I have a friend that acquired a 58 Chevy truck. It has been converted to 5x4/ 3/4 pattern. I suspect the normal method. 64 and down hub and brake drum on the stock spindle. here is the weird part. The passenger side /spindle has this steel bracket and cylinder bolted to the back. And it looks factory. What is it and what does it do. Also remember that I’ve had a dozen or more 55-59 Chevy trucks. 1/2- 3/4 - and 1 ton but I’ve never seen this before.
Google images says that doesn't exist. Cocktail shaker? I'll be interested to hear what the brain trust says.
i recall seeing that on a GMC, that might have had original power steering...but it's been ten years, and my memory ain't so good any more. Is there anything inside the tube?
Thats what I meant by cocktail shaker, 1st gen Camaro convertibles had one in all four corners but not on the wheels.
It's a road shock damper. I believe it came stock on GMC suburbans of that vintage. From the GMC manual: https://chevy.oldcarmanualproject.com/gmc/5559mm/5559mm519.html Edit: I guess if I had read the manual page I posted I would have seen that yes it was standard on GMC Suburbans and an option on pickups.
Cocktail shakers were used on a few gm products back in the 60's ragtops. First one I remember seeing was on a 67'firebird.... ...
Wow. Live and learn. Never seen one in my life. I am interested in the axle assembly for obvious reasons. Thanks Guys.
Super weird, I learned something today. Odd that this truck only has one, the book says they were supposed to be on each wheel. Not sure why someone would convert this truck to 5 lug and remove one of those but leave the other one in place, that's baffling.
Those axles were converted to 5x4.75 drums from 1949-54, not pre 64. When doing this the stock backing plates for the 6 bolt still work, so whatever that is was there prior to the conversion. But since it's sandwiched between the backing plate and spindle it would be easy to remove and clean things up.
Mass damper. Originally used in the 40s and 50s but still used today. https://japan.webike.net/magazine/p...um-tire-grip-with-over-suspension-technology/
Early 2CVs had inertia dampers because conventional dampers would run counter to the suspension interconnection. The other way would have been dampers inside the pots, which would have required making the pots openable for service. The later horizontal telescopics were a bit of a compromise, possibly enabled by going from steel to rubber for the volute springs. I really need to read up, but it seems to me that the limits of inertia damping are that they necessarily involve adding mass overall, and that the additional mass is small in relation to the mass being damped. It did occur to me many years ago that cycle fenders could be carried on damped springs. That would reduce unsprung mass — though at least half the problem with unsprung mass is that it reduces sprung mass, which separate sprung masses would not solve.