Thread: Spring question.

Tweet

At the risk of fanning the flames of discontent I'll add an item or two.

From '35-48 Ford did in fact mount the spring other than on top of the axle, see pic below. The rationale as I've read it in the past was to have a wider spring for a more compliant ride without being constricted by the width of the axle. Also it lowered the ride height, which afterall is a big part of what we do as rodders. Of course the hardware pictured here is a nice forged assemblage, of particular note that the attachment to the axle is both top and bottom. Which leads me to my personal suspicion (for want of a better word) of the design you've proposed that would be a single shear mount. If you allowed for enough rotation in the radius arm pivots you might not put too much stress on the mounting point, but I'd be mindful of that. Keep in mind, with the original Ford design the wishbone bracket pretty much moved in the same arc as the axle due to the single mounting point under the transmission. When we "split the bones" and mount them out to the frame sides we limit the amount of rotation which translates to stress at the axle mounting, particularly with a single mounting point on each side at the rear. You get higher stress from both rotational movement of the axle on the spring center point, as well as straight up and down movement at the axle mounting points. That's partly why four bar arrangements became so popular years back, having two mounting points front and rear lowered the stress at the axle mounting in verticle movement, and was somewhat more tolerant of rotational movement.

My other "objection" to the axle you've got is how wide it is..........this is mostly an aesthetic issue. The Ford axles had 48" kingpin centers, you're 6 inches beyond that. Couple that with how narrow the frame will be, and a fenderless body, and it all gets a bit gawkish. Too bad you're about as far away from me as the lower 48 allows, I've got a nice '39 axle just lying fallow out in the shop.

Originally Posted by Dave Severson

The shackles are only a pivot. With the spring on top of the axle, the spring perch is the weakest link.... With the spring behind, I'd say the constant flex and pressure on the batwings and the spring perch bolt makes them the weak link. Guess I've never seen a shackle break, but I have seen spring perch's break. Doesn't matter which gives first, with the spring on top the components and hardware are much less likely to fail.

I don't build anything with a straight axle anymore, IFS is so much better handling. Never have been one to go in for "the look" or the most current fad in suspension. My preference is always to the best performing suspension for the money spent. I place value at a higher level then cost...... I don't use old axles or spindles because of the "unknowns" in their past life....how bad were they abused, overloaded, or neglected????? Magnafluxing will show cracks, but how much misuse and abuse has there been on a 50 or 60 year old axle? Another thing, all those pieces from the 30's and 40's were designed for 30 to 40 mph cars with skinny little tires. How much does a big horse V-8 and sticky radial tires exceed the design limits of the components???? I'm not some kind of scardy cat, but I feel there's enough inherent risks in driving a high performance car in among today's low performance driver's that I choose to not take any extra risks by using old, worn out parts at a level they were never designed to perform at........

i did a blown sbc for a 31 A bone some years back it was a need of a tune up and put a msd in it .WELL after a long day of work that went late in the nigth. it was ready for a test run. well the road some were by my shop well i hit that road all the time with my cars but it was along day .what i did do was forget about the rail road tracks .i hit them about as fast as i do with my cars the tracks are better then some but i did have a flash pass by my brain thinking they were going to pick pat mc parts and A bone parts out of the field by the test road .some may not tell you how to land a I beam front end back on the ground .i have been there done it and do not care to do it any more . it is like nothing like a car with a IFS . build it safe if you must use a I beam front end so far i seen nothing i would drive or ride in

Thank you guys! some valid answers.

Dave i see your concerns, and agree to go with modern tech most of the time, but i do like the look of a straight axle on a fenderless car.

Jerry, no i have not set a design yet , so im free to do anything i want. I only posted pics of that setup cause you said it cant be done.

Also im not putting this car in the weeds, so a over the axle spring is not out of the question. I do like the look with the radiator over the axle with no frame horns sticking out.

Bob, i was also concerned with the width of the axle, but i plan on widening the body maybe 4" so i think it will look less big eared when im done.

Hotroddaddy---It was me that created that 3D image you posted. However---Just because something can be done, doesn't mean that it SHOULD be done. There are a thousand guys over on the HAMB doing all kinds of weird front suspension setups. This time, I am all with Jerry. Spend a bit of money and get a proper front axle and cross spring that are intended to work together. In the overall cost of a hotrod, the cost of a proper front axle and spring are pretty small. Safety and driving satisfaction will both suffer if you "cobble something up".---Brian

Hor Rod Daddy, Ultimately this choice is going to be yours. Some of the advice you have gotten here is both good-- Bad-- and some even worse as it is obviously just personal opinion with no basis in fact at all.

I personally don't think your idea of a i-Beam Truck axle with spring behind and the use of bat wings is bad. The design itself has been proven time and time again, not a few times or even a hundred times but thousands of times. At some point a design is proven worthy by history, your idea certainly fits into that category.

If the idea was completly without merit, and have been used as many times as it has then we all would be reading every day about some Hot Rod crashing becuase the front suspension of I-Beam Axle, bat wings and spring behind suspension failed. I have been in and around Hot Rods and modified cars for a lot more years than I care to think about, and I have never heard of ONE not a single ONE that, that ever happened to.

