When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The Granada mk3 (named Scorpio in the rest of Eruope) uses the same rear subframe, but not the same arms as the Sierra. The surfaces where the hub carriers bolt onto are wider and at a slightly different angle on the Granada arms.
Last edited by Marc sierra; 30-05-2017 at 06:24 AM.
I'm not sure what you mean with camber-wise maxed out suspension. Normally the camber cannot be adjusted, so there is nothing to max out. However, if you use adjustable TCAs on the Sierra I don't know if Granada arms are longer than maxed out adjustable Sierra ones.
BTW, I measured the arms not so long ago and I think the difference between Sierra and Granada front TCAs is 12 mm. I expect this 12 mm should give you about 1.15 degrees more camber, for the same ride height. To keep enough thread from the tie rod in the tie rod end I would also use the Granada tie rod ends as they are also longer, just like the TCAs.
For the rear the Granada arms also give about 12 mm wider track. I suppose to accomodate this the Granada driveshafts are a bit longer, but I never put them next to Sierra driveshafts. The beam and arb can be used independently from the arms and driveshafts.
Oh snap, right.. No camber adjustment to max out xD Yeah, let's assume non-adjustable Sierra arms.
That's another good piece of info with the length and camber difference. I was also thinking that using the Granada tie rods ("steering joints" .. forgot the correct word ) with the TCAs would be a good idea.
On the rear track, is that 12 mm wider track in total or per side? Either way, I would expect the Granada driveshafts to be longer for, say, 6 mm?
I might get a chance to go measure Granada and Sierra driveshafts, I guess measuring boot to boot would be close enough?
Is there anything else besides the trackwidth that would change with Granada arms and shafts out back?
On the rear ARB, I think the only difference between Sierra/Granada was the "cut out" of the bar around the diff (7/7.5) or its carrier respectively?
Thanks
Originally Posted by robrs2
This is only for post 1994 bugeye.
The mk3 granada was the same rear beam as the sierra. The 24V scorpio mk3 pre 1994 uses a beam the same as a 2wd cosworth but with 5 stud hubs and 100mm cv joints.
Ok now I'm confused.
"Granada" = Granada Mk3 = Scorpio for the rest of Europe as Marc put it
"Scorpio" = Ultima frog / bugeye thingie '94-up
Also, the 100/108mm cv joints is the flange diameter or the length?
Also, imho all Mk3 Granadas had 5 lugs (at least my 90 12V 2wd and my facelifted 92 2.0i 2wd had, and about every other I have seen so far).
Marc, your last post including the pic (labelled Scorpio) was referring to the Granada Mk3? You stated that only the flanges for the hub carriers are wider/angled differently? Or is your statement on the arms length (to give more trackwidth) still valid?
On the rear track, is that 12 mm wider track in total or per side? Either way, I would expect the Granada driveshafts to be longer for, say, 6 mm?
It's 12 mm per side. So probably the driveshafts are also 12 mm longer per side.
Originally Posted by janus
I might get a chance to go measure Granada and Sierra driveshafts, I guess measuring boot to boot would be close enough?
Is there anything else besides the trackwidth that would change with Granada arms and shafts out back?
On the rear ARB, I think the only difference between Sierra/Granada was the "cut out" of the bar around the diff (7/7.5) or its carrier respectively?
There are quite a few differences between different Sierra rear axles. The 2wd Cosworth is most comparable to the Granada mk3. With Granada arms on a Sierra you will also have more negative camber, next to the wider track.
The cut out in the arb around the diff can indeed be different, but all Granada (and bug eye Scorpio) rear arbs fit the Sierra, so there are quite some diameters to choose from (14, 16, 18, 20, 21 and 22 mm).
Originally Posted by janus
Ok now I'm confused.
"Granada" = Granada Mk3 = Scorpio for the rest of Europe as Marc put it
"Scorpio" = Ultima frog / bugeye thingie '94-up
Also, the 100/108mm cv joints is the flange diameter or the length?
Also, imho all Mk3 Granadas had 5 lugs (at least my 90 12V 2wd and my facelifted 92 2.0i 2wd had, and about every other I have seen so far).
The 100/108 mm is indeed the flange diameter. All mk3 Granadas (upto 1994) had 5 lugs and the Scorpio (bug-eye, from 1994-1998) had 4 lugs.
Originally Posted by janus
Marc, your last post including the pic (labelled Scorpio) was referring to the Granada Mk3? You stated that only the flanges for the hub carriers are wider/angled differently? Or is your statement on the arms length (to give more trackwidth) still valid?
The text and the pic (which isn't mine) was referring to the Granada mk3. Indeed only the flanges are wider and angled differently on the rear. The longer arms to give more trackwidth is on the front.
Gotcha, thanks a bunch on more details!
Any idea how much more negative camber the Granada Mk3 rear arms on a Sierra would give?
I'd guess the whole Granada trackwidth is 24 mm wider in total then, front and rear?
Originally Posted by Marc sierra
Indeed only the flanges are wider and angled differently on the rear. The longer arms to give more trackwidth is on the front.
Ok, so what then is ultimately the reason for the wider rear track, and more negative camber when using Granada Mk3 rear arms on a Sierra? Or were you saying "the longer arms to give more trackwidth is on the front" - like, front of the rear arms?
Yes, the front and rear track is about 24 mm wider for the Granada front and rear. There are quite a few different numbers around on the internet, so it's difficult to say what is really correct. In the end the track also depends on the offset of the wheels, and those might be different as well for the Sierra and Granada.
The reason for the wider rear track is the thicker flanges on the arms. The rest of the arms is exactly the same as on the Sierra.
With longer arms I meant the TCAs on the front suspension, making the front track wider than the Sierra.
This is only for post 1994 bugeye.
The mk3 granada was the same rear beam as the sierra. The 24V scorpio mk3 pre 1994 uses a beam the same as a 2wd cosworth but with 5 stud hubs and 100mm cv joints.
correctamundo
the shafts are the same length and thickness depending on if it's got a 7 or a 7.5 inch diff
Gotcha, thanks a bunch on more details!
Any idea how much more negative camber the Granada Mk3 rear arms on a Sierra would give?
I'd guess the whole Granada trackwidth is 24 mm wider in total then, front and rear?
Ok, so what then is ultimately the reason for the wider rear track, and more negative camber when using Granada Mk3 rear arms on a Sierra? Or were you saying "the longer arms to give more trackwidth is on the front" - like, front of the rear arms?
Thx
i fitted granada stuff to my sierra years ago, everything bolted up fine on the rear as it's exactly the same
on the front i used granada struts with sierra springs on granada hubs but kept the brand new sierra tca's (although i also used a granada rack on a previous sierra which bolted directly into the crossmember and there was no issue with steering angles of track rod lengths)
i also used the 24v granada wheels and nothing rubbed on the sierra
the wheels are taller though, let me get you a pic of it in full attack mode with 8 inch wide wheels front and rear 215/45/17's
Measured the rear beam and the Granada 24v arms are 8.5mm wider than the Sierra ones. So the rear width is 17mm wider.
The front tca's are 19mm longer from the crossmember mounting bolt to the arb bush. The bush to the ball joint it the same as a Sierra. So using the Granada tca's will give 38mm wider track over the Sierra ones..
The widest rear beam is the one from the BOB Scorpio post 1994. This is something like 15 to 20mm wider each side but I only have the driveshaft from one of these to measure so can't get an accurate measurement.
30-05-2017, 06:05 AM
) with the TCAs would be a good idea.
