Well I've had a chance to do some measuring, and this confirms what was said in conversation with Gary Nelson earlier.
The distance between centres of the inner pivot bolt bush and the outer rose bush mounting are the same as the originals, and that of the upper drop link mounting.
Also the distance from the centre of the spring isolator spigot to that of the inner bush centre is the same.
What differs in the dimension of the spring cup, and the position of the oval clearance hole where the drop link passes through the arm, so apart from the creation of a possible water trap under the isolator due to it not seating fully in the cup, which can be rectified by removing 5mm from the outer diameter of the isolator, something I will have an experiment with tomorrow, and the possibility of any axial play in the antiroll bar, which may result in contact between the drop link and the inboard part of the oval hole.
In any case, I am going to cut off the brackets from the new arms, rework them slightly, then reweld them, simply because they are not parallel with one another due to the fact they are fitted into the reducing part of the oval.
I've another set of used arms, obtained from a low mileage ZT 180, these have been sandblasted, treated with Kurust, zinc primed, and given five coats of chassis black, before being ladled internally with lashings of cavity wax, so these will be fitted to the car instead, and the shortcomings in the new arms addressed when I have a little more time.
Perhaps I'm being a little too fussy
Brian
