History Proper Front Suspension for a Traditional Rod ?

Fair enough Mr Falcon.
Being new here and not really being interested until recently, in pre 55 cars I have done good with this thread.
Hell, I had never heard of Ak Millar and only seen lever action shocks on Formula One cars and now know they were common and used many years before.
Also, I now know who Ak is and look up to him as one of the Real innovators and realise he knew something that the Formula One guys would be wanting to utilise in the future.
So , I have learned a little bit of history, got to interact with some good people (and a few highly stressed Australiaaaans) .
So, this thread has worked for me...

 

It's butt ugly.
Smelly butt ugly.
Dangle berry butt ugly.

But that's by today's standards.

Back then it wasn't done to anything more than an 30 year old car. Today's equivalent of cutting up a 1986 turd something. Who cares right? Who cared back then.

Park Doan Spencer's roadster side by side with that thing and tell me. Race Doans ride against that and tell me.

 

It's butt ugly.
Smelly butt ugly.
Dangle berry butt ugly.

But that's by today's standards.

Back then it wasn't done to anything more than an 30 year old car. Today's equivalent of cutting up a 1986 turd something. Who cares right? Who cared back then.

Park Doan Spencer's roadster side by side with that thing and tell me. Race Doans ride against that and tell me.

 

This thread isn't necessarily about A.K Millars Roadster but it certainly seems to have dominated a lot of the conversation so I am posting some past threads to inform myself and the members who may be interested.

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/ak-miller-image.300430/

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/ak-miller-roadster-pics-please.181176/

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/dry-lake-car-build-by-another-dane.956601/

http://www.hotrod.com/features/history/stories/hrdp-0606-ak-miller-history-best-hot-rodder/

http://www.dmc-decals.dk/41677941

 

Its already been established where I land on the "cool" spectrum...
http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/juding-car-shows.1017247/page-6#post-11517382

 

I thought I was cool once.....I got over it!

 

My view of it is that what ever was done back then was innovative progress in the attempt to improve an aspect of the cars performance, as for looks.... I believe the visual aspect is much the same as the AG coupe. I bet it looks worse in color!! JW

 

This isn't an actual Knee Action, it's the later, fairly conventional unequal length control arm system. Knee Action was something different, originally designed by apéritif heir André Dubonnet, tested on the Hispano-Suiza H6 which eventually became the Xenia, and fitted to '34-'38 Chevrolets.

As you may see here, though arguably even uglier than the later system, it at least had a sort of period weirdness to it. Its main feature is that the entire suspension is contained in oil-filled units which turn with the steering. Theoretically that should give the least possible unsprung mass by an extremely narrow margin; in practice cranks and cantilevers make for heavy parts. And it has the same disadvantage as all the trailing-arm systems which don't turn with the steering, like the VW Bug system, i.e. zero camber recovery: camber gain = roll angle. This might be useful on something which would oversteer viciously otherwise, which explains why it was considered the best thing since sliced bread at a time when bad handling usually meant rear-end waywardness. A roll centre at ground level is often also nice to have, as is no chance of any amount of bump steer ever. And if you look at the illustrations you'll see that there is dual-rate springing using the same principle of primary and secondary springs used on modern serious off-road vehicles.

It doesn't suit any purpose of mine, however.

 

They are in the Chevy workshop material known as "external knee action", a pose to the early "internal knee action".

I know I'm just added gas to the fire, but this is to me not that ugly, but fare from pretty.

I just like to see this car, for a reference point, to establish how much a difference a straight eight over a different front suspension would change the feeling of speed, the handling at corner at WOT, compared to a flathead, a transverse spring and straight axle.

Because I bet you it handles different, and to me the upgrade in handling can make it bear-able to run that suspension. Because there is a ton of ways to do it. And all has been tried true time.

Make a call, or in other words; piss or get off the pot.

This will for me always be the most beautiful, non-ford suspension ever made

 

For sure Ak Miller was an innovator, and thought "outside the box".

 

Up until she was about 5, my kid loved it if I sang to her. EVERYWHERE, like in the supermarket, ect. And I dont sing well, so that tells you how "cool" I am. NOTHING will ruin your badass image like strolling through the Mini-Mart singing the Barney song off-key. "Cool" and "parent" are pretty much mutually exclusive, and once you become a parent, it just becomes irrelevant anyway.

 

That Barney song is melted in my brain!

 

LOL I have never thought that I was cool but I never really cared. I do what I want when I want, if someone doesn't like it they can not like it, take me up on it or get over it. no skin off my nose, well unless they decide to take me up on it I suppose.

Anyway I have never considered myself to be cool, it has never really been an issue.

 

I'm sure that song was probably composed as part of some CIA mind control experiment. Man is it insidious! Bet they used it in Guantanamo...

 

Was your Dad's Fairlane blue? There was a blue '62 Fairlane with a 460 and narrowed Transit (?) front axle on parallel leafs that turned up in Auckland later in the 80's that is most likely the same car.

