Tim Crabtree
New Registration
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2008
- Messages
- 1
- Reaction score
- 0
Have an SL 320 2000. I have what I think is bad scutle shake, had shocs checked and they are fine. It's worse with the hard top off. Any ideas?
Sounds normal to me - our 129 was a bit wobbly without the roof on
Hi All.forgive me but what is scuttle shake exactly? my x used to have an SL 280. 1984 Model.the ride was nowhere near as smooth as our CE again 1984 model.
Apparently, in the bad old days of BL, when they were prototype testing the Triumph Stag, it flexed so badly that they had to re-engineer the shell - introducing the steel hoop over the top behind the seats and tie it forwards to the middle of the windscreen header rail. This was the only way they could make it acceptably stiff for marketing.
I have never known a true 'open' car that didn't suffer some degree of scuttle shake. It is an impossibility to stiffen up the floor of any car and make it as stiff as a full monocoque (particualrly with bonded-in windscreens). Try a Megane convertable if you want to see how bad scuttle shake can be!!!
I'd agree with Malcolm and make sure you're tyres are inflated only to the minimum values stated in the manual. Other than that - just get used to driving around the worst of the potholes that infect seemingly every road nowadays...and enjoy the sunshine.
Doug
Ah, but yours is a high quality car, relatively 'heavily' engineered' and with a comparatively short wheelbase.
Worst are these cheap folding tin tops with front wheel drive and huge rear overhangs. These have the high polar moments of inertia, particularly when the roof is stowed, exacerbated any flexing. MB's generally have short overhangs and the engines are set as far back as possible, moving the centre of gravity towards the centre and giving the low polar MOI essential for both reduced scuttle shake and quick, responsive handling. The smaller (lighter and shorter) engined models benefit most from the physics.
Doug