History Proper Front Suspension for a Traditional Rod ?

Would a basic sprintcar straight axle , torsion/shock front set up be good in a roadster or other early project do you think ? They seem to handle and do everything alse good turning into a corner at 100 mph plus. Good near new used setups are available for next to nothing everywhere and top quality
.

 

No idea where it is now, but I know how to get hold of Chris who owned it for a while. You can contact him through his web site... http://www.jetdragster.co.nz/

Did your Dad build it?

 

This has chrome springs.....traditional??
Added one more air bags too.

 

Firstly it doesn't matter if it is a straight axle or a drop tube as long as it has mechanical integrity.
The front "wheel" geometry is the most important .
The same with torsions, a spring is a spring . You can use levers and bellcranks etc but all the car really cares about is the wheel rate [stiffness]

Now back to the sprint car

They rely heavily on rear weight bias and tyre stagger to turn left. [4 wheel steer ]
A sprint car also has a lot of LH weight bias when static, when the car turns left the dynamic weight transfer [lateral acceleration] is set up to ideally plant 50/50 on the rear tyres.
That way the rear tyre stagger helps it turn.

Most sprint cars will understeer if you chicken out at corner entry [you need to give it some jandal]

 

Innovative, for the genre.

 

Innovation from one end of the car to the other...

 

Unless you are restoring that car or building an accurate clone, I don't see the point.
Apart from its looks, early IFS were not that great geometry wise.

Seems to me you can build a superior setup to that , based on a I beam.

And if I'd have my heart set on some sort of a IFS in a trad car, I'd base it on a trailing link ( used a lot in racecars in the '30s on cars like ERA type D, and the Auto Unions), or I'd use a long swingaxle ( like the Lotus 11 and various English Specials )
Another advantage of the swingaxle is that you can make it look more like a I beam.

 

Traditional.

 

Spoke to him today and he said he can remember helping to build it and thinks he ended up buying it half way through the build and finishing it.
He is going to work out how to master his internet device and try joining the H.A.M.B and do some replies of knowledge.. Lol.

 

bad ass

 

The AlaKart...Interesting front end...if I remember, he kept Ford leafs in there, stripped down to probably just the main leaf. This way control of suspension movement was essentially normal Ford, but load was carried by the combined coil springs and overload air bags within!

 

Like Kerrynzl said the sprint cars use tyre stagger to turn the car. You can change the offset on the rears to loosen or tighten the car up. Also the front axles have split caster built into them. Also everything revolves around the right front wheel. Just changing the offset on the right front everything. Most of the right fronts you can put on backwards to change it. It has all to do with the laws of physics. They run a right front brake, and a large one on the left side of quick change, also run a smaller one on the left rear wheel to help setup in the corners. Also the Jacobs ladder is hooked up on the right rear for dirt and left rear for pavement. Most front axles run only 3 radius arms. I know I probably confused the shit out of you. But it's all physics it all revolves around the center of the right front wheel. Frank

 

When reading an interview with Blacky Giejian (I am absolutely sure I spelled his name wrong for which I am ashamed ) he mentioned this truck and the whole deal as it went down with Barris. I guess the truck actually belonged to his friend and he was there through the entire project from napkin to show. Anyway he said that barris chose to use could springs just so that he could use bags, although it was never mentioned why. Now of note it actually uses bags and I doubt that it has anything to do with laying frame and it is evident that is does not run on board compressors.

I am presently designing my rear suspension along the same lines. I am not sure that Barris used them for the same reason that I am, I have coils that are purposely a little light for my application and I am using bags so that I can have adjustable spring rate. It gives me an option on preload at the strip once a year.

While I have not read anywhere what Barris used for bags I would guess that he used air lift bags as that was the industry standard for the era. that is what I plan for my build not because Barris probably used them, but because they have been around a long time and are proven to work.

I digress, my point is that you cannot compare this old custom to modern bagged rides it is not where close to what the bag it and drag it crowd do.

 

I believe I read somewhere that they are assist bags...can't remember the preferred brand back in '58, maybe air lift or air ride, meant mostly for saggy station wagons but plenty for a 2,000 pound A. Their decals came with almost all AMT hot rod kits back then!
Stock type drag racers used them to preload rear for tire spin control...I think the company also provided light coils to contain them for use on the many brands that used wagon springs rather than coils back then.

 

I agree mr. porknbeaner it's just a snapshot in time when builders were thinking out side the box, before traditionalism was in vouge. Could this be accepted here today? I guess with that level of quality. Would hate to pay the chrome bill. Just to be clear I was not comparing to modern bag and drag cars. The build is innovative and timeless.

 

Don't make me bust out the pictures of double-convoluted air bags, retrofit to cars, in the mid 1930's.

 

Actually Bekins Van Lines trucks used them too only bigger.