 

Sure was that car Simon Sez mate. Do you know where it could be found these days ?
Wouldn't mind finding it.
I think my Dad wanted $300o for it back then and I passed as I was into my XY Falcons. Cool old car that Fairlane.

 

Is that a torsion set up ?

 

Doane and dusted mate..
The old things are only original once...

 

Best way to pull on any womans heart strings is to play the 'Poor Solo Dad" trick at the Supermarkets... Beats any internet dating service hands down... Lol

 

A golden lab with a red polka-dot bandana around his neck works better than any ferrari...I got a lot of mileage out of that deal when I was a young guy...

 

No parallel leafsprings, early Chevy frame (1926).
Ran the almost Identical setup from 1925 till 1959 on cars and trucks.

 

I never thought I was cool, just knew it. I knew it before my schoolmates did. How cool is it to graduate HS using a 38 Dodge pickup as the ride around afterward? It even had Cadillac power. That was in 75 when the kids who thought they were cool drove new cars with impact bumpers and catalytic converters. Had a 62 Ford short bed uni too, also Cadillac powered. But back on topic, look how easy it is to get balled up in trying to convince the trad police what's what and who's who. At the end of the day who gives a fat rat's ass? As long as it stays fun and respectful to our brothers in arms, all good. We need to remember not to take any of this stuff too serious, and not to take ourselves too serious either.

 

These arguments get so old. I say if it looks good to you and you enjoy the car do whatever you want. We have had to change our views on what is acceptable even at our local Thrashing Bee to allow cars that have been modified and hot rodded to come and even into the Late 70's. Why because the car show was dying because younger generations, my generation didn't have stock cars or "Traditional" cars to bring to the show. Now the show is bigger than ever and we have a lot more traffic through the show, because we allowed different vehicles to come. Now I am an unusual young guy I hate Muscle cars and am not really into anything post 1960. But in order to keep hot rodding alive I am willing to accept that that 1970's muscle car or 1940's rat rod is someone's pride and joy, who am I to say that it isn't. I think this is a neat idea, and if it was done back then I say a Mustang II setup is just an upgraded version. Sure a straight Axle looks cooler, but I know for a fact that it does not ride or handle nearly as nicely as an Independent front.

 

It's funny to me how upset people can get on this subject. The reality was that to guys like Ak Miller, Vic Edelbrock ,Mickey Thompson and that crowd were racers first, looks were secondary to performance.
Always.
In that crowd, if you were fast, other guys wanted to know what you did and how so they could beat you. None of them would have put form over function. In fact, most of their time and money was into performance, and "pretty" was secondary.
Ford was about simplicity and assembly speed. Henry resisted innovation until the market demanded it. So performance guys usually upgraded their light, easy to work on Fords with performance upgrades from innovative, more expensive donors from the junk yard. A 32 "traditional"built flat head hot rod of today would not have had a chance of being competitive on the salt by the early 50s.
If any of today's "purist" types went to a Muroc meet in the fifties in a time machine and started mouthing off about what " looked correct" or not, I think they would get blank stares in return. Race car guys wanted to go fast, most of them were smart, and I bet Ak Miller would not have cared how ugly it was. If it gained him an extra 1/2 mph, he would do it. The fairings he added later would have been for another 1/2 mph in drag reduction, not to make it prettier..
That being said, I am personally bored with cars that are built to the exact template of thousand of previous cars. I love seeing innovative takes within the traditional parameters. Threads by guys like langy, Marty stroud, or Ryan's latest model A are what's awesome on this site. Because these guys still innovate and carry on the essence of "hot rod".If some guy here built a car and used a 40 dodge or chev ifs I would follow along and encourage him or her. If it fails, you do it over, if it works, awesome.

 

Well...my take is that there's good and bad IFS*...
When I was in College, my ride was my '48 Ford. I regularly drove my Grandfather's '53 Chevy Coupe (same basic layout except for shocks as '41) on vacations.
The '48 cornered flatter than '50's and '60's cars, and obviously had no camber problems...I was always quite a few MPH faster comfortably than the modern cars on off ramps and such, where old Chevys and '60's Ford looked like they were about to roll over on their door handles.
The '53, which was in good shape, had the typical GM roll...the roll center must have been close to China...and colossal camber change when cornering. Going around a turn at anything above Grandma-on-the-way-to-Church speed left me looking straight down at the road through the side windows, and the camber change left the tires screaming at ridiculously low speed. It was desperately behind the '48, which took normal turns at speed with no dramatics at all.
I had access to a semi-private junkyard containing all the old rides of NASCAR guy Clyde Lynn, who had moved on by then to running in the big league with 427 Galaxies. There were rows of old Ford and Chevy coupes, straight axle Fords and Chevies covering periods including straight axle, Dubonnet Knee action, and normal A-arm IFS.
EVERY Chevy had a Ford straight axle front. You can't drive hard with wretchedly designed systems that cannot control camber.
I'd love to drive that Chevy IFS '32 and see how it felt...if it worked, I would bet that it worked by being heavily oversprung so that it had very little movement at all in roll...

