Wishbone, subframe and rear axle differences

[CJM]

After hours of searching I'm no closer to the answers that I need regarding subframes and track width.
I'm also going to be including wishbones and rear axles in this as there is no definitive answer within one thread regarding which wishbones and axle arb thickness came on what cars.

It would be useful to have all the information in one place for reference


First of all subframes, ph1, standard 172/182, and 172/182 cups.

If we could get all measurements in the same format that would make it even eaiser. If they could be measured according to the picture below that would be ideal.

Ph2
-
-

Ph2
- 51 12mm
- 03 12mm
- 03 12mm
- 53 12mm

172 cup
-
-

182
-
-

182 cup suspension pack
-
-

182 cup
-
-

Trophy
-
-


Next up wishbones with and without the extra castor. As some later ph2 172s came with the extra castor wishbones standard. It would be useful to roughly find out the year change for this.
I'm presuming all 172 cups came with the extra castor?
There doesn't seem to be much info on all of the 182 models and what they come with.

Ph2 172
- 51 normal castor
- 03 extra castor
- 03 extra castor
- 53 extra castor

182
-
-

182 cup suspension pack
-
-

182 cup
-
-

Trophy
-
-


Last thing on the list is the rear arb size that's built into the rear beam.
I've seen on here that 182 cups come with a bigger arb in the rear axle, but again no proof anywhere of this.
I've also seen it mentioned numerous times the late axles have more metal under the shock bolt area?

You can see in the pic below the rear arb and the easiest way to measure them.

Ph1
-
-

Ph2 172
- 51 22mm
- 03 22mm
- 03 22mm
- 53 22mm

172 cup
-
-

182
-
-

182 with cup suspension pack
-
-

182 cup
-
-

Trophy
-
-



If a few of you can measure your own cars to build up a decent list that would be helpful in determining what parts came on what car.

 

[Timmsy]

Also isnt later 172/182's rear axle wider than say a ph1 or early ph2 172?

 

[GrahamS]

That's the stub axles which are different matey

 

[CJM]

Right, after a bit more research and buying some parts I've come up with the folowing;

All ph2 172 cars share the same the same subframe, the track width difference of 19mn (renault documented) comes from the lower offset wheels (10mm per side)
172 track width 1418mm
172 track width 1437mm
182 track width is 1430mm but I'm unsure if this extra width over the 172 comes from wheel offset or different hubs

Some 182s come with a bigger rear arb of 24mm as a posed to the 22mm found on the ph2 172s. I would guess that this lager arb was part of the cup pack suspension and obviously on the cup cars as well.

 

[GrahamS]

I believe the larger rear ARB was only on 182 cups although that could be wrong. I read somewhere once that cup pack cars didn't have it but normal cups did.
et38.5 wheels on the 172 cup and et48 on the normal 172 alloys.
@NorthloopCup knows about the hubs don't ya!

 

[Diagro]

My 04 172 had normal caster before I changedthem

 

[CJM]

The axle I've bought has come off a ff 182.
But without a few people measuring we wouldn't be able to tell for sure.

Some more info on the 182 hubs would be handy as I plan to upgrade to the lager bearings on the 182 hubs
Is this only 60mm spacing ones with the larger bearings or all 182 items?

 

[NorthloopCup]

The axle I've bought has come off a ff 182.
But without a few people measuring we wouldn't be able to tell for sure.

Some more info on the 182 hubs would be handy as I plan to upgrade to the lager bearings on the 182 hubs
Is this only 60mm spacing ones with the larger bearings or all 182 items?

Hub wise, non gave a wider front track width mate. The wider track width comes from the subframe and wheel offsets.

Only the 60mm spacing hubs had the larger bearings. They also have different steering arms cast on to the hub so they have improved Ackerman angle.

 

[NorthloopCup]

I've got a 182 cup rear beam with the larger diameter rear arb fitted so I can compare it to the original that's on my cup if you want mate.

 

[MG cup]

I'll just post this spiel which is something that I have posted in the past. All of this is stuff I have researched myself by speaking with Adam at Wolverhampton about part numbers, seeing the differences physically or seeing people's GEO print outs. Anybody correct it if I'm wrong but I'm 95% all of that is right except actual ARB widths and hub bolt spacings as I always forget what they're.

Clio suspension differences

Going to waffle on here.

182 cups have different bolt spacing (60mm) on the hub to strut fixing, everything else shares the same size( 54mm)

All 172 cups came with the extra caster wishbones, some of the later model 1*2's came with them also but its a lottery.