Ford engineered the Spring offset canfiguration and used it for a dozen or more years, so the argument for the spring being on top of the axle "Were it belongs" doesnt hold water. And most of the objections -- " In my opinion" have also been proven unfounded simple by the numbers and the time that has past with this spring configuration being used.

RS

Sure. Then once it's all put together and the spring rates, steering arms, steering box, etc. is all figured out and dialed in a 54" wide wheel track on a fenderless car with a narrow frame probably isn't going to look worth a poop or handle that well either!!!! No reason to reinvent the wheel here, then end up with something that neither looks good or works good.

IMO, from a guy who's been building hot rods for 45 years and has a bit of experience with what works and what doesn't work, and along with the opinions of some others here with even more experience in Hot Rods then me, and some with very impressive race credentials, unless you have a full understanding of the geometry and engineering involved with designing front suspension, you'll be much better off with a known combination. What you have is real good trading material, lots of builders out there looking for gasser type front ends. Could end up with the better end of a trade deal!!!!

As mentioned, even if it would work and take the stress, it's gonna be waaaaaay too wide. Using what you have is kewl, but not if the result is a car that doesn't look or work right....

The front suspension should be considered as a unit or package in the design and dreamin' stage of a car. Thought and plans must be given to how it will work with the steering and other components, as well as how the axle width and ride height follows the theme for the entire build.

I've given you plenty of reasons not to do it this way and even some suggestions for how to do it if you insist, given you referance to place for where you can buy reasonably priced components---

If you insist on doing it with that axle and spring, at least try driving it before you waste even one rattle can of paint on it

Originally Posted by Hombre259

Hor Rod Daddy, Ultimately this choice is going to be yours. Some of the advice you have gotten here is both good-- Bad-- and some even worse as it is obviously just personal opinion with no basis in fact at all.

I personally don't think your idea of a i-Beam Truck axle with spring behind and the use of bat wings is bad. The design itself has been proven time and time again, not a few times or even a hundred times but thousands of times. At some point a design is proven worthy by history, your idea certainly fits into that category.

If the idea was completly without merit, and have been used as many times as it has then we all would be reading every day about some Hot Rod crashing becuase the front suspension of I-Beam Axle, bat wings and spring behind suspension failed. I have been in and around Hot Rods and modified cars for a lot more years than I care to think about, and I have never heard of ONE not a single ONE that, that ever happened to.

Ford engineered the Spring offset canfiguration and used it for a dozen or more years, so the argument for the spring being on top of the axle "Were it belongs" doesnt hold water. And most of the objections -- " In my opinion" have also been proven unfounded simple by the numbers and the time that has past with this spring configuration being used.

RS

Guess you must have "seen" a lot..... Personally, only seen one car with a transverse spring mounted to a wide dual elliptical axle, and it's on a 2wd mudder type Hot Rod. Got some pics of this setup used successfully on a street car???? Curious how they get such a wide track to look and work even half ways decent on a narrow framed car???????

And then when they reverse steer it to the front, the ackerman will be all wroung and need an impossible steering arm arrangement.

Dave i have always trusted your opinion, but im gonna be stubborn here and im gonna go ahead with my plans! I have to learn on my own and im going to put my life and my families life on my choice! I pray that it does not come to a bad out come!

I am highly upset that a lot of guys did not defend me in my quest as i have high respect in the fact that i base this work off their design, but i guess they will not rock the boat! I posted pics of guys that you all respect and said nothing of their builds, but i feel that im being attacked here for whatever reason and i will most likely stop coming here!

I will consider your knowledge and help you have provided for me, but im going with hombre on this one! Best of luck to ya, and no hard feelings.

Hotroddaddy, Glad to see that you can look at options and come to a conclusion.

I sincerly hope that your decision to leave this site is not cast in stone and you reconsider. Everyone is intitled to there opinion even if they are wrong sometimes.

As I refleck on this thread I guess some of the objectors probably see things in other ways. I think that a lot of times not much thought is given for some's opinion at least as those opinions are when it comes to fact vs just a prejudice. For me its really hard to look at the way some things have been done hundreds of times and not see some validity to that way of doing things. But they are probably correct. After all they have decades of experiance the way they tell it. Ackerman Steering Geometry front steering and some of the other problems talked about can not be overcome they I guess are cast in stone and un adjustable, forget the fact that it has been done hundreds of times (AR LEAST) and those problems were in fact dealt with and overcome. Those guys just built unsafe cars.

And for goodness sake don't try and reinvent the wheel as suggested. Hot Rodders have only been doing that sense the 20's and 30's. As a matter of fact reinventing the wheel is really what HoT Rodding is all about-----I thought!! Man I guess I was wrong about that as well.

Best thing you could do I guess is forget this whole Hot Rod thing go and build you a Mustang and only use all Stock parts and don't try anything interesting. Yea man do that.

