Keep the hydro! It's better. I own both wet and dry. Leaks are nearly always from the pipes in my experience. The bags are remarkably resilient. Replacements can be found if needed and prices not outrageous. 
I've had more suspension issues on cones than hydro (broken knuckles etc.)
If you must go dry, stick to cones.

Note that I own a car that has been converted to dry. One day I'll take it back to wet. 

The fluid is just glycol or anitfreeze. There are directions on the WWW on how to setup a grease gun to use as the tool.

Thanks for the info. The car is pretty rough and needs some love, and the state of the current hydro system is a mystery. Some of the other weathering on the car gives me the impression that the hydro might be in bad shape too. I'm mostly scared that if the leak is bad, I'd possibly have to replace bags. I bought it without the car being at ride height, so I'm not sure if its a slow leak or a fast one. And I'd be buying fluid and a pump for 500+ dollars on a maybe... 

For reliability the cones seem like the best option. I've heard the ride is better on them than the springs too so I'm glad that thought was reinforced. I'm hoping I can get everything out of it in good condition so I could switch back if needed. 

This is a tough decision for me. I'll try to track down more info on the pricing as well. If there are any more reasons not to swap keep 'em coming. I appreciate all the comments. I'm still learning and curious to see what everyone thinks.

You can use the wet subframes for the conversion. You'll need the front upper shock mounts. You'll need the lower pin for the lower shock mount. You'll need a very good, almost aerospace drill bit to install the lower pin mount onto the upper arm.  You'll need 4 spacers to fill in the gap in the subframe. I got mine from Heritage Garage in Costa Mesa.  A good set of Hi lo's, and definitely use good quality rubber cones. I implore you, do not to use springs. I did, and it was crap. Then store your hydro bags and hoses for safekeeping. You can reverse it if you ever decide to go back, or if you sell it and the new owner can have them. 

Good luck 
George 

Originally, the springs were prone to breaking. Unless they are now made with better metal I would go with rubber cones in the conversion.

Thanks for the second, if you want to bastardize an original mini do it to a mark 3 and up. But not to a mark 1.

I'll second that. It will save you a lot of time and money to track down the leak and fix it.

Kelley

Don't do it. Fix what you have. The ride suffers immensely. 

Hello all, 

I have a 1968 Morris Mini Mk2 with the hydrolastic suspension. It has a leak somewhere and I'm thinking about swapping it for a "dry" setup like some of the kits with hi/lows. Does anyone have any experience with this conversion and is there anything in particular to watch out for? 

Also, is it possible to use the wet arms in this conversion or would I need to swap those out (front upper and rear trailing)?

Lastly, which kit would you recommend. I saw a few here on mini mania and was thinking of going with the blue spring kit.
https://www.minimania.com/part/MMKT0909B/Classic-Mini-Hydrolastic-Wet-To-Dry-Suspension-Conversion-Kit-Blue-Springs

This is my first mini, so any advice is very much appreciated. Thanks!!