"Bone Stock" NEW 1932 Ford Wishbones !

These are very good questions Bruce and thank you for asking them.
I too would like that info, perhaps the accident investigators might have some data.
I know that m*** produced forgings are subjected to many tests and finally tested to destruction. Some of the tests are for elongation or stretching, bending, twisting, impact etc. They are also x-rayed and now ultrasound is widely used.
I am amazed that these castings even exist, do you have any regulating authorities that ***ess these parts? Surely this is at least a public safety issue, not to mention the risk to our guys and their cars.
I take your point that many of these cars aren't driven hard or recklessly and for those reasons many builders may be lulled into a false sense of security.
The old forgings weren't really over engineered. Drop Forging is as much of an art as it is a science. Depending on the shape, size and complexity of the part, an appropriate steel is selected. Drop Forgers
have their own specialty steels, these steels differ from common forging steels in they must retain required strength, toughness and hardenabilty levels after they have been overheated and forged.
Also each steel behaves differently when subjected to different tests.
So when you look at a forging and think it looks over engineered remember the steel selected to make that shape may not be the ideal steel to achieve strength et al in other areas, so they make the part as big as they have to to achieve all the design requirements.
After all of the design parameters have been met then a certain percentage of size will be added for an in-built safety factor.
The designers and method engineers are very concious of weight and cost factors, so over engineering is a no no.
Maybe others here can fill in the gaps, tell us what happened, what failed and under what conditions, also what was the outcome.
Thank you one and all.

 

After reading F's and B's posts,
I'm relieved all my stuffs original ford steel!
It gets beat up too!
TP

 

Well, I've seen a few busted cast I beams and one cast end tube axle.

 

Something I just learned from Superdupergurus on Model A Barn...Ford forged pitman arms were tested (100% of production) for proper heat treat with I think Brinnel test (Very ignorant here, may be wrong test). I went and checked a couple of my spares--small polished off area with pin ***** on each. Now that's the way to treat a critical part... Of course, we can be certain that the Chinese are being just as careful as Henry as they cast all those steering arms out of our old melted cars...

 

Ah! So that might explain those mystery 'dimples' I have seen in the steering arms on Ford spindles?

 

Yeah, so just hacksaw those things off and replace them with nice smooth cast stainless and a pair of mystery bolts...old stuff is dangerous.

 

I like the "steer through".

Solves a lot of steering arm problems, and it's neat looking.

Rich

 

Just curious - did they break in normal use, or from a crash ?

 

The cars with the beams hit stationary objects, one of which I actually observed - a water filled plastic construction barrier. The cast end tube was road use, must have been weakening then broke when the car hit a big pothole.

 

FWIW the aircraft industry has many structural parts that it has to plate for various environments (landing gear strut pistons get chromed for example). There are processes of heating the part after plating (usually between 250 and 400 degrees F) for various lengths of time to remove the Hydrogen. There is a time limit between plating and baking (yes before the big interest in techno babble it was actually called baking, sometimes it still is) no point in taking the hydrogen out if it is already cracked.

Bear in mind all this is performed under close scrutiny and is tracked as mentioned earlier. We actually have NOS parts for our aircraft that have the word 'BAKED' stamped on them (ink stamp) along with half a dozen other stamps indicating various inspections and who performed them.

 

I think the best of both worlds would be to use the forged yokes and ball joint from a Model A wishbone and the new tapered tubes. $285 and a couple hours of cutting and welding is a pretty cheap 32 wishbone.

 

Supposedly the Navy developed the whole hydrogen/baking bit... according to the lore, some of the tremendously strong landing gear parts necessary for carrier planes started failing on fairly gentle landings...everything critical was plated to withstand sal****er. Research began...
I had a short conversation, mostly far above my comprehension, with an old physicist in the library...his explanation of the bubbles hitting and disrupting the surface made the embrittlement process sound almost like shot peining done from the wrong side of the skin...
But on castings...violence....bend? ...Break?? Is there any pattern of failure out there involving our common sudden road hazards or not? Most real car parts, certainly early Ford stuff, are almost impossible to break because they will by design bend instead.

 

Thanks. The only busted cast axle I have seen was after it ran into another car and the fenderless front wheel took the main impact.

