A little frame help please

My father and I are planning on Pro-Streeting a 1964 Falcon 2Dr post. We are starting to make plans for the back-half job that will follow and in my research, I found two seperate, feasable routes we could take. One would be to use a brand new frame, the way AutoWeldChassis has shown here, and the other is to do the back half but add in some subframe connectors, the way Chris Alston's ChassisWorks has done here. We would like to run quite a bit o' powa, somewhere around 600 hp/tq, or enough to get us into the 10's once we perfect our driving. What are yall running, full frame or connectors, and what do yall recommend?

Thanks,
Randy

Forgot to mention that it will be seeing considerable street time. I know the frame would provide for a stiffer vehicle overall, but I'm not sure if that's all it will yield.

ANyone?

Well, you're gonna end up doing the front too, so I'm thinkin' I'd probably start with the complete frame instead of cobbling up something to tie together.

After having done so many of these through the years, I try to figure out how I'm gonna sell it before I ever strike an arc. In other words, how can I make it desireable to the guy who is thinkin' of buying it? If I were gonna sell your project, I'd rather be able to talk about how the car was built on a one-piece fabricated frame with everything perfectly lined up than to talk about how it was back-halved and front-halved and the subsequent possibility for error. See what I mean? You may be thinkin' to yourself that the day will never come when you will have to sell this car, but I would caution you to never say never!!!!!

You guys should also be thinkin' at this point what you ultimately want to do with the car. You can use a mild steel cage with the Auto-Weld frame down to 8.50 1/4 mile elapsed time, but to go 8.49 or quicker will require a complete SFI-legal frame structure. And don't say the car will never go 8.49, 'cause with a blower it most certainly could, depending on how the rest of the car is set up of course.
http://www.swracecars.com/pdf/CATpg21.PDF

You might want to follow along on pro70z28's build.....
http://www.clubhotrod.com/forums/t6440-15&pagenumber=1
He's building to an SFI spec....

Just a word of caution, but anything other than a small block is going to get really tight between those skinny shock towers on a '64..... I would probably side with Tech on this one, start with a full frame. It will leave all your engine options open....

Quote:

---

Originally posted by techinspector1
Well, you're gonna end up doing the front too, so I'm thinkin' I'd probably start with the complete frame instead of cobbling up something to tie together.

After having done so many of these through the years, I try to figure out how I'm gonna sell it before I ever strike an arc. In other words, how can I make it desireable to the guy who is thinkin' of buying it? If I were gonna sell your project, I'd rather be able to talk about how the car was built on a one-piece fabricated frame with everything perfectly lined up than to talk about how it was back-halved and front-halved and the subsequent possibility for error. See what I mean? You may be thinkin' to yourself that the day will never come when you will have to sell this car, but I would caution you to never say never!!!!!

You guys should also be thinkin' at this point what you ultimately want to do with the car. You can use a mild steel cage with the Auto-Weld frame down to 8.50 1/4 mile elapsed time, but to go 8.49 or quicker will require a complete SFI-legal frame structure. And don't say the car will never go 8.49, 'cause with a blower it most certainly could, depending on how the rest of the car is set up of course.
http://www.swracecars.com/pdf/CATpg21.PDF

You might want to follow along on pro70z28's build.....
http://www.clubhotrod.com/forums/t6440-15&pagenumber=1
He's building to an SFI spec....

---

We were considering a full frame because of the front end as well. That would also give us a complete rolling chassis once we got it wheeled. I would like to say the day will never come, but I'm someone who usually never says never as well, and if it were to come down to it, I would imagine the full frame would add to the ease of sale.

I have been doing a lot of reading. I have checked up on several sites and read what's what through peoples comments and I think we have kind of got it in for a CA product. They may not be the cheapest, but they sure do market thier skills, knowledge and "eagerness to help" the best, and that has grown on us. My father and I just spoke about it and we think we are going to contact CA about an Eliminator I series chassis. This way we get the frame along with the cage ready for set-up. Mild steel, A-arm front and ladder bar rear, 1 5/8" frame.

We don't plan on running anywhere near 8.49. I cannot imagine the vehicle being anything near street friendly at those times. But it is possible I assume, so incase that happens, there is an Eliminator I to funny-car conversion that they sell. We will make appriopriate adjustments if the time comes.

I'll look into ProZ28's build. Maybe ask him soem questions if he doesn't mind answering them.

Dave, you're right, although I have seen a few Falcons with big muscle shoved in there. We have decided that a sbc, probably a 350, will be the motor of choice. Of course, as I have said before, things change. That is our plan thus far.

Thanks a lot for the help. If you have any thoughts or ideas as far as the Eliminator set-up goes, let me know. I'm open for anything.

Thanks,
Randy

My sources:
http://www.cachassisworks.com/TechTi...EB.pdf#search='eliminator%20I%20chassis'
https://www.cachassisworks.com/CatPages/Vol_14_056.pdf

Well, you can go with a ladder bar if you want, but I can tell you right now, you won't like it on the street and you won't like it when it's time to go fast and you won't like it when it's time to sell the car.

