In 1937, as cars were becoming larger and heavier, Ford started putting the bearings on the kingpins under the axle and sandwiched between the bottom of the spindle and the bottom of the axle. The reason for this was to make the heavier cars steer easier. If you look at the pic marked 1937 Ford, as the spindle is on a car, the weight of the car pushes the axle downward and puts weight on the bearing at points #1 and #2. With me so far? On 1936 (and earlier to 1928) the set up was much different. On the picture 1936 Ford, if you notice, the bearing is ON TOP of the spindle. On a stock kingpin there was a circular cup on top that was used for mechanical brakes, in this picture they have removed the cup and welded a washer in its place, as was common when adding juice brakes to earlier spindles. Here is why I see NO advantage to even having the bearing at all on the 1936. As weight is placed on the axle, it again points downward, and the main support of the weight (and friction of the steering) is now riding on point #3. Kingpins are held in place by a groove milled into the kingpin and a retaining pin is driven into the axle. Once in, the kingpin is immobile, and the way it is set up, can only sit in that point, its not adjustable then the pin locks it in, it only locks it in one way. So even if you use shims at point #1 and #2, you still will need shims at point #3 so there is no slop. Once they all settle or wear in the slightest, your weight would now be concentrated at point #3 again. Here is the question. Since I would be using these on lightweight cars, what is wrong with deleting the bearing on top and making the shims at point #3 out of a friction reducing material such as oilight or Teflon? There is no strength gained with the longer kingpins because your shear point is at the spindle and not past its extremes. There would be a higher friction rate than the 37 spindle for steering, but on a lighter car it wouldnt be extreme. Tell me why this wouldnt work, or what Im not seeing, or offer any input to help me see the light.
The earlier set up does not ride on point 3, there is even a space there which is occupied by a metal cup enclosing a felt seal washer. The load is actually at point 1, the axle (and car weight) "hangs" from the king pin and bearing. A welded on washer at that location is not the best idea. You can use a needle thrust bearing and race under the axle at point 3 along with a '37-'41 king pin, don't think teflon or bronze washer would work very well.
Only reason I asked about teflon, I remember an article in Street Rodder or some other rod magazine (few years back, trying to find it) about a new kingpin kit for 37-48s that used a teflon disc instead of the typical bearing. So, if you used a needle bearing at point 3 on the early spindles, it should work? I have more later spindles than I will ever use, but I had someone ask me this question, so Im putting it out there to guys with more experience than me.
Royal Kingpins sell needle bearing kits at an outrageous price. Unfortunately roller bearings do not roll in this application, they skid. I took'em out and went back to plain bushings
I think we are talking about different parts. Are you talking about the bronze bushings that you put in the spindles and hone out (or the equivilent needle bearings that go in their place)? Im talking about the bearing that sits under the axle on a 37-48 spindle or top of the spindle on the 36 and earlier. In between points 1 and 2 in both pics.
what you are wanting to do has/is being done, i think the laceys at the early V8 garage in LA may even offer it in a kit. Al.
I'll throw in a thought or three. The change to a bearing under the axle was the advent of less wear. Consider how grease is readily available today compared to the, and then the new source of less wear to the axle and spindle. Ford wasn't the only manufacturer to put the bearing in that position. Current manufacturers of kingpin thrust bearings, in some applications, even go as far as having a sealing ring to help carry grease into the thrust bearing in the process of greasing the lower spindle bushing. I've never seen Elgin to offer the option of a Teflon thrust bushing as opposed to the subject load supporting thrust bearing. Elgin is a major manufacturer of kingpin sets for more than just the blue and yellow box with the Moog name.
I tried finding a website for them, couldnt. Does ayone have any links to a kit, or even any post on a forum of this being done?
The part numbers for the needle bearings and thrust washers are: Needle Bearings: NTA-1423 - two needed (one each kingpin) Thrust Washers: TRA-1423 - four needed (two each kingpin) I think NealinCA posted these numbers in one of his threads.
<TABLE id=post217481 cl***=tborder border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" align=center><TBODY><TR vAlign=top><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #e5e5e5 1px solid" id=td_post_217481 cl***=alt1>***uming that you are planning to install hydraulic brakes, you cannot just saw off the socket, as this is what the bearing bears against to carry the load. I offer a special kingpin/bearing kit for 32-36 spindles which uses shortened 37-41 kingpins with the flat cap on the top, and special thrust bearings and plates that fit between the bottom of the axle and the spindles and thereby carry the load. IF you are using Ford/Lockheed brakes, you can just keep the 36 kingpins and bearings, although it will look like ****. IF you are using Bendix brakes, the wheel cylinder is mounted lower and so the socket will be in the way of installing the hose into the WC port. In that case, you need to use my kit or something similar to afford a clear path for the front hoses. I have used my setup on my own car for going on 8 years with no problems... and many of my customers have used it with no reported problems. <!-- / message --><!-- sig -->__________________ Early V8 Garage Pasadena Roadster Club <!-- / sig --></TD></TR><TR><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #e5e5e5 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #e5e5e5 1px solid; BORDER-TOP: #e5e5e5 0px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #e5e5e5 1px solid" cl***=alt2> </TD><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #e5e5e5 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #e5e5e5 0px solid; BORDER-TOP: #e5e5e5 0px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #e5e5e5 1px solid" cl***=alt1 align=right><!-- controls --></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Can you tell me how this worked? I'm in the same situation and have been looking at the needle bearings as an option.
Interesting. My A axle has the bearing on top between the axle and the spindle. When I was setting the spindles up on my '37 axle I just used common sense and put it on the bottom. I don't really see the point of having one on top at all. The bearings are not expensive as I recall and most kingpin sets I have purchased had the bearing with them. But I guess if I didn't have access to bearings and wanted to get on the road I would not give a second thought to using oilite bronze to make a bushing to replace it.
I am running stock 32 spindles and king pins with 40 brakes. I cut part of the mech brake cups off but they are still structurally fine. I sure like the big bearings better than the little ones skidding around. It is working just fine as it is stock. I have some Wilson backing plates I would like to use. I see trouble. I will try to modify the backing plates before I switch spindles.
My problem is the spindle doesn't have enough space between the axle slot to put the stock bearing in between. When I upgraded to a solid kingpin the locating notch was cut in a different location making it so I have to drop the kingpin slightly to get the notch to line up with the locator bold on the axle. A lower profile needle bearing has been the option that appears to make the most sense. I was just curious what the results were.
Just get the early king pin kit that is right for your spindles and install it. You will like it much better than the needle bearing bandaid.
I found the needle bearings for next to nothing on Amazon. For as little as I paid for them I'm going to try them. Beats the **** out of buying a new kingpin set and having the bushings honed again. 'Preciate the advice.
The Jalopy Journal