RS

[QUOTE=jerry clayton;353231]You have shown 4 different cars----I wouldn't ride in any of them!!!!!!Aboit everything they have done is wrong


First of all Jerry, I really don't appreciate the slams to our cars. I'll put up any one of them against anything you have built, for safety, reliability, and workmanship. You are entitled to your opinion, but to make a broad statement that "everything is wrong" shows how little you really know. I don't care what your background is, to put yourself up on a pedestal really shows a bit of snobbishness on your part that surprises me.

I've made this comment before, there is the perfect world and the real world. There are thousands of cars running around with "wrong" things on them, and somehow they successfully go down the road day after day without problems. Case in point is steering arms out front. Thousands if not millions of T bucket type cars and others are running them this way (two of ours) and I notice NO difference between them and the other rods I have had with "proper" ackermann. NONE. Only when parking is there any hint of scrub, otherwise they go down the road with one hand on the wheel and corner like they should.


We can look at any hot rod out there and find "things" that might be questionable. In 50 years of playing this game I haven't seen one car yet that didn't have one thing that the "experts" would deem engineering wise "imperfect." Somehow they manage to work, and are for the most part safe.

Now, to get back to John's question. Is it the perfect way to get a beam axle under his rod? No. I too think one of the original or aftermarket axles with perch holes on the ends would be easier to use. But I understand his reasons. He is a family man with a budget and is trying to build his car and still keep a roof over his family. Been there, done that, and wouldn't trade one second of those tight financial times for anything in the world.

His way of doing it has been done by more than a few people, and his approach is the best way............that is welding up some adapter perches and BOLTING them to the four holes in the axle per side. I do not like the ones where they weld the perches to the axle, but properly constructed bolted on perches are fine. You do get the advantage of later brakes that are already part of the axle. The axle doesn't care if it has one perch hole per side and is using a SoCal suicide mount or if it has a well built home version that bolts to 4 bolts, it will function just as well.

Here is the crux of this discussion as I see it. It is easy for us older rodders to sit back and condemn some idea because it is not what we would do, but we have very short memories. We forget what it was like when we were young, short on funds, and without the benefit of having the well equipped shops we have accumulated over the years. My first one was built on a dirt floored garage, with basic hand tools and very little money to spare. I remember those times, and is one reason I am a member of some rat rod forums. It gives me a chance to try to steer some youngsters in the right direction and avoid mistakes I made. But I have to always remember when suggesting something to them that I am probably dealing with someone who has to scrimp and save to buy that next part, and who needs to cut corners where safely prudent to get to the finish line.


Don

[QUOTE=hotroddaddy;353410]Dave i have always trusted your opinion, but im gonna be stubborn here and im gonna go ahead with my plans! I have to learn on my own and im going to put my life and my families life on my choice! I pray that it does not come to a bad out come!

QUOTE]


Well then, good luck with the build. I tried to point out some of the considerations, but some have to turn it into a personal thing. Sure, it will work, and I hope you build everything strong enough that it can withstand the extra stress...... My suggestion would be to do what we always do, mock the whole thing up and see what it looks like. Then sit back in a chair, open up your favorite beverage of choice, and take a good long objective look at it. If it works aesthetically and mechanically for you, build it. Just don't make the mistake of proceeding with the plan as is if you have any misgivings on how it will turn out....

Originally Posted by Hombre259

Hotroddaddy, Glad to see that you can look at options and come to a conclusion.

I sincerly hope that your decision to leave this site is not cast in stone and you reconsider. Everyone is intitled to there opinion even if they are wrong sometimes.

As I refleck on this thread I guess some of the objectors probably see things in other ways. I think that a lot of times not much thought is given for some's opinion at least as those opinions are when it comes to fact vs just a prejudice. For me its really hard to look at the way some things have been done hundreds of times and not see some validity to that way of doing things. But they are probably correct. After all they have decades of experiance the way they tell it. Ackerman Steering Geometry front steering and some of the other problems talked about can not be overcome they I guess are cast in stone and un adjustable, forget the fact that it has been done hundreds of times (AR LEAST) and those problems were in fact dealt with and overcome. Those guys just built unsafe cars.

And for goodness sake don't try and reinvent the wheel as suggested. Hot Rodders have only been doing that sense the 20's and 30's. As a matter of fact reinventing the wheel is really what HoT Rodding is all about-----I thought!! Man I guess I was wrong about that as well.

Best thing you could do I guess is forget this whole Hot Rod thing go and build you a Mustang and only use all Stock parts and don't try anything interesting. Yea man do that.

RS

You just never miss a chance to start an argument and get your cheap shot little digs in, do you.????? I am speaking from fabricating and building experience on these Hot Rod issues. There are shots in my gallery of many of my builds and projects since I joined CHR a few years ago to back up my "opinions" as you call them... I've also spent a bit of time with the technical education part of this hobby with a bit of engineering school.

Not that I would suggest I doubt your abilities, but I would certainly be curious to see some pics of your current and past build projects. The last "project" I remember you sharing with us was the done car you wrote the big check for......after all, a picture is worth a thousand "opinions".

Geez.... when I first started reading this thread I thought I had made a mistake and gotten on the H.A.M.B! I thought this type of narrow minded, "I am right and you are wrong" thinking was their domain, not one we usually see here. C'mon guys, lighten up.