Removed by author.
Printable View
Removed by author.
I saw that video the last time you posted it. The owner was one of the oddest ducks I've ever seen. Don't sit in it, don't drive it, won't start it.Quote:
Originally Posted by daveS53
Removed by author.
Removed by author.
Dave, I still stick with on mustang II suspension your bottom a arms should be pretty much level, upper arms are fine if angled down toward the ball joint, also I know your daily driver my have a ton of travel but streetrods typically don't, when I put on my first Heidts superide I talked with Jerry Slover owner of Pete & Jakes and I remember him saying 20 yrs or so ago a independent or dropped axle on a streetrod typically has 3" of travel, after all its a streetrod. I have installed several front ends,3 heidts and several others (MustangII) and angled upper arms have always been the norm, no binding as they only have about 3" of travel just as Jerry told me years ago. I believe the Oze as I have mentioned uses a modified mustang II geometry, not superride or superide II the difference is no spring pocket but modified to use coilovers and threaded adjusters on the upper arms no slots, my wildrod I know for fact is Mustang II as I measured it and ordered all the parts as I didn't get the suspension with the car, bottom a arms are stock mustang II's narrowed 5/8", mustang II spindles and modified mustang II upper arms with threaded adjusters, all with Aldan Eagle coilovers, granted yours could be different but it doesn't look like it, the package resembles a superide but its not nor is the geometry, its mustang II. I could be wrong but start measuring or call the manufacturer as I always say and ask them, they will know and they want to tell you as they want your ride safe, their reputation and business depend on it (as well as their liability insurance). Anyway mine is aligned and drives awesome as a mustang II. As for my superide on my '32 its aligned and sets differently, lower arms angled as instructed. Neither have more than 3" of travel. I am only trying to save you grief on reengineering something that has been proven a million times in streetrods as well as saving you dollars, Most aftermarket mustang II a arms use the larger Volare screw in balljoint, top and bottom as they are much stronger as their where no 4000 lb mustang II's. Best of luck
Dave,
I too had to cut the mounting plate and re drill the holes further back for my TH400. What size of stall do you have and what hp does your engine make? TCI is telling me to use a 3400 stall for my 375 hp engine. That sounds a bit large for me...I'm thinking around 2400.
What are you cam specs? Duration @ .050?
Comp cam #12-212-2. duration @ 0.50 lilt = 230
Comp cam #12-212-2. Duration @ 0.50 lift = 230.
Removed by author.
Removed by author.
Maybe it is an illusion, but it looks like the upper arm is upside down.....the ball joint mount is angled down instead of up relative to the arm.
Comp Cam 12-212-2 230 duration
I have that same cam in my 383 and run a 2400 stall converter in a 700R4 transmisison. The combination works great.
This is what Comp Cams is telling you: For '58-'98 262-400 cid Small Block Engines w/ Flat Tappet Cam - Great For Street Machines • Needs 2500+ Stall, Headers & Gears • Rough IdleQuote:
Originally Posted by hammer-time
Lynn,Quote:
Originally Posted by rumrumm
Might the lower 1st gear in your 700R4 vice his TH400 make a little difference, and require a bit higher stall - particularly off the line?
Dave, I was thinking the same thing. I looked at old photos of the M-II suspension on my long-gone '30 A-Bone Sedan. At ride height, the ball-joint studs are almost perfectly perpendicular to the A-arms. Also, my upper A-arms slant upwards from frame to wheel.Quote:
It seems like the mounts for the ball joints should be angled to match the angle of the stud mounts on the spindle (about 7 degrees)?
What spindles did OZE use? With the apparent vertical distance between the balljoint bosses compared to the vertical distance between the upper and lower frame mounts, I can't see how this will ever work.
Is it possible that the design of that system is FUBAR?
If he is running a 350 rather than a 383, a little more stall might be in order given how the difference in cubic inches will affect idle characteristics. But I don't think anything over 3000 would be necessary.
Dave----its time that you need to realize that your upper/inner frame mount is TOTALY wrong---------there isn't any reason to keep polishing the turd and you need to clean the entire mount from the frame and start anew ( a new ) the upper arms should angle up/out toward the ball joint and when you get that corrected you'll have more down travel-also don't follow the scheme that a longer shock will give you more suspension travel-it won't-you need a shorter shock to let you have a less restriction to travel of your arms-------the day will never come that a guy can build one of these and fit all the fairy tails of internet and get a suspension that works
If and when you redo the upper a arm mounts you can correct your caster/camber /wheelbase issues and also fab a shock upper mount that lets you use a shock/spring combo that is at travel midpoint at ride ht.
Sorry guys, but we've been beating the same dead horse for more than two years - http://www.clubhotrod.com/hot-rod-bu...tml#post507056 This is the guy who cut pieces out of the front A-arm mounting structure to adjust wheelbase and caster! At this point Jerry is right, it's time to cut the entire front suspension off and start from scratch, doing it right.
Dave, IMO you'd be much better off hauling the car in to a good shop and letting them install a new IFS from scratch, then have them align the chassis, setting the rear square to the newly installed front suspension with consideration for wheelbase to center the rear wheels in your wheelwells.
Dave Severson told me to back away from this one, and I tried but now I'm gone.
