Tigger had brand new Rover cones fitted several years ago now, and the back end is still higher than "normal".

I'm not convinced that all knuckle joints are equal, and some may be a tad longer.

Metric is for people who can't do fractions.

I would suggest that if the rubber cones are original factory items there is very little chance that the will settle significantly.

As has been stated, the extra weight on the front will shorten the front cones - and any extra compression on the cone fitted to the rear will be emphasised by the higher "suspension rate" at the rear.

There may be some change as the different bits settle into each other but the original cones are petty robust and quite durable - the ones I use are 40 odd years old and still fine.

Cheers, Ian

I misspoke.  The knuckle joint on the rear ALSO presses into the end of the trumpet in the stock setup.  The links I referred to in my previous post are included in a Hi-lo kit and I was envisioning Hi-los as I wrote that part.  So, in the stock setup, both front and rear are the same in that in both cases, the knuckle is pressed into the end of the trumpet.

the 3:1 and 5:1 ratios you speak of have nothing to do with trumpet length.  Rather, they have to do with the relative positioning of the knuckle joint(which is pressed into the end of the trumpet(front) or end of the link connecting the knuckle joint to the trumpet(rear)) on the front upper arm and the rear trailing/radius arm.  The net effect is that the front cone is compressed more per unit of wheel travel(in bump) than the rear cone becaause of these ratios being different front-to-rear.  The trumpet length has an effect on ride height(ground clearance) and before Hi-los came along, ride height was altered by shortening the trumpet lengths.  Once Hi-los came along, they could be used to reduce ride height with it no longer being necessary to shorten the trumpets.  The heavier weight on the front suspension of a Mini also puts more load on the cones and may cause them to be compressed more on the fronts.

And - because of the differences in trumpet lengths the suspension geometry responds differently to cone height or any other length variable in the mix.  A 1/2" difference in cone height will be a 1 1/2" ride height change in the front (3:1 ratio), but a  2 1/2" change in the rear (5:1 ratio ) so swapping them has likely magnified the difference between front and back - the rear is now lower than normal and the front is higher than normal.  Probably would've been close to level if left as it was.  But make sure all the trumpets are properly seated in the cones, the cones are seated in the subframes, and the knuckles are fully in the suspension arms.

SE7EN

_{new cones should not be different heights for front and rear.  If used, one set may have settled more than the other, but when cones of the same part number are new, they are all basically the same height.}

as the car settles, the camber should become less positive and the toe may change as well.  You'll need to get both checked when the car seems to have settled as far as it's going to.

You probably mean +ve camber and it does get less positive and can go to -ve as the suspension goes down.

It shouldn't take long at all for them to settle......(These were used cones?)

Some ordinary everyday driving should take care of it.

A FATHER CARRIES PICTURES WHERE HIS MONEY USED TO BE 

1130cc, 12g295, SW5 cam, LCB, HIF38, CA spec.

I just converted my 66 Riley elf to dry suspension (wet suspension stuff is now available to anyone interested).

I used the rubber cones that came with the dry subframes. I put the rear (taller) cones in front and the front cones in the rear.

The car sits higher in the front than in the rear, and the car sits high all around. Will the front cones "relax" so the front of the car comes down? There seems te be a fair amount of camber, and am hoping this will go away. I had the toe out set today, but dont want my tires to wear out on the outside.

Bruce 

Happiness is driving a british car, ANY british car!