Thread: Lethal Weapon, Project A-Bucket

Tweet

If the top of the F1 mount was curved over towards the wheel the shocks would work much more effectively, Coming on well.

Originally Posted by Itoldyouso

The shocks should give you great control in that position. What would we rodders have done if Ford didn't use those mounts on their early pickups? Looks great so far.

Don

Originally Posted by roadster32

If the top of the F1 mount was curved over towards the wheel the shocks would work much more effectively, Coming on well.

I don't know, Steve, sometimes they work TOO well in more of an upright position. One member on another forum posted that his hot rod rode like a truck, too firm. When I looked at his pictures everything looked very well done, good components and installed correctly. Then I noticed he had put the lower shock mounts on the wrong sides, and it was moving his shocks in at the bottom, making them more upright. I posted the picture of my front end and how they were intended to be mounted, and he changed them.

I have had people comment that mine are laid over too far, but they have been on there for over 20 years and the car has literally thousands of miles on it and handles like a sportscar. I also feel the shocks in this position give a little more lateral control, sort of acting as antisway bars. So, I guess there is more than one opinion on this subject.

Don

Don shocks are designed to be upright, The reason a lot of cars seem to handle fairly well is that usually the springs are too stiff, Its all a comprimise really as ideally the springs and shocks should be matched, something difficult to do with whats available. That setup will undoubtably be ok but the tube shocks available really are not very good unless you buy the rather spendy Bilsteins, These will make a vast difference over the P&J tube shocks

Originally Posted by Itoldyouso

I don't know, Steve, sometimes they work TOO well in more of an upright position. One member on another forum posted that his hot rod rode like a truck, too firm. When I looked at his pictures everything looked very well done, good components and installed correctly. Then I noticed he had put the lower shock mounts on the wrong sides, and it was moving his shocks in at the bottom, making them more upright. I posted the picture of my front end and how they were intended to be mounted, and he changed them.

I have had people comment that mine are laid over too far, but they have been on there for over 20 years and the car has literally thousands of miles on it and handles like a sportscar. I also feel the shocks in this position give a little more lateral control, sort of acting as antisway bars. So, I guess there is more than one opinion on this subject.

Don

I agree about the quality of the Bilsteins, and those were what Dan was going to use on his rpu but we ran out of time (and money) I think the Bilsteins go for about $ 150 per shock, and at some point after he recovers he wants to go to them. But in the meantime, the P and J ones work fine.

As for the shocks needing to be upright, I still feel that the way straight axled cars axles arc when going over a bump the shock should be laid over somewhat to mirror that arc. The exact degree needed is open to personal opinion, I guess, so we will agree to disagree on this one.

Don

dlo hhmm no pics show up , just the pic numbers .

Originally Posted by bluestang67

dlo hhmm no pics show up , just the pic numbers .

Well Hmmmmmmmmmmm......... I see them, and others I guess do, as they have commented on them............ Puzzler............

I shook my monitor and it didn't help must just be a glitch here .

Originally Posted by roadster32

Don shocks are designed to be upright, The reason a lot of cars seem to handle fairly well is that usually the springs are too stiff, Its all a comprimise really as ideally the springs and shocks should be matched, something difficult to do with whats available. That setup will undoubtably be ok but the tube shocks available really are not very good unless you buy the rather spendy Bilsteins, These will make a vast difference over the P&J tube shocks

I'm in agreement here, Steve!!! Anything beyond 20 degrees on the mounting angle of a shock negates the valving action of the shock and it becomes little more then a cushioning device for the (normally) too stiff spring(s). I tend to ask questions at car shows and other get togethers, it's always surprising to me just how few people know what the rating is on their springs, or the dampening values of the shocks....

It's like we've talked about before, there are things that we do to our cars that others swear will not work, and yet somehow they go down the road and do it quite well. Personally, I think we overthink this stuff sometimes, very few of us are mechanical engineers, so we just do what makes sense to us and what has worked for us for a bunch of years.

I've had that same shock setup on the 27 for over 20 years and the car has been to Daytona 5 times and driven almost daily for 7 years and it could not ride or handle better.As for me knowing the rating or dampening value of my shocks, I buy them because they are pretty chromed ones and the right length.

Don

Sort of seat of the pants engineering. Why mess with something that works?

I understand where guys like Steve and Dave are coming from, they do this day in and day out and know their stuff and want to present the proper way to do things so that others can learn from it. I respect that 100% and really learn from and appreciate their input. I was just being a little tongue in cheek with my response and kinda presenting the other side of the discussion that sometimes things aren't as cut and dry as they might seem. That is the fun about this hobby and this forum, we all do things a little differently and although we may disagree we can still be friends and respect the other guy's position.

