your shop is somewhat better equipped than my garage...... I do plan to try and get the car back on the road within the couple of weeks and will probably use the URO mounts. But, now having the benefit of reviewing your work and comments, I'm considering partially filling the inside of the housings with something like 3M 4200 or 5200 as a stopgap measure. I had good luck with both those polyurethane products during my past boating life although I'm not sure how they would fare against metal surfaces (need to study the spec sheets). There's plenty of space to fill in there (att.) and either product would definitely support and hold the center donuts in position, certainly more securely than just relying on the compression load between the top and bottom elements of the mount....particularly as the load within the URO unit is pretty low due to the thinner donuts. Do you have any experience with semi permanently 'gluing' of the center donuts with additional 'pour in' support?

 

On the center donuts I use, they are not so much to fill the washer to the sides, but I did make each one fit in the hole with a lip, so when crushed I moved the installed shock all over the place and got no movement off center. I feel you could get the top donuts cut without any problem. Just a drill press, couple of
Fostner bits and a fine blade hacksaw.
You can always cut bushing a little thick and sand them down of a belt sander. Just move them around to get them level.
I would be glad to talk to you during the effort, just give me a number and time.
As for the polymer, you are way ahead of me on that. Studied it a while back, just no first hand experience.

 

When I received my new Welsh mounts I immediately noticed that the center mounting hole was NOT centered nor parallel with the top surfaces on either of them.
I disassembled them, flattened the surfaces, centered the donut and then packed them with surebond-sb188. Assembled them and let them sit to fully cure before installing them.

I anticipate replacing them when they fail with a pair of Wayne's units.

wj

 

^^ Keep us posted on how your modifications to the current Welsh product holds up. Welsh had this market cornered until they decided to cut costs by changing materials or suppliers or both (we will probably never fully know). I predict that Wayne's custom-designed units will become the de-facto standard once they prove themselves on the first few vehicles that get them....

 

Good info WJ. I'm not familiar with the Surebond product but will read the spec. sheet. Question: Was it sufficiently viscous that it didn't drip all over the place when you re-assembled the two halves of the mount body,or did you let it partially cure before re-assembling?

 

It had enough body (just) to hold in place as I injected it into and around.
I had tested the material previously to determine how the cured product would react to heat or cold. It held its shape and the tension seemed little affected with heat, it did get a bit more resistant to movement when left in the freezer for a few hours...but still plyable.
I only wanted to lessen the area where the welsh jelly piece could move around. The oem donut had more body and I assume the tension contributed to it's holding in place. The welsh piece had less mass and was more compliant...(easier for movement). The sb-188 is a high temp product but I cannot see that it has any place in your mount project.
Since the Welsh unit comes with new spring mounts and they seem of good quality I believe they are being sourced rather than manufactured for Welsh. IMO this is the approach you should take. Trying to assemble spring mounts from two pieces is time consuming and will probably be the place of first failure. I have a long history of making things work and be reliable/durable but this only works for those wanting the challenge and the time and inclination to do it.
keep up your good work!
wj

 

I'm trying not to overthink the issue of firmly stabilizing the center donuts, but I'm concerned that the URO donuts are loose, (see att.) not cemented to the steel center plate like the OEM design. (I'm not familiar with the Welsh parts). They only have shallow recesses to locate them to the center plate and they rely entirely on the crush pressure between the two halves of the mount to keep all three parts together. This means there are potentially four slip planes where movement can occur... 1) under side of upper housing & top face of top donut, 2) bottom face of top donut & top face of center plate, 3) bottom face of center plate & top face of bottom donut, 4) bottom face of bottom donut & upper side of lower housing. Also, as can be seen in the earlier pics, the URO donuts are a lot thinner than the OEM donuts and therefore there isn't as much crush pressure as the OEM set up.

 

I can see buying the Welsh kit if just for the large donut between the top plate assembly and the spring collar. What I presently use fits the collar very tightly, but who knows what the forces on a quick maneuver might do with a diving weight shift at the front of the car.
I'll try to find the 4 7113's in the area again tomorrow and send them out, if nothing else for comparison.
On most of those donuts I checked on, the used assembles that were sent to me, they all were a loose fit, not even close on some. So when they crush down to nothing, they are also dissolving on the sides against the spring collar.
Can't remember where I saw it, but one of the members had the Welsh one split in half and was hanging out of the top of the tower. That was the reason I didn't want to suggest that, but if Jim thinks that material has been improved, then surely that is the way to go in that area.

 

Ian, In my search for coil spring insulators and maybe using the Gizmo part, I did find where it came from.
Someone along the way installed a X308 bushing at the bottom, where it does show for that car.
I think that is why it had a broken tag, not a perfect fit.
I know it's no Biggy but when I found it, thought you and others might want to know where is came from.

https://www.sngbarratt.com/English/#...assembly/14069

 

Thanks Wayne. I've been able to establish that the Gizmo is a legit XK part, and I've now seen it used on XKs elsewhere. As an example there is a 2004 XKR suspension rebuild shown on You Tube. At 02:57 the lower spring mount is clearly visible and it has the identical double packer plus white Gizmo set-up as on my car at post #8 in this thread.
On the same topic I recently saw an 'upgraded' lower spring mount offered by DCR in the UK. https://www.xk8-parts.com/category/x...ension-wheels/ The DCR mount completely eliminates all the plastic/nylon bits....packers and gizmo. Looks pretty slick. I've written to them for more info. I'll post again when I hear back.

 

I've been delving into the whole front ride height issue. There is info up the wazoo about the effect worn mounts and bushings make but, for comparison purposes, I was looking for the overall free length dimension of a new front spring for a convertible....assuming the spring rate might be different between soft top & coupe.....together with an idea of how much 'sag' can be tolerated before packers/spacers are needed to keep camber in spec. I've looked through most of the suspension related threads and the workshop manual but haven't seen any numbers. Thanks in advance for any help to point me in the right direction.