My new weird front axle with artillery wheels

Check out this '34 or '35 Hudson "axle flex" front axle with cable operated mechanical brakes and artillery wheels I just bought. Has 16 inch wheels but only 4 bolt hubs. Leaf springs are pretty flat with very little arch and came that way from the factory for a "better ride." Measure 50 inches from inner hub to inner hub. Not sure what to do with it but I thought it was cool and different.

 

Wow, that's neat. A very early IFS. It looks like since the leaf is so close to the pivot point that it would be twisted when you hit a bump. Seems like a coil spring would have been a better choice in the design. What year you think its from? Mid 30's I suppose?

Parallel springs aren't usually as asthetically pleasing on the front end, but that could be pretty cool to show off.

 

That thing confuses me. It looks like each side is pivoting off two points, the ends of both center bars? Doesn't make sense, it would mean one side would affect the travel and geometry of the other?

Edit: bear with me, I'm really hung over today. Ouch.

 

Kind of an IFS, since any "up" movement at one end of the axle (in relation to the spring perch on that side of the axle) will have an equal amount of "down" movement at the other due to the parallel links in the center of the axle. I can only see this working well if the springs have an extreme resistance to twisting. Any twist in the spring on one side will translate to an equal twist on the other, and a resulting opposite motion of that end of the axle.

This setup in another form was used on old John Deere tractors with narrow front wheels. It was called "Rol-O-Matic", the two front spindles were geared together so that when one went up, the other went down an equal amount. Made the tractor ride a little smoother on rough ground......

Edit: 8flat, we replied at the same time, thinking the same thing.

 

thats gotta be one of the coolest lookin front end setups i seen in a while. very cool

 

Well, it will keep the tires square to the ground going up and down, but the positive camber roll in a hard corner is going to ****.

 

I wonder if this was Hudson's response to Chevy's "Knee-Action" setup?

 

i am buildind a 32 hudson. that thing is cool.

 

Man that's cool, I'd soooooo use this on a hot rod.

 

Thanks guys. I've sure never seen anything like it and had to read up on it. I was able to read the words "Hudson Axleflex" embossed on it along with alot of numbers. I don't have any plans for it, maybe use it for trading stock someday.

 

Sorry Guys ... I can't see where there would be any down pressure exerted on the opposite end of the axle when upward pressure is applied to one side. The two pivoting tie beams in the middle should act like tie rods only allowing for an early type of independant suspension. Each leaf spring is allowed to work for its side only. (just the way I see it) That axle should flop all over now that the springs are free.

 

G'day all,
That front axle set up is off a 34 Hudson Terraplane, I have one, I reckon it was set up to 'flex', it doesn't work as independant suspension, it can't, the leaf spring would have to twist. btw mine has cable operated brakes.
Chevy....

 

Draw a parallelogram, and imagine that all four corners are connected with flexible joints. Now tilt one of the vertical sides of the parallelogram, and the other side will move with it, the same direction and amount. Apply this new knowledge to the Hudson axle..........

 

Studebaker had an early funky IFS too, called it Planar Suspension, a cross leaf spring was used as the lower suspension arms.

 

Much like late corvette rear suspension.PF,That axel would be nice on some oddrod,er hotrod.

 

Thats funny. I know where there is a trailer with 4 lug wheels just like that. Now I know what they came from. lol

Tuesday the neighbor dropped off two artillery wheels, ford pattern. They were just sitting next to the house. I got a great neighbor. He said they came off a trailer he got.

 

http://images.google.com/imgres?img...aker&um=1&hl=en&rlz=1T4GGLR_enUS243US244&sa=N

http://www.nautiloid.net/51willys/planar.html

 

How long did hudson use this front suspension? Was it only used on the terraplanes?

Very cool pics and info!!

 

Ran across this old thread regarding Hudson Axle-Flex and for the researchers, feel compelled to add something.

I have a '34 Terraplane convert with this no-cost option and have owned another in the distant past. No, this was not a response to GM knee action. This was early independent experimenting on each companies' part to come up with better front suspension to carry the rigors of the 1930s roads. Hudson and Terrplane cars offered Axle-Flex at no extra cost in both the '34 and '35 model years. A significant percentage of those cars received the option. Even the heavier 8 cylinder Hudson cars had the 4-bolt wheels in these two years with an extra cost 5-bolt brake drum and wheel ***embly offered for Hudsons sourced from Kelsey-Hayes (very rare).

The real question is how well does it work on the car. VERY well. So long as the pivot point bearings are kept greased and the telescopic shocks (first in the industry at H+T in '34) were functioning, this is a great system far superior to knee action over at GM.

The factory diagram of the movement is attached as well as photos under my car.

Terraplanes were "race proven" cars holding SEVENTY TWO national AAA records including being the winner of EVERY hillclimb event in the US during 1933.

 

Cool,,,seeing it "at work" makes perfect sense,,,,,,

 

This is an interesting approach to what they thought the problems were in the '30s. They cared about minimizing track-width change, shimmy (big bugaboo with solid axles), and keeping the wheels straight up and down. I have to think it'd tuck under like a swing-axle, or at least try to, with anything resembling a modern sticky tire.

It's one of those evolutionary missing-links like the Ford Twin-I-Beam, no one would do it that way now but it did what they were trying to do at the time.

 

That is a wicked cool axle. I'd rock it on a fenderless rod.

 

Very interesting indeed; and it wants some thorough geometric ****ysis. I agree that the question is what it would do under significant lateral force.

I'm partial to a critical understanding of automotive history that considers non-technological agendas behind a lot of technological choices. Many of the wide variety of possible engineering approaches were abandoned for reasons other than performance, contrary to the prevailing view. Studying these sorts of designs can be very informative in that regard.

 

Also just found this factory 1935 Hudson illustration (the above illus. shows a '34 Terraplane) which is somewhat more detailed - perhaps too much so - but worth sharing. The system was identical for all '34 and '35 Hud and Terra.

 

Looks pretty cool.

Amateur ****ysis follows:
It does seem like, even though it was designed to minimize camber changes in the wheel hitting the bump, it would still tend to change the camber of the opposite wheel. The wheel moving upward has a lot of leverage against the spring and hinge points, and would tend to twist the spring and push in on the upper link. Maybe not a problem for straight-ahead driving, but it could have some bad effects in hard cornering. But that's just what it looks like to me.

It was probably better than other competing systems, but I think modern systems are probably better in the end.

 

With one tie rod, does it bump steer?
I cant tell if the width changes as it goes through it's motion or not.

 

Imagine that reverse Elliot design on the front of an open wheeled 'Big Car' (Sprint car, Indy Rdstr)

I have built hot rods around the front axle...when it was interesting enough.
Have a '24 Dodge Bros axle w/ Rev. Elliot spindles. If I stay this young, I may do a 'tribute' to the old Kant Score Pistons racer...

 

The move to independent front suspension was driven by the need to decrease front spring rates to improve the ride. A beam axle requires stiff springs to control shimmy and brake reaction. This in turn requires stiff rear springs to control pitch. On pre-IFS cars, the ride was typically better in the front seat.

 

If the front wheels leaned in the same direction, it would be like two motorcycles running parallel. Perhaps motorcycle tires would be in order? LOL

 

For those who like complaining, this is a 2008 thread.