Don

Yes Virgina, a 47 Ford F1 Steering box can be reversed. I had 2 other steering boxes, including an early 60's F100 box, and there just wasn't room to mount them the way I needed. I kinda painted myself into a corner with the frame widening to follow the body line. This morning I looked at a 47 box, these were cross steer, and it looked to me like it could be reversed. This afternoon I diss-assembled it and sure enough it could. I don't know what kind of grease was in this, it looked like peanut butter, the thickness of honey. But it was not soluble, degreaser had little effect, oven cleaner a bit. I finally just hosed off the parts and wiped em down and put into a can of old carb cleaner. Well anyway it's reversed. I still have to get a freeze plug to plug the bottom, and weld in the vent tube, I guess that's what it is, it goes up from bottom into the hollow steering shaft, and weld a piece of tube on what now is the top and put a seal in it. First I'll make sure it will work. It looks like it will work like a champ. With the longer sector shaft I'll mount it so the shaft exits the bottom corner of the cowl, and the box will mostly be hidden.

DSCF3256-600.jpg

DSCF3257-600.jpg

DSCF3258-600.jpg

I thought I was going to have to go the corvair box route. Save that money..................... I'm Happy..........

Got burned out on welding, so I switched to some other tasks. Maybe ahead of the cart, but I cleaned and painted the ft axle, spindles, backing plates, and hubs. I am putting 49 F1 brakes on 47 spindles. Well I got the correct inner bearings and seals. Now everyone will tell you that you need to grind a bevel in the inner bearing so it will seat properly. Well I decided to do just that. Then it occurred to me, why grind the bearing. If I have to replace the bearing I'll have to grind that one. Now if I am in BFE and need a bearing and am actually able to find it then what. So what I did is smooth the small radius on the spindle out. It still has just a tiny bit of radius but the being seats against the spindle as is.

I also started assembling the engine. Got the heads done, and the block except for the last 2 pistons. I was having a difficult time locating a piston the correct weight. All the replacements were quite a bit lighter. Well our own Pat McCarthy saved the day. He shipped me 2 pistons of almost perfect weight, they should arrive tomorrow and I'll finish the engine, and take some pics.

Well my big project for today was the steering arm. I purchased one from Speedy Bill, when it arrived I looked at it and put it away. Well yesterday I got it out, and after looking at it for awhile, I realized it was the ugliest thing I had seen. I was plenty beefy, not going to brake. It was one of those stamped steel ones. I went this route because I wanted the longer length. And the gold anodizing on it did not help one bit..... So this afternoon I got out the grinders, sanders, and other implements of destruction and had at it. I don't know if it will be really noticeable in the pic but I rounded it quite a bit. I think after paint it will be acceptable.

DSCF3260-600.jpg

Originally Posted by roadster32

If the top of the F1 mount was curved over towards the wheel the shocks would work much more effectively, Coming on well.

Ideally you are correct. The best location would be so the shock would be in a straight line intersecting the arc the wheel travels. So this is a compromise. Although with a solid axle the arc does not remain constant. Now mind you this is only my opinion from building and racing stock cars. Sometimes I have to remind myself I need to turn right as well..... This location was based on shock length, so there would be proper travel. The length of shock tower, adequate clearance for the steering arm on drivers side, and maintaining some angle, relative to the arc that the axle pivots around. I have found also that even rod shocks are really designed for heavier vehicles, not the lighter cars that they are installed on. The angle serves a couple of purposes. First it softens the shock some, second it offers better roll control, body roll in a turn, and third as Don pointed out is offers some lateral stability, chassis in relation to axle. And then there is ascetics. And sometimes we trade function for form, at least a little.

One of the things that I do on the transverse spring setup is to preload the spring slightly. What I mean by this is when the spring pivots are tightened they actually pull on the spring. For a 26" spring I use 31" inside to inside between pivot mounts. So when I tighten up pivot bolts it pulls the spring about 1/4" to 3/8". I hope that makes sense. Now I may be wrong, wouldn't be the first time, but when I hear talk of a panard bar on a transverse spring setup, even with cross steer, I feel that the front end is not properly set up. I feel too much slop in spring shackles is the real cause. A preload on the spring acts to center the chassis to the axle and offer some amount of force to uncenter it. The normal force of cross steering action should not want to move the axle laterally in relation to the chassis. As stated before, just my opinion. Now coil on front, ie the way Roth used them on many of his rods is entirely different.

Opps........ One small clarification on the previous post. As for the cross steer statement, that was relative to radius rod or wishbone setup. I don't like the way 4 link looks and as such have no experience with that setup, it may very well need a panard bar. I just realized I had not taken that setup into account. Didn't want to get anybodys panties in a bunch this morning............