Cup front shocks are cup shocks irrelevant if they're 172 or 182 with the only difference being bolt spacing, rear shocks are supposed to all be the same despite all the different part numbers. Springs are also 15% stiffer and lower on cups according to Renault sales bumph.

Then there's difference in wheel bearing sizes between 172 hubs and 182 hubs and also different ABS reluctor rings and triggering patterns.

182 cup has the thickest ARB too supposedly by 1mm iirc.

172 cups have wider drilled subframes, longest shafts and inner tie rods on any 1*2 model.

182's have two piece shafts on the O/S.

There is two types of steering rack TRW/SMI and again are supposedly the same turn to turn with the only difference being the inner tie rod thread size.

There is two manufactures of callipers too throughout the evolution lucas/ and I forgot the other. Both the same in pad design etc, the seals are different though.

Then there's the different thickness stub axles on the rear beam, this I'm not sure what has what tbh.

Thats all the differences in actual suspension geometry that I have noticed or had confirmed, some cars have more caster than others and my only explanation is changes to the strut tops but no definitive info on that. Then there's the wheel offsets which affect track widths between models.

I'm sure there are other small nuances in there but I haven't noticed them, happy to be corrected on any of these or others added.

 

[p@blo]

I've got a 182 cup rear beam with the larger diameter rear arb fitted so I can compare it to the original that's on my cup if you want mate.

Likewise had meant to compare the evo00/evo04 cup car rear beams I have - was sure they were 22mm as stated in the build manual but wouldn't rule out that being a typo. :expressionless:

evo00:
View attachment 106932

evo04:
View attachment 106929

172 cups have wider drilled subframes, longest shafts and inner tie rods on any 1*2 model.

CJM's figures seem to factor this, but pretty sure the 10mm difference he quoted per side should be attributed to 5mm for the wheel offset and 5mm for the subframe. The later Cup car subframe is the same as the evo04 uniball carriers are 5mm shorter to account for the pivot being further outboard.

 

[MG cup]

I'm not going to lie, I know very little about what is what on the different evolutions of cup racer @p@blo but I do know there is a lot more than 5mm per side of difference in the drillings on the subframe holes between 172 ph1 and 172 cup.

There was a thread on here last year where Mark182 posted pictures of different hole drillings and inner track rods/tie rods.

 

[p@blo]

Do you have a link Morgan? I'd just assumed it was 5mm as had never compared the two side by side.

Just checked now and it is a typo in the manual. The later beam with the reinforcement is 24mm dia bar compared to 22mm on the earlier variant as @CJM had suggested.

 

[ilovewilly]

I had a 53 plate 172 with a build date of Nov/December 2003 which I'm pretty sure didn't have the extra castor arms. Obviously it's plausible that in 11 years the arms may have been changed. I think I still have them somewhere so will check if I think of it.

 

[mark123]

Do you have a link Morgan?

My pics
172 cup

ph1

 

[p@blo]

Cheers @mark123, is that around 10mm further outboard on the 172 cup s/frame? Are they both the same height?

Curious about the actual difference in trackwidth now with the two lengths of uniball holders & different wheel offsets. Will have a look over the weekend.

 

[MG cup]

Sorry @mark123 , I was thinking your name was mark182 and that's the photos I meant. You also had tie rod photos too in that same thread?

 

[mark123]

This one?
ph1 versus 172 cup (longer)

I also measured the door glass thickness and the 172 cup was about 1-2mm thinner than my 182 FF

My 182 FF also had the wish bones with increased castor and the subframe was the same as my 172 cup i.e. holes drilled further out.

 

[scullyg40]

My pics
172 cup
View attachment 1218644
ph1
View attachment 1218645

Old thread I know, but if the subframes are wider, the ARB's must be wider as well, right?

 

[497adam]

I’ve bought a 2nd rear beam off a 182ff to refesh and fit to my 172. Is there any issue doing this? It appears to have the 24mm arb too


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Crayola]

I’ve bought a 2nd rear beam off a 182ff to refesh and fit to my 172. Is there any issue doing this? It appears to have the 24mm arb too


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don't they all have the same rear arb thickness?

The only differences I've ever seen is that some 182 FF came with strengthening gussets under the spring perches

 

[497adam]

Reading back in this thread some had a 24mm rear arb. This beam has a 24mm one best I can get the verniers in


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[497adam]

Reading back in this thread some had a 24mm rear arb. This beam has a 24mm one best I can get the verniers in


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But I thought it was 182 cup that had it not the 182 cup packed cars?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk