Thread: Sunday Red: A 1932 Roadster Build Log Started in 2022

Tweet

Originally Posted by JimBeam

Hey Roger, always good to see your updates and my own build is very much inspired by yours: Sunday Red

I'm getting ready to order my P&J chassis and thought I'd get your opinion on the options.
1 - I know your build log mentioned that the power brake option is simply not needed so I'm bypassing this.
2 - Do you think I should get the brake lines pre-installed? Even though I haven't run any before, I want to learn throughout this process. Do you think this car is OK for a rookie to plumb it himself or should I go for the pre-install option?
3 - The rear disc brake kit at around $320 seems like a bargain. Or is there a better way to handle that?
4 - What do you think about the C-notch rear chassis option. I'm not 100% clear on what I gain/lose here so would appreciate your insight.

Am I forgetting anything else? I know you bought yours second hand so you didn't get to choose all options but would love your thoughts since you know this chassis just about better than anyone.

Rather than answer you on my build thread I'll copy & paste to yours and answer here.
1) Jason at P&J will tell you that you don't need the power brake booster. I agree you should pass.
2) Yes, buy the brake line option. They do a great job, keeping everything tight and smooth bends. You cannot duplicate their work.
3) If you want 4 wheel discs buy P&J's option. I believe it's a good choice.
4) Buy the C-notch. Unless you're replicating a stock chassis with stock suspension you'll need the clearance.

You've not asked, but had I bought the roadster chassis myself I would not have gone with the IFS. The dropped I-beam is the traditional hot rod look, and with the show chrome option it's a stunner. Easy to set up, and they track straight and true with no bump steer.

Originally Posted by JimBeam

I'm going down my list and starting to look at some of the other systems I'm going to need for this car. Let's talk brakes:

With the P&J chassis there is the option to add rear-wheel disc, which I will almost certainly do. But it looks like they will match the front discs which are listed as being GM. I want to keep Ford in Ford and want to explore other options, like using Mustang brakes. If I am down to the bare spindle, there's probably no reason why I couldn't mount Mustang breaks, right? I'm assuming I can just buy the caliper bracket, caliper and rotor and proceed accordingly, yes?

What am I missing here? Or is there a reason why I should stay GM?

Your assumption is not right, and saying you want Mustang Brakes so it will be Ford in Ford borders on the insane, no offense intended. P&J engineers a product, so if you want their chassis don't try to change their design. You're going to find that there are a LOT of 3rd party parts that are "based on GM". One that comes to mind is steering columns, where both Ididit and Flaming River offer custom length columns with GM tilt and GM style wire connectors; and the wire connectors from the wiring kits use GM style. Limit "Ford in Ford" to your power train and your build will go smoother. Just my $0.02, and do what you want.

Originally Posted by rspears

You've not asked, but had I bought the roadster chassis myself I would not have gone with the IFS. The dropped I-beam is the traditional hot rod look, and with the show chrome option it's a stunner. Easy to set up, and they track straight and true with no bump steer.

Thank you for the help Roger. I will stick with the GM brakes.

That's an interesting comment on the IFS. I like the thought of it because - in theory - it should be a smoother ride overall. Is the bump steer that bad with it? Or are you mentioning this more from an aesthetic perspective? On paper the iFS should be the better option but I might have to reconsider that now.

Originally Posted by JimBeam

That's an interesting comment on the IFS. I like the thought of it because - in theory - it should be a smoother ride overall. Is the bump steer that bad with it? Or are you mentioning this more from an aesthetic perspective? On paper the iFS should be the better option but I might have to reconsider that now.

I mentioned bump steer because that's one of the major criticisms you see when someone is talking about the I beam axle front end. It was a bigger problem back when guys used "same side steering", where the pitman arm sits ~parallel with the front axle and the drag link runs up to a steering arm on the driver's side wheel. When they adapted the "crossed steering geometry", where the pitman arm sits more parallel to the frame and the drag link connects to the steering arm on the passenger side bump steer pretty much disappeared.
If you go fenderless you'll hear the quiet snide remarks like "....yeah but ya' just don't run IFS on a hiboy (or lowboy or hot rod). It just looks wrong, ya' know?" Not that anyone else's opinion matters, but the traditional "hot rod" from this era has a dropped I-beam axle of one kind or another and a leaf spring. Personally I like the "look" of hairpins over 4-bar for the caster & alignment. The 4-bar does tend to keep the front axle moving straight up & down (parallelogram action) which I believe was more needed for the tube axles which can't flex like the I-beam and can work harden and fail over time, especially with a softer spring.
Again, just my opinions and like belly buttons, everyone has an opinion but only yours really matters. I've only done two cars, both just for my own pleasure and the joy of fabrication, so I'm by no means an expert on anything here.

Originally Posted by rspears

I mentioned bump steer because that's one of the major criticisms you see when someone is talking about the I beam axle front end. It was a bigger problem back when guys used "same side steering", where the pitman arm sits ~parallel with the front axle and the drag link runs up to a steering arm on the driver's side wheel. When they adapted the "crossed steering geometry", where the pitman arm sits more parallel to the frame and the drag link connects to the steering arm on the passenger side bump steer pretty much disappeared.
If you go fenderless you'll hear the quiet snide remarks like "....yeah but ya' just don't run IFS on a hiboy (or lowboy or hot rod). It just looks wrong, ya' know?" Not that anyone else's opinion matters, but the traditional "hot rod" from this era has a dropped I-beam axle of one kind or another and a leaf spring. Personally I like the "look" of hairpins over 4-bar for the caster & alignment. The 4-bar does tend to keep the front axle moving straight up & down (parallelogram action) which I believe was more needed for the tube axles which can't flex like the I-beam and can work harden and fail over time, especially with a softer spring.
Again, just my opinions and like belly buttons, everyone has an opinion but only yours really matters. I've only done two cars, both just for my own pleasure and the joy of fabrication, so I'm by no means an expert on anything here.

Well you're more of an expert than I am and that's good enough for me to learn from you

If the snide comments are all I have to worry about then I'm completely OK with that. I want a car that will be functional and fun to drive and I think IFS achieves that for me. I'll proceed with the P&J plan.

Originally Posted by JimBeam

If the snide comments are all I have to worry about then I'm completely OK with that. I want a car that will be functional and fun to drive and I think IFS achieves that for me. I'll proceed with the P&J plan.

Sounds good! Just FYI, P&J offers both IFS and traditional, with lots of options on the traditional. If you don't have their hard copy catalog & price list you should order one! It's got a ton of good info.