132/Argenta rear axle in 131

[wak131]

I am in process of refreshing an Argenta VX rear axle and preparing it to fit to my 131.

I know there are few people here who have this conversion done and speak just positives about it.

The thing is a 132 axle has diferent placing and angle of the upper arms and missing panhard rod.
The wider angle of the upper arms partialy substitute the missing panhard rod which is there to stop the axle swinging to sides in relation to the body.

My question is, has anyone the 132 axle mounted in 131 without the panhard rod?
Wouldn?t the panhard rod colide with the diferently mounted upper arms in the means of proper suspension.
What other modifications do you have in context with that?

[djape1977]

have you ever driven 132 or argenta? there's just a tiny bit more side to side motion than on 131. frankly, in my oppinion, panhard rod is  unnecesary bit of suspension.
if you think about it, in a moment you hit a dip in te roar or go hard into a corner, panhard rod pushes the body sideways compared to rear axle. on 132, rear axle has no side to side motion at all, apart from what rubber bushings allow. if you were to put polyurethane bushes instead of rubber ones on the upper suspension arms of that argenta axle, you'd get much less sideways motion than on original 131 suspension. specially when coupled to rear anti roll bar.

if you would put panhard rod and leave upper suspension arms in their original 132 position, you'd have a world of grief ahead. panhard rod wants to push the axle sideways and upper arms would prevent it. something would crack immediatelly. that would work well only with very stiff springs and shocks, preventing almost all up/down axle motion.

in my experience, i find 132 setup superior when two way gas shocks are fitted and rear antiroll bar is present

[wak131]

if you would put panhard rod and leave upper suspension arms in their original 132 position, you'd have a world of grief ahead. panhard rod wants to push the axle sideways and upper arms would prevent it. something would crack immediatelly. that would work well only with very stiff springs and shocks, preventing almost all up/down axle motion.

Thanx a lot,  that?s exactly what i needed to know and was afraid of.
And no, i haven?t driven an 132 or Argenta, a pitty for sure, can?t compare.

So the variants are: leave the Argenta axle as it is, with angled upper arms and stabilizator and exclude the panhard rod OR weld the upper arms mounts in 131 style and use both the panhard rod and stabilizator, heh.

I?ll probably try to fit the axle as it is, just the mounts for the upper arms will have to be made. Panhard rod will be left home and suspension tested

[131DHOC]

should be more confortable in bendings because of the absence of Panhard rod.....

[djape1977]

if you're gonna use 132 setup, make sure you have a strong point in the floor to screw the upper suspension arms to.

[wak131]

Yes, for sure, i think to weld some more material on the place where the arms meets the floor.

should be more confortable in bendings because of the absence of Panhard rod.....

That would be realy nice.

[djape1977]

weld in plates of 1mm thick steel plate all the way to rear chasis legs, and then put screws thru that. bigger the piece, the better

[Tas131]

I recently installed a 132 disc rearend in my 131, it had been removed from a 131 so had a mount for the panhard rod already fabricated, which I think would be a lot easier than fabricating body mount points for the 132 upper control arms. The spring mounts were at a different angle than the 131 as well, so I removed a set from a 131 rearend and welded them on. I also welded the 131 upper control arm mounts onto the 132 rearend. A very worthwhile upgrade, better braking, better ratio for city driving and a narrower track so my tyres don't rub.

[wak131]

@Djape: sounds good, i plan even more structural stifftening to the whole floor as i ?ll have complete sills and consoles changed.

@Tas: that?s strange, how come that although it have been removed from a 131 with a panhard rod you had to make upper arms mounts and springs mounts. How different angle does it have?
Are you sure the track, the width of the 132 axle is narrower?
Could it be that the Argenta and a 132 axles were defferent? When I meassured just with a rope the Argenta axle i have is definitely wider than the one in my ?82 1600 CL...

[djape1977]

argenta's rear axle is a bit wider, but i don't think that wak will have anything against that. also, lower suspension arms might be a bit longer than on 131. check that before installation

[djape1977]

over the years, rear axle on 132/argenta was changed several times. also, offset of wheels was changed.
as far as i know:
mk1 132 1600/1800 - rear axle is as on 125
mk2 132 1800 axle is as on mk1 131 a bit wider than on mk1
mk3 132 1600/2000/2500 as on mk2/mk3 131 but with wider wheels and smaller ET of wheels
argenta wider axle than 131/132 and bigger ET

width wise, result should be that argenta's rear axle with standard 131 wheels should give a bit wider track, with mk3 132 wheels - a lot wider track.

[Tas131]

@Tas: that?s strange, how come that although it have been removed from a 131 with a panhard rod you had to make upper arms mounts and springs mounts. How different angle does it have?
Are you sure the track, the width of the 132 axle is narrower?

The 132 spring mounts were angled in more towards the centre than 131 mounts, not much but I decided to change it. The upper control arm mounts, although setup for a 131 was not particularly well done, so I cut them off and welded on another set. With the 131 drum rearend, no spacer plates, my tyres rubbed on the inner guards, with the 132 disc rearend, with spacer plates, my tyres clear the inner lip on the guards by about 5mm.
I copied this from another forum where 132 diff ratios were being discussed, I found it very useful, it applies to 132 models imported into Australia.

For the 132's manufactured up to 1977 the diff is in house Fiat manufacture (GMP) of the type where the diff unit is removed complete (rather like a stock 124 diff) the ratio of these (auto and manual) is 4.1:1

For vehicles manufactured in 1978 (which for Australia includes the 132GLS model) the differential is Borg - Warner sourced... and is manufactured with Fiat Axle tubes installed into a "generic" differential centre. These are the differentials with the plate bolted to the rear, and the differential gears installed into the centre housing. These 132GLS's also used the 131 style gearbox (in the manuals), had the 12mm flywheel bolts, and used a late sump pattern (2 litre sump bolt pattern) but still had 1756cc displacment.

These 1978 cars came as a 3.727:1 diff ratio in both auto and manual. (disc brake rear end)

In 1979 Fiat introduced the 132 2000 model, these carried over the 131 style gearbox (for the manuals) and Borg-Warner sourced differential, differential ratios were 3.727:1 for the manual, and the auto's used a 3.416:1 final drive (but these are pretty rare to find) 132 2000 differentials are drum brake.

Argenta is different again... as the Argenta came as a 1600, 2000 and also a 2000 Volumex, each with a different final drive ratio.

SteveC