I’m just asking, has anyone installed the throttle by cable set up.
It looks real trick and smooth.
Just wondering.
GTJOEY1314
1 Like
Hi GTJOEY,
I have and I really like it. It’s much more responsive. It doesn’t hesitate under torque like the stock “tractor design” rod and ball linkage. The one I have is part of a complete Mangoletsi kit. The kit included everything needed, pedal, pedal box, manifold, dual cables, brackets, nuts, bolts, silicon hoses, clamps, etc. Mine is for Webers, but Mangoletsi are primarily manifold people, so I’m sure they have a set up for SUs. They even included an aluminum template (and flapper wheels!) to make it easier to port the head.
It’s a game changer, especially for slaloms & rallies.
NOW WE ARE TALKING BIG BOY!
One thing My car is left hand drive like yours, where does the cable go!
from the pedal box, how does it get to the carbs?
Thanks BIG TIME
GTJOEY1314
Ok half that stuff I wont need because of stock , su’s….
It swings all the way round, that’s a trick set up.
I drove a full fuel injection set up and it was really smooth on the pedal.
Hoe does it look in the footwell?
gtjoey1314
This has always puzzled me: Ive driven an E with a cable throttle, and many more with a properly adjusted mechanical linkage.
For the life of me, I cannot grok how a cable is a “game changer” wet to throttle response. Ditto for the mechanically-linkaged Datsuns… I competed perfectly OK wirh the “inferior” mechanical setup.
I can only see it being a game changer if you replace old worn with new.
Perhaps: Tweety’s linkage had on it somewhere north of 200,000 miles, and though it had a small amount of “slop” in it, it was NOT slow to respond.
Properly adjusted, that’s the key. I agree, the stock system is perfectly acceptable. IMO, it’s a lot like the carbs themselves; once it’s set up right stop messing with it.
1 Like
One area the hard linkage is weak (at least the LHD linkage) is that it seems necessary to sacrifice one end of the range. On mine it can either be set up so that the launch is gentle and controlled but that means on the other end the valves can’t reach full open before it runs out of travel. Or it can be shortened so it can open the valves all the way, but then the launch snaps my neck back and is very difficult to control.
Also the whole mess of 50 something parts rattles around which is kind of annoying. There is unavoidable slop, like the forked joint between the front and back throttle rods.
Synchronization using just the pinch bolts on the carb spindles is doable but aggravating.
The floor mounted pedal hinge isn’t as easy to control as a top mounted pedal, although it might be a bit easier to maintain speed without ankle stress.
I’m not sure how many of these issues are solved by the kit.
Jerry,
I just went back and refreshed my memory on the 15% mileage improvement report by reading this thread: [E-Type] Mangoletsi throttle cable conversion kit. It’s an interesting thread, though it’s almost 5 years old so an update from more recent experience would probably be more helpful to the original poster. In particular, an update from a user of a LHD car, as it appears that at the time of the original post there were some issues with the LHD version.
The stock throttle setup is adequate, but certainly not great. It has significant backlash (slop), and friction. Most importantly, the geometry is poor, at least on the LHD version. The pedal itself is, to me, a particularly awful piece of work. I, long ago, removed the whole pedal, and welded up a new one, top-humg like the RHD setup, This change, by itself, greatly reduces friction and pedal effort, and provides a more natural, comfortable geometry. But, the action of the firewall linkage is still just wrong, regardless of how it is adjusted. The pedal is far too sensitive off-idle, making a smooth take-off from a stop difficult.
For the above reasons I have designed my own cable linkage, which I expect will resolve all of these problems. If uses two cables for the triple-SU setup, with one operating the front carb, the other operating the center and rear carbs. The whole setup is smaller, lighter, with far fewer moving parts, and far fewer parts overall. Friction (using teflon-coated cables) should be almost non-existent, there will be no slop, and no rattling. I hope to try out the first 3D printed prototype before too long.
Regards,
Ray L.
1 Like
sounds interesting ray. 3D printing as well! is this your own printer or an industrial unit you have access to?
Phil,
A friend of mine gave me a 3D printer when he upgraded to a larger one. I hope to have it up and running in a few days. It’s small (~9"x9"x12" work cube) and inexpensive, but he did a LOT of upgrades to it, so it works pretty nicely. MORE than good enough for the few very simple parts I have in mind.
Regards,
Ray L.
im fascinated Ray. please post some photos of the printing in progress if its not asking too much or encroaching on your IP
Sync’ing the first crack of the butterflies… I remember having to do this quite often on my '64 in '74 when these cars were just 10 years old. I just did mine again last night. Near impossible but outside of competition, close enough.
A cable system would STILL require sync’ing the shafts. No?
Beware of cable-whip induced slop upon relaxation of the pedal. Keeping the cables as straight as possible helps as will keeping positive pressure on the entire system. Making sure there is near zero clearance inside the sheath helps too.
1 Like
Well I knew we would hit the third rail with this topic…For a stock su setup I’m on the fence for two reasons.
The cable set up must go AROUND THE ENTIRE front engine bay to get to the carbs.
Second it would look goofy over the original cleaner from what SNG is telling me as of today.
The set up on a right hand drive looks the part.
The set up for webbers TO ME looks the part.
But TOO ME on the su set up, its getting a bit over powering and ALOT of cable to do what a single rod does.
Do I like the concept , YES , But maybe a bit over board for a stock set up.
Thanks everyone, will play and see what happens.
GTJOEY1314
P.S. MITCHMAN MAKES A GOOD POINT.
It would yes, but if it could be done with three screws it would be a lot more straightforward. One of the hardest aspects of the process on e-types is the wobble joints that attach to the spindles. They not only have to be synchronized, there is supposed to be a small amount of dead travel and then all three wobble joints are supposed to lock up and start moving the spindles together at once. It’s a lot of variables and there’s a lot of trial and error.
I can’t speak for the Mangoletsi setup, but for mine the cables will be relatively short, and routed very directly (a single constant, gentle bend, with most of the cable pretty much tucked out–of-sight where most people would not even notice it.
Regards,
Ray L.
Well, BRING IT ON young man…always game while everything is out!
How long will this system take?
GTJOEY1314