Dave, I just looked at my suspension on my wildrod, looks similar to yours but no extreme ball joint angle on the top a arm? It appears by the pic that your spindle mounting ear for the top a arm is heavily angled resulting in the extreme angle on the ball joint?? Here is the pic of my front suspension, now these are dropped apindles that I replaced with standard height spindles but nothing has changed on angles except here its mocked up and the alignment is done now. I am wondering about the spindles, you might not have as much issue as you think.....maybe the parts are wrong. Also check that you don't have standard length lower a-arms with 5/8" narrower uppers resulting in a cock eyed match, you may need 5/8" narrower lowers (I did) If you have any questions call a reputable shop like Lakeshore fabrications at (573) 875-1500 and ask him he as makes custom a arms as well as many for others kits ex. Speedway. give your center line to ball joint dimension on the custom uppers, heck send him a pic and he will tell you the problem, great guy.
Attachment 64147
Removed by author.
Dave after reading Jerry & Rogers post I hadn't realized that the mount centerline for the upper a arms has been changed?? You can see that the pivot for the upper a arms on yours is pretty much the same height as the upper shock mounting bolt, on mine the pivot is much lower, getting rid of the cattywampus angle it is, I think Jerry is right it has altered the suspension geometry so much that you may have to do something more extreme with your approach to a solution, possibly order a new cross member and graft on the top part to get back to your original geometry, this is all assuming you had changed that part?? When I received my frame like I mentioned I didn't have the bolt on items, however I had rides I had built with Mustang II suspensions and I measured all the parts on my frame as well as measuring two friends rides that where identical to mine and called the distributor and they all confirmed that it was Mustang II geometry but with custom upper a arms, coil over mounts and stock size lower a arms but 5/8 narrower (keep in mind when referencing stock I mean in geometry only as no parts are factory Mustang) I also had the benifit of having a Superide in my garage to measure.
I saw you have updated your rear bars with double adjustable ends, though it makes it asier to adjust keep a close eye on the jamb nuts, the problem I have been told with this setup occurs when you twist a rear end like going over railroad tracks, the heim ends tends to unscrew very slightly and loosen the jambs making the bar loose and able to rotate, tha'ts the reason most street cars have only one adjustable end as there are no worries.
I hope all goes well, honestly. Please keep in mind that some of these guys really are only trying to help and are quite knowledgeable, I am no expert but have had quite a few builds, I have met Roger, great guy and very knowledgeable and Jerry's history speaks for itself, anytime guys like that speak its something to consider,constructive criticism is still constructive! if I can be of any help just holler! Best of luck Matthyj
Removed by author.
Dave,
Considering all the grief you've had with this front end, I'm glad something finally makes sense.
I'd be interested in seeing your math on up/down travel of the shock. I had a lot of trouble getting that right on my '34 because neither the upper nor lower shock mounts were adjustable.
Also, I assume that the shock will limit downward suspension travel. It would be a bad deal for the ball joint stud to do that.
Removed by author.
Removed by author.
I think your starting to get it------
Don't limit the suspension travel with the shock travel-use snubbers or other limiters
when you have the suspension angles and movements mapped out and verified, you then do the upper shock mounting location to a distance that is a little less(so suspension doesn't bang out the shock-----and doesn't bottom on the lower during compression. Then whwn all that's freed up/non binding, no bump steer.etc-choose springs that will work with your numbers-------suggest looking at some of the variable rate springs
I'm not sure about this torque converter thing. Not to concerned about launch speed as I am about unloading the engine at a stop light.
I believe that the 3400 recommendation by TCI is way overboard, but there's a lot to choosing a converter, including tire diameter, car weight, differential ratio, torque peak, etc. You might want to READ THIS ARTICLEQuote:
Originally Posted by hammer-time
If I were you, I would call several other manufacturers such as Monster, B&M, Hughes, etc with your specs and see what they say.
Hughes says they would make a "special" torque converter for my application. A GM25MAX, this is a custom version of their GM25 Street Master torque converter. It is a 12” model that will provide approximately 2,400 – 2,600 RPM of max stall speed. They also stated that their standard GM25 torque converter would not likely allow my engine to idle in gear extremely well, and would only provide approximately 2,000 – 2,100 RPM of max stall speed even though it is rated at 2500 RPM.
I'm still waiting on other replies.
Thanks for all the help!
FWIW, Hughes is one of the best, if not the best, of the converter companies. They are more expensive, but most other companies will not design and build a custom unit to suit your needs.
Dave, every time I read your latest posting, I feed sad for you because I think about how much stuff that you have had to redo because of the original fabricator that didn't pay attention or didn't care. Just think if you had all this time and money back to use for finishing your car....you probably would be driving it by now! I would expect that a competent fabricator would have said "let me have the car back to make it right" but these guys have caused you so much grief......I know you have learned lots but you shouldn't have had to pay for all these lessons. I hope that others have read your experiences and can learn so they don't have to go thru the same thing. Best wishes on your build. Mike
robot, I do too, and understand completely, having gone through it myself. I did take mine back to the original fabricator. Unfortunately, transport both ways was on me, and his 'fixes' just made it worse. Where are Sherman, Peabody and the Wayback Machine when you need them?
Removed by author.
Removed by author.
Dave, what modification are you making to the top mount? Shortening it?
Removed by author.
Removed by author.
Removed by author.