More written for the mindless morons who want to justify their builds instead of just building and letting the chips fall where they may.

Here is an interesting tid bit, when coils were used on a rod in the '60s the most common coils used were 'vair. They used the fronts in the back and the backs in the front. I know of no value to the thread but interesting to know, don't ya think?

Did you mean setups like these?






Sorry I just could not resist.

On a side note and just to make sure that everyone knows that I have been known to wander off toward the darkness on occasion, I have wanted to build a roadster with an F-1 type of suspension for a long time. It wouldn't fly as even remotely traditional and I have no idea why I want to do it but I still do.

 

In no way am I trying to stir emotions or sway opinion. This is just a definition which aids in understanding the essence of the thread. This is of course keeping in mind 1965 as a guideline of compliance and the inspired to be that or before...

tra·di·tion·al
trəˈdiSH(ə)n(ə)l/
adjective

1. existing in or as part of a tradition; long-established.
   "the traditional festivities of the church year"
   synonyms: long-established, customary, time-honored, established, classic,accustomed, standard, regular, normal,conventional, usual, orthodox, habitual,set, fixed, routine, ritual;More
   
   • produced, done, or used in accordance with tradition.
     "a traditional fish soup"
   • habitually done, used, or found.
     "the traditional drinks in the clubhouse"

 

It may not be your intention, but posting the definition will only open the great divide. The hard heads will ignore or twist it around. I just really can't see how a few "flashes of genius" 50 years ago can be called "traditional". And the topic only comes up, when someone's trying to validate the bullshit build they're doing in 2016. I had a slug post damn near the same pic, on another forum, to back up his point that a Mustang II suspension would be cool on a freakin' T Bucket! Just build your damn car and live with it. Don't piss on everyone's back and tell 'em it's raining.

 

You shoulda told me. I had an F-1 that I stole the brakes and steering from, and we junked most of the rest of the chassis. You could have had it for free.

 

Uh I meant formula 1 LOL

 

This is where the problems comes in... You're applying a much narrower dictionary definition than what is given in the site guidelines...
'The Traditional Hot Rod forum is reserved for threads and posts pertaining to period correct hot rods only.' (bold added)
There's your definition, not the dictionary version. And it's the correct one, as using the dictionary version requires that you make all sorts of exceptions to cover the 'habitually done, used, or found' part of it. How many sets of Ardun heads or Kinmont brakes were there? Less than 300 each by most counts, that hardly makes them 'habitually used'. Or the dozens of cars that were built over the years that went on to become iconic for one reason or another but weren't common or 'habitually done'. The dictionary version also allows opinion to creep in, ignoring the facts...

So if you use 'period correct', all of these problems disappear. If it was built in the period or built with period parts, it's 'traditional', end of story. This neatly covers all your 'exceptions' and eliminates opinion. Now, it does 'let in' all the oddball stuff that occurred, but that's a part of the history. To some extent, that's why current 'trad builds' (as defined by the 'dictionary traditionalists') can seem boring; a lot of the 'flavor' of the original age has been lost.

 

I read through this whole thread and kept thinking back to an old article I had seen in a 1961 Hot Rod magazine. Nice lookin Caddy powered 32 with a 40 Chevy front suspension under it. Fortunately he left it full fendered so it's not drawing your eye to the suspension. The fact that the article stuck in my mind really proves this was an uncommon setup. Had it been a straight axle I might not have even remembered it. It may have been done more than we realize, but you really have to search hard in the old mags to find something similar. With that being said I would tip my hat to this guy for doing it like he wanted but I wouldn't call it traditional.

 

That Chevy suspension was tempting to many who saw it dropped out of the Chevy frame.
It was a whole unit, continuing production into the early Corvettes.
(there was a certain number of 'rodders' that seized upon most items 'exclusively Corvette', as I recall) And the 'near bolt-in' fit?
So, I'm surprised that more of those whole rolling units weren't simply dropped upon with 'A', '32, and Model 40 frames.

 

Its funny I was reading his definition and it occurred to me that the same definition almost word for word can be and is applied to religion. Which kind of takes us full circle, "Spreading the gospel of traditional hot rods and customs to hoodlums world wide."

 

"...old article I had seen in a 1961 Hot Rod..." Note also the U-joints in the steering (rare until the streetrod epoch, in the days of tradition steering shafts were solid from box to wheel, as God and Henry intended) and the swing pedals...these last became common VERY quickly after the '52 Fords came out, with people even buying the parts new before they became junkyard findable, but now no one seems to choose them for "traditional" cars.
Don't tell that thing has an electric fan...

 

Yeah, but given religious history, it's not exactly a 'happy' comparison.... LOL

 

One of you is correct about Traditional ?

 

Maybe it didn't catch on because it looked like ass.

 

Not on this one Mr Fever.