That, of course, is just my humble opinion :eek:

Well what abou tit wouldn't we like? Is it just an overall poorly designed system? I recall reading somewhere that the ladder bar would be more street friendly in the area of adjusting it as opposed to a 4Link, would still give a decent ride and would still be suitable at the track. i'll have to reread and see if I read wrong the first time.

A four bar has so much more adjustability than a ladder bar. I prefer a 4 link with poly bushed rod ends on the street, and moly heim joint rod ends for racing. The ladder bar is more of a compromise and tends to bind up a bit on the street. Also with an equal length 4 bar, the pinion agle will remain constant throughout the range of travel, not so with ladder bars.

OK, spent the day reading internet sources and a book by Herb Adams. I found that the pinion angle does change with ladder bars, but also with unequal length 4-links as well (like you said). Although I did not read anything about binding, could you possibly elaborate a little for me? From what I read, the adjustability of the 4-link is very useful, but it also takes a great deal of knowledge, along with being more expensive to maintain in the long run.

If we were to go with 4-link, would you suggest a parallel set-up with a Panhard bar or a triangulated set-up?

In my opinion, the Panhard bar is a crime against nature and this guy Panhard should have been strung up by his onions until he came up with a better arrangement. But like I said, that's just my opinion.

I don't like panhard bars either, a Watt's linkage is far better at keeping the rear end centered in the car. Set up and tuning on a 4 bar isn't that tough. The chassis book "Doorslammers" has a ton of very good information on making them work correct.

A triangulated 4 bar works quite well, also, probably not as much tunablity as an equal length though. The equal length 4 bar is still the best setup for street or racing IMO. I would say maintainance is the same on all of them, really nothing more than checking the rod ends from time to time. I've ran some fairly big horsepower hitting on the 4 bars, and never have broke anything. The investment in the good rod ends, whether you use heims or poly, costs a bit more up front but will only save money and keep you safe in the long run........

I take it we are all confused on where this shoudl go. I put it in drag racing because I was asking mainly what we should build for a high HP application, then someone moved it to HotRod and now it's in shop talk. I keep gettign confused as hell and wondering if I even made the thread to begin with :P

I'm waiting for a reply from Alston before we make any purchases. I'm going to read up a little more on everything, and look for the doorslammers book.

Thanks for the help.

i don't see nothing wrong with the panhard bar. good enough for nascar, good enough for me. most late model racers don't know what a Watt's linkage is. i agree with the 4 bar. you can make a car do most anything you want it to do with them. **) i used the panhard, 4 link, on the st. at the drags and round track. in 1990 i built a camaro 502 cu.in. for a friend of mine that was the fastest st. car at richmond dragway that yr. and we put ladder bars and a panhard bar under that. hooked those st. tires up big time. drive it to the track, turned 10.8 sec. and drive it home. to race you had to be closed up, st. tires and st. insp. :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by lt1s10
i don't see nothing wrong with the panhard bar. good enough for nascar, good enough for me. most late model racers don't know what a Watt's linkage is. i agree with the 4 bar. you can make a car do most anything you want it to do with them. **) i used the panhard, 4 link, on the st. at the drags and round track. in 1990 i built a camaro 502 cu.in. for a friend of mine that was the fastest st. car at richmond dragway that yr. and we put ladder bars and a panhard bar under that. hooked those st. tires up big time. drive it to the track, turned 10.8 sec. and drive it home. to race you had to be closed up, st. tires and st. insp. :cool:

---

I was thinking about the Panhard bar as well. Herb Adams, if any of yall know who he is, actually recommends that over the Watts in his book because, the limited gain you receive from such detailed and complex design just is not worth it unless you have the knowledge to build one properly. I'll read some more and hopefully get more input from others on here.

Hey LT1S10, where exactly is Rustburg?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RJ & CJ
I was thinking about the Panhard bar as well. Herb Adams, if any of yall know who he is, actually recommends that over the Watts in his book because, the limited gain you receive from such detailed and complex design just is not worth it unless you have the knowledge to build one properly. I'll read some more and hopefully get more input from others on here.

Hey LT1S10, where exactly is Rustburg?

---

Its15 miles south of Lynchburg, VA. on 501. I live on Chanlders Mountain over looking Lynchburg and Liberty University.

We've had this discussion on here before about who likes Panhard bars and who doesn't. It is simply that from an engineering standpoint, I am strongly opposed to a system which tries to work in dissimilar arcs. The four-bars are trying to go straight up and down and the Panhard bar is pushing and pulling the bars laterally and putting a bind on the bar fittings. It just isn't natural.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by techinspector1
We've had this discussion on here before about who likes Panhard bars and who doesn't. It is simply that from an engineering standpoint, I am strongly opposed to a system which tries to work in dissimilar arcs. The four-bars are trying to go straight up and down and the Panhard bar is pushing and pulling the bars laterally and putting a bind on the bar fittings. It just isn't natural.

---

All I can say about that is every racer I've ever known spends every dime he has to find a way to out run the other guy, and I've never seen a watts linkage on a race car. speedway dont sale one that I see, and they are hard to find if you're looking for one. people don't run them on the south East coast, I don't know about anywhere else. on a round track car its just something else to break, and there are other adj. to off set any problem you might have with a pan hand bar. long trailing arms are better than short arms, but most people run the short arms for conv. :cool: