Register now to get rid of these ads!

Technical Lowering a 1941 Plymouth

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Kellen WM, Jul 21, 2015.

  1. Kellen WM
    Joined: Dec 21, 2014
    Posts: 15

    Kellen WM

    My bone stock 1941 Plymouth 2 door sedan rides WAAAAY to high.

    How low and how can I lower it using the stock shock absorbers on it? Cut coils in the front (how many)? Lowering blocks in the rear on the leaf springs?

    Any help would be greatly appreciated!
     
  2. 302GMC
    Joined: Dec 15, 2005
    Posts: 8,142

    302GMC
    Member
    from Idaho

    2 coils in front, de-arch the rears ...the shocks work fine as is if in decent condition.
     
  3. Kellen WM
    Joined: Dec 21, 2014
    Posts: 15

    Kellen WM

    De arch? Sorry for the new guy question here. Learning as I go.
     
  4. This was my 1941 Plymouth Coupe, one coil was cut from the front end which dropped it about 2"and 2" lowering blocks installed between the rear spring pads and rear axle........you could go lower if wanted but this was enough for me..andyd
     

    Attached Files:

  5. 2racer
    Joined: Sep 1, 2011
    Posts: 959

    2racer
    Member

  6. desertdroog
    Joined: Nov 16, 2001
    Posts: 1,020

    desertdroog
    Member

    You can also drill out the rivets that hold the spring pocket to the bottom of the lower arm. Make a 1" spacer, bolt it back together, and voila, dropped front end with an easy change back to stock if you like.

    Also, may I suggest sourcing a good spring shop in your town? They can re-arch your rear springs to any height you want. Keeps your axle from getting too out of geometry if you intend to go super low with taller blocks.
     
  7. DonnyK
    Joined: Nov 30, 2017
    Posts: 33

    DonnyK

    When you say make a 1" spacer, exactly what are you spacing? are you put a 1" spacer under the coil?
     
  8. I'm also looking to lower my stock 41 coupe. I'm going to cut 1 coil off the front springs and then put lowering blocks in the back. I'm going for a real early tail dragger kinda look with white wall crossply 600s and fender skirts. The cars black so I'm hoping it'll look quite mean when I'm done
     
  9. Doublepumper
    Joined: Jun 26, 2016
    Posts: 1,662

    Doublepumper
    Member
    from WA-OR, USA

    I like this idea. Keeps everything where it's supposed to be and maintains the ride quality by using the factory length springs.
     
  10. RodStRace
    Joined: Dec 7, 2007
    Posts: 5,589

    RodStRace
    Member

    What it is doing is providing less spring preload, so the front A arms settle lower. It would be the same as a shorter spring with the same rate, or kind of like cutting some from the spring. If you have seen those sales aids for replacing your springs in repair shops, it shows why the stock suspension being lowered is why suspension parts and tires wear more 'lowered'. The arc of the upper and lower control arms are designed to be at a certain point in those arcs at ride height. Most of us understand this and are willing to sacrifice for the look. However, any mod that uses the stock components (upper and lower arms at stock mounting point and spindle/upright) and sits lower still does this. No free lunch here.
    [​IMG]
    You are also talking about a suspension that was designed for tall, narrow bias ply tires. Just like going with big wide tires, any change from stock will probably add stress.
    You can swap to a lowered upright (high stress, forged stuff, lots of cost and liability), move the pivot points of both a arms up on the chassis (High load again), or swap to a different suspension and mount it at the desired height (we aren't going to talk about this one).
    Have car enthusiasts done this before? All the time, but just be aware that camber, scrub radius and bump steer are all affected.
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2023
  11. gene-koning
    Joined: Oct 28, 2016
    Posts: 4,594

    gene-koning
    Member

    I think I can help here. Pictured is the front suspension that was removed from my 48 Plymouth coupe (the frame was rotted through junk, this suspension went on to live under another Plymouth). This suspension design was originally installed on Plymouths from 1939 to 1950 something.
    What you have may have slight differences, but it is pretty much the same stuff. This one happens to be the the left (drivers) 48 coupe 302.jpg side suspension.

    The "spring plate" these guys are talking about moving is the flat plate with the bump in the middle of the lower A frame, in the picture. The plate in this picture is in its original position and that plate is riveted to the the channel of the lower A frame below it with 4 rivets.
    The modification is that you cut off the heads of the rivets, remove the plate, rid the lower A frame of the rivet remains, flatten the outside edges and move the plate to under the A frame, and bolt it back up with the 1" spacers. That lowers the front suspension 1" if you add a 2" spacer between the plate and the lower A frame, you lower the front end the additional inch. Use grade 8 bolts and nuts. If you move the plate, you don't need to cut the coil spring.

    It is not advised that you lower the front suspension more then 2" total, 2" is a lot.

    If you look closely, you can also see that the factory shock is mounted between the upper control arm and the lower A frame. If you move that shock mount from the upper control arm and add a bracket so the top of the shock can be bolted to the frame rather then to the control arm, the car handling will improve, but the ride gets a bit more stiff.
     
  12. rustythumb32
    Joined: Aug 16, 2022
    Posts: 8

    rustythumb32

    correct me if i'm wrong, but it looks like moving that spring plate under the a arm will lower the spring aprox. 2". and that will lower the car aprox. 4".
     
  13. j hansen
    Joined: Dec 22, 2012
    Posts: 8,929

    j hansen
    Member

    My car is a -48 Dodge,but I think it looks pretty much like the suspension on a -41 Plymouth.
    Drop spindles and lowering blocks.
    IMG_8021.jpeg IMG_9168.jpeg IMG_7382.jpeg
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2023
    Charlie Chop likes this.
  14. J. Hanson, that’s gotta be one of the best looking Dodge business coupes ever built.
    I admire it every time you post a picture of it…
     
    leadfoot1000 and j hansen like this.
  15. j hansen
    Joined: Dec 22, 2012
    Posts: 8,929

    j hansen
    Member

    Thank you,,,,,,but I just bought the car!!
    And I did som minor changes to it.
     
  16. j hansen
    Joined: Dec 22, 2012
    Posts: 8,929

    j hansen
    Member

    My 1941 De Soto vs My 1948 Dodge.
    Skannad 1.jpeg IMG_7380.jpeg
     

    Attached Files:

    Copper Top likes this.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.