 

Hi Bruce,
Hydrogen Embrittlement should not be a big problem on Ford forged parts, if, the link you found and referenced to an eariler post of yours is correct.
The composition of the metal in the forged axle shows mid/high manganese levels. (At the risk of sounding like your physicist friend, but not wanting to confuse anybody). 101 in blacksmithing; forgings are designed to be either: Tough, Hard, or Strong, or any and all combinations of the above. When combining these characteristics with dozens of Heat Treatment options you very quickly enter the realm of the spe******t.
The level of Manganese in the axels suggest to me that the Rockwell Scale "C"? of 40-50 could be obtained by cooling the axels in still air after forging. Heat Treatment is not always the answer, so, higher strength steels are used when flexibility is required. Cooling in still air also helps in Normalising the forging. Normalising will often reduce Hydrogen Embrittlement.
Your query on the behaviour of castings subjected to severe impact is relevant to our HAMBERS. Sorry to be boring, but 101 again; steel delivered from the mill has a random or almost non-existant grain structure, even though steel is very strong in it's mill state it's strength can be greatly improved by Forging. Forging aligns the randomly ****tered grains into a cohesive dense structure, this is known as Refining the grain. The granular structure is then aligned into Grain Flow when the steel is forged into shape. Think of the way wood grain flows from the trunk of a tree into the branches, if the grain didn't flow along the main axis the branch structure would be weak. So it is with Forged verses Cast. Cast metal has a grain structure, and the better Foundries take great care with their metals ****ysis and composition just prior to pouring. However the grain can never be refined into grain flow in a casting, thus the casting is weak, particularly when the casting "branches" off or changes direction.
Because castings cannot be refined in terms of Grain Flow they are susceptable to sudden fracture across and along the unaligned granular structure.
A crude way to visualise this is by imagining you are bending a small stick freshly cut from a tree. The stick will bend and twist quite a bit before the fibers break, when the fibers break that is the end, don't pull the stick apart, that is your representative forging. Now construct a sandcastle (you can even use some cement if you want),
when dry hit the sand castle with the stick, even though the stick has failed and is soft where the fibers have broken it can still destroy the sand castle, the sand castle will not bend and twist, it will fracture.
Now heres where the physics get interesting, the forging will absorb severe and sustained impact or force before yeilding to that force.
While this is happening the force is being rapidly disipated throughout the forged part thereby decreasing the energy resulting from the initial force.
A casting will not absorb shock or certain forces (lateral) the casting will break without absorbing much of the initial force. This leaves the energy to transmit to the next part in its path, if the next part is a casting then that part will offer little resistance, then onto the next part. I don't want to seem to melodramatic here but I hope you get the picture.

Lifes too short to drink cheap beer..... and, as far as I know HAMBERS aren't posting from six feet under.

 

Good stuff...my only real source is my 1935 Ford apprentice school metals textbook, and about 75% of that is above my head...
It is clear at least that Ford, as the leading casting and forging company, used few SAE steels for anything, making its own formulas by the dozen for each type of application and applying very sophisticated heat treatments. Ford even made many of its own steels for drills and tools rather than using whatever was the standard of the day...this all would be part of the reason why you can see 50 '32 Fords for every '32 Chevy that survived...

 

Geez Bruce!!! I thought the reason more fords survived was that they were better looking.

 

I have followed this thread with great interest as there is probably no one more opposed to the use of cast iron parts used in front ends than I.

I will qualifie that statement some what. 1.Use of ordinary sand cast parts such as used in a cheap wood stove, 2. cast ductill iron as used in cheap C clamps and Super Bell axles.3. investment cast parts- iron or steel.

The first catagory has absolutely no reason to be used in auto suspension parts. the second category has been used for years makeing drpped axles such as Super Bell with some success. I have personally never seen or heard of a broken Super Bell axle although examples are quoted above. My personal wxperience with ductill cast iron is that it is fairly tough as to breakage but will deform dramatically compared to forces that do not effect forged steel. I keep thinking of driving down the road , hitting a chuck hole and having a ductill iron axle or spindel bend 20 or 30 degrees. While it may not have broken the driver and others are suddenly in dire danger ! I'll go into the #rd catergory below.

