1940 Ford Tudor Build Thread

[Dave Severson]

Yes I did Dave. Now the other issue that was brought to my attention. Look at the top pic in post 143...... The front part of the frame is above the rear part of the cross member by a good bit. Hopefully the LH rail is the same, or maybe that is a bad pic. I'm heading over there now to look at it. I think I know why it's hacked, I mean done like that...... Instead of notching the lower portion of the frame so the rack would fit, they raised the front of the frame to make clearance.

Yup, the front part of the frame is way too high, puts the spring tower up too high and the anti-dive angle for the upper A-Arm is way off!!!! Going to have to do something there, too. Missed seeing that when I looked at your pics.

Hopefully this pic comes through, it's the correct set up for anti-dive angle on the upper arm. The angle of the upper arm should be about 7-10 degrees with the front of the arm higher. As long as this angle is not less then your caster angle, it works out ok.

[40FordDeluxe]

Yup, the front part of the frame is way too high, puts the spring tower up too high and the anti-dive angle for the upper A-Arm is way off!!!! Going to have to do something there, too. Missed seeing that when I looked at your pics.

I missed it too. I'm not sure what I'm going to do about it. I honestly am thinkng of just strengthening it and running it. Because either I: A cut the cross member out and buy a new one and try to scab the old front frame horns back on, or B start with a different/new frame. Well, this thing drove surprisingly well for all the bad crap it had going on. I think I might be able to live with the anti-dive being screwed up. The biggest complaint I had before was the bump steer. So as long as it doesn't drive worse than it did, I will probably leave it. It isn't pretty or ideal, but I think it would be a major project to correct that without at least a frame jig.................

[40FordDeluxe]

Yup, the front part of the frame is way too high, puts the spring tower up too high and the anti-dive angle for the upper A-Arm is way off!!!! Going to have to do something there, too. Missed seeing that when I looked at your pics.

Hopefully this pic comes through, it's the correct set up for anti-dive angle on the upper arm. The angle of the upper arm should be about 7-10 degrees with the front of the arm higher. As long as this angle is not less then your caster angle, it works out ok.

Thanks Dave! That helps a lot! I think I have an idea how to bring the angle down too. I can cut the upper part and cut a pie shape out of it. Bring it down to a correct angle, and weld it all up. The only way this thing has survived is the boxing plates they put on the inside are one piece. This thing may not be ideal but it'll have to work for now. I can't imagine how bad it really is if we compared stock frame measurements to what it is now. Poor dang car.

I did check the LH rail and it's the same way. So when they installed the MII, they just cut the frame off and then stuck the cross member and scabbed from there. How this car survived all this is beyond me. I bet that front end has 100,000 miles or more on it like that. I put 8000 miles on it, and my uncle drove the car daily when I was a lad.

[40FordDeluxe]

Yup, the front part of the frame is way too high, puts the spring tower up too high and the anti-dive angle for the upper A-Arm is way off!!!! Going to have to do something there, too. Missed seeing that when I looked at your pics.

Hopefully this pic comes through, it's the correct set up for anti-dive angle on the upper arm. The angle of the upper arm should be about 7-10 degrees with the front of the arm higher. As long as this angle is not less then your caster angle, it works out ok.

Dave, do you remember where you got this pic from? Thanks Ryan.

Post #146 Page 10 of this thread.