*and Chevy was not the only source back then. I've got pics of one rod with what seems to be planar front IFS, and people also imitated the scary Allard swing system.

 

If you played the feakin song to me more then once and/or had that big purple lizard talk to me for about 5 minutes I would tell you anything you wanted to know and even make some stuff up if I had to.

I would be willing to bet dollars to dunuts that Miller was not racing that heavy knee action front suspension on Muroc to just get dry lakes record. I'll bet that he was doing as much R&D as he was trying to go fast in the dust.
As I recall from reading and talking with the old guys (I don't think I ever met him) he was interested in road racing and other forms of racing early on and that being the case he would have been doing as much testing and refining on the dry lakes as he was racing. granted this is just conjecture on my part and thee is no way to proof it out one way or the other.

 

I would be willing to bet dollars to dunuts that Miller was not racing that heavy knee action front suspension on Muroc to just get dry lakes record. I'll bet that he was doing as much R&D as he was trying to go fast in the dust.
As I recall from reading and talking with the old guys (I don't think I ever met him) he was interested in road racing and other forms of racing early on and that being the case he would have been doing as much testing and refining on the dry lakes as he was racing. granted this is just conjecture on my part and thee is no way to proof it out one way or the other.

 

Here's the thing. And I really do know that I am gonna' get it for saying this: people who follow the staunch blueprint of the "Traditional Hotrod" or any unbending rule system -enjoy the inherent safety of it all. Known or guaranteed acceptance among any group of people is worth gold.

This really is why there are so many cream colored Toyota sedans on the road in America. Humans are a pretty rough lot; we all want to fit in but be slightly different, yet we are so eager to note the odd yellow bird among all the white and yell charge.

Again, I know, I am gonna get it, but most people just aren't that creative; seriously. We have all (me included) ridden off the coattails of the greats before us. We haven't added much except fine craftsmanship like ways of doing what has already been created.

Proof is every hot rod at every show I attend: same, same, same, and same. Why? There is safety in sameness; there is guaranteed acceptance in what has been ordained by the masses.

The inarguable point however, is that all greats, at one time or another, ran with the group until they decided it was boring and not enough for what was inside them. Soon after, with hard work and the will to try things out and ignore criticism, they became immortal (Garlets, Barris brothers, Gene Berg, Brizio, Butler, Buttera, Presley, Jackson, Hemingway, Edison, etc.).

Close: it is ten times harder to have the skill and balls to go out and do something radical than it is to be within the safety of the herd and call blasphemy on some poor bastard who is trying to do something different with good intentions.

Just this lame copycat hotrodder's thoughts.

The Pork

 

If you look into a bunch of the earliest familiar rod magazines, '48-50 stuff, look around some into the early '60's when out type rods disappeared from the mags, and also read the books put out by Trend/Petersen and Fawcett, you will find a pretty good sprinkling of experimentation with stuff we don't recognize as traditional. You can find articles on swing axles, people building torsion bar suspension (at first from scratch, later from Morris, Packard, and Mopar stuff), early sport rods and early luxury rods, etc. It was all very individual, while what we call traditional was people (the great majority) following familiar Ford combinations as the most known/least resistance way to build. Just as in recent rodding, where the path of least resistance has become simply buying everything from a few full-page ads in Streetrodder... but even streetrodding churns up some original ideas.
Tradition as commonly accepted in the HAMB became nailed down early...look at the high end roadster clubs of the late fifties in California, very rigid looking standards...but at least those guys brought in the highest standards of workmanship, and also carried on rodding into the sixties when no one else wanted anything but Super Stocks, Karts, and later musclecars.
Some creative thinking even turns retro...this hit me when a guy who was into hot Corvairs told me about getting Colin Chapman (Lotus!) to talk about suspension dynamics at a CORSA meeting. Someone asked him what suspension type he would choose if he could only work with one for the rest of his life.
His reply...Model T Ford! He explained this as meaning the whole general early Ford system of solid axle/simple control arm. Why?? He said that this was the best solution to camber and caster control, and easy to control in all planes of suspension movement. Bottom line, he said, was that it entirely solved the big problem of keeping the tires planted in perfect relation to the pavement and allowing suspension movement without allowing bad changes to that relationship...development from their would be simple!

 

Someone asked when this picture was taken - it says 1947 right in the caption. LOL

Now here's the other interesting thing - I have also found some evidence that points to the fact that this car originally had a 31 Chevy Body on it! That would have been in the late 30's. (He and Wally Parks founded the Roadrunners in 1937). The Roadrunners even reportedly kicked him out of the club for a time for being "Too Unconventional", they didn't like their flat heads getting their asses kicked by the Buick.