Never had a 35-40 ch***is to work with, so these may sound like very basic questions. Plan is to have a rather stock looking '39 Ford full fendered pick up, 289, nine inch, dropped I beam. Think the twin rear springs would be good on the truck. Do most people keep the front crossmember or is there one that drops the spring. Basically asking what works well, best parts suppliers etc. as with all HAMB threads photos are most welcomed. Bob
Working n my 39 right now. Using the TCI kit for the rear. I ut a dro axle in front and pulled 2 leafs. It's low as far as I'm concerned. I'm running an ohv, so I'll be splitting the bones. You'll need to clearance the bones over the steering links, then you won't need those tie rod spacers. Sent from my LGLS992 using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
Forget the cutting up your front crossmember. A dropped axle and reversed eye spring will make it plenty low. If you need it ultra low dearch the spring and cut the bump stops in half.
I like the dual rear spring set up over the buggy spring myself. I take issue with the Kits out there as to how they mount. I like good stance and tire fit in wheel opening. I also understand the aftermarket industery needs to make things home builder friendly. Bolt on is the way they go. After that it's up to you to get it where you like it. Here is a C.E. Kit on a 40 truck with a 28" tall tire. If you look close you can see the mount bracket and bolt head just Below the running board as well as the scrub line. In order to get this stance the owner/builder followed mount instructions. Here's the other side with fender removed and showing rear spring mount per instructions and the necessary 6" lowering block to get the desired tire to fender fit. I take issue with all of this. Very Poor Design!!! 6" Lowering blocks? I don't think so. Mount below scrub line? NO! Now I understand tire to fender fit is personal but can you accept 6" above the tire to the fender opening? I don't think so. This is not the first time I've done this remount of the springs. It requires some cut and weld that the C.E. kit is built to avoid. There is plenty of room to put the upper shackle bushing tube through the frame rail and raise the rear mount 1.5" and not get into the gas tank. I also move the front hanger inside the rails and way up. Just minor fab work to me but end result is well worth it. It also means moving spring pads on the rear Axle housing, again kids play to me. When done this truck will sit right where it is in the Photo above without any lowering block at all as it should. The Wizzard
I used a CE axle, stock spindles, CE arms, F-1 brakes, split '37-'40 bones, special width Posies spring, P&J shock mounts, CE adjustable shocks, CE SBC engine mounts, CE X-member kit, and a CE parallel leaf kit on my '35 coupe. All works together pretty good. Had to fool around with blocks to get the rear centered and low. We put together a '40 Tudor with a different mix of parts. We used a Magnum '37-'40 axle (yes; I know it's cast), stock spindles, CE arms, Speedway F-150 disc brake kit, split '40 bones, regular width Posies spring, CE shocks and mounts, CE SBC engine mounts, CE X-member kit, and a Posies parallel leaf kit. Again; works together pretty good. Had to fool around with the CE arms and the Speedway caliper mounts (we integrated them), and locating the front hangers of the rear leafs to get the rear centered. There are pros and cons to all this stuff; but we really liked the Posies rear kit as it mounted the springs inside the frame and eliminated the need for lowering blocks. It is not strictly a bolt on kit like CE's but the welding is not a big deal. If you want discs; the F-150 brake kit is nice because it does not add anything to width of the car; but you do have to do some light grinding on the caliper for clearance and stock spindles with integral steering arms work best. Couple pictures showing the difference between the CE (painted) and Posies (raw) rear kits, the height and centering you end up with a CE kit, before and after blocks (coupe), and the height of the Posies kit with no blocks (sedan).
That Posi kit is Miles ahead of the C.E. unit. I like the Tire to Fender fit on the Sedan. Is that without any lowering block at all? How tall is that tire? The Wizzard
I have driven my 1939 Ford pickup every day for 17 years. With VW tires on the front you dont need for it to sit any lower. I dont have a dropped axle or reversed eye. Parallel leaf springs for the rear is a very good idea and will give that familiar hotrod bounce as you drive. A small block chevy fits a lot better than a Ford engine and is the traditional hotrod solution for ****py flatheads.
I have built 4 - 1940 Fords and used the Ch***is Engineering components on every one of them,these pieces are well made and take any guess work out of the equation. The last car I built using their parts I had a complete frame up and rolling in one weekend with absolutely no extra hands,their parts are reasonably priced and fit like a top. HRP
My 40 coupe has CE rear springs with no lowering blocks. I would not want it lower. 235/75 rear tires.
No lowering blocks. There are two holes for the front spring bolt, we used the lowest position. Not sure on the tire size, 15" Coker 78 series bias ply; but around 29".
My 39 Ford has Ch***is Eng. parts - Rear leaf springs - no blocks, split wish bones, Vega (stronger Flaming River box) mount, Front reverse eye spring. Car sits per my taste - have driven it 60,000 miles over the last 25 years - I have used C/E parts on other 39/40 Ford projects - good fit and quality.
Gee whiz, I'm considering making mine a spring over, because the kits seem so low! Sent from my LGLS992 using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
Thanks for all the replies, just ordered a Ch***is Engineering catalog from their website, sure was easy, and free. Bob