In the manufacturs web page he states the parts are invest ment cast. In the case of stainless he quotes the specific alloy but does not in the case of non stainless. If the the non stainless parts are investment cast STEEL then we are into another world altogether. I'm not sure that when Henry was making his beam axles that the tecknology was available to successfully cast steel axles.

Today the ability to cast steel is very common and can be very strong depending in the alloy of steel used.

There are two pioneering companies in Oregon that specialize in investment cast steel parts. one is Esco Steel. They began in making steel parts for the logging industry back in the 30's. Thse parts have to be imensly strong yet relatively small and compact, thus steel. the other company is Precision Cast Parts. They make internal parts for jet engines and landing struts. They parts that both companies make are of such shape that it is impossible to drop forge them.

I intend to contact the owner of the company that is makeing the wishbones and ask him for more clarification on his parts. I'll even ask him to commment here on the HAMB.

Ted

 

Good idea Ted, would you please also ask him to provide the Test Results from the testing Laboratory.
I would really like to see in particular the Charpy Impact Test results,
and the Elongation measurements.
Another thing I'd like to know, would anyone trust a cast steel part that had been bent once, to be straightened and reused?

 

A few years ago at Hershey a guy had a Ford I beam axle on display that was from a factory test. I guess they attached one end to a fixture and started turning the other 20-30 times until it looked like a coil spring, it never broke.

 

I woke up this morning after reading reading most of the posts last night and had the same idea, the 35-48 froged ends could get the spring mounts cut off and used as well.

 

fe26;

I sent Mr. Puhto an email last night asking for details on his parts asking him to describe his parts. I did not get specific as frankly I don't know that much about investment cast parts. I also asked him to elaborate here on the HAMB so we will have to wait to see how he respons, if at all. When and if I hear any tning from him I'll certainly post the results.

Ted H

 

I actually hesitate to post on this thread because there seems to be so many experts and I am just a old Hot Rodder,..... but this wouldn't work, the yoke or "wrist" of a Model A wishbone is built for a wishbone that was mounted lower at the "ball joint end", and there is very little if any caster axis built into them.

The 1932-1934 yoke (same forging) was built for a higher mounting area in the ch***is and the ball joint end, and there was "caster axis" built right into them, However the 1932 wishbones were longer than the Model 40 (1933-1934) with a totally different ball joint end.

From 1935 on the yoke took a larger diameter oval tube, and again a different ball joint end.

And one more thing if you want to see Charpy Impact Test results,
and the Elongation measurements on these, maybe these should be standard tests applied to all after market suspension components.
I wonder how Hairpins would hold up, or clevis ends, heim joints, frame mounts for the wishbone/ hairpin, after all they are expected to do the same job as these wishbones.

 

Or they have been repoping them for so long?

 

Good point about the Model A caster angle, Harms Way, I forgot about that. I guess you could bend the original Ford part since it is a forging...

 

And one more thing if you want to see Charpy Impact Test results,
and the Elongation measurements on these, maybe these should be standard tests applied to all after market suspension components.
I wonder how Hairpins would hold up, or clevis ends, heim joints, frame mounts for the wishbone/ hairpin, after all they are expected to do the same job as these wishbones.[/quote]

Exactly my point. Here in OZ and NZ any mod's to any car must be certified by an engineer, if he asks for do***entation on specific parts it must be provided. If you can't provide it and he insists, the part must be tested by a certified lab. That is my understanding of after market parts.
As for new or production parts, the testing is very rigorous.
As previously noted, perhaps repop parts have been around so long people have forgotten to ask, "what happens to me if this part fails".

Investment casting as far as I know is a process of placing a shell, usually ceramic around a wax positive of the desired part, the shell is heated, the wax melts and is poured out. The metal is then poured in. When cool the shell is broken away and you have your part. Basically it is the same type of casting process as any other, just a different outer mould or shell. The one advantage of Investment casting is the appearance of the casting, almost perfect.
If the caster leaves a fingerprint in the wax positive, that print will show in the casting. So a manufacturer by saying a part is "Investment Cast" should not be implying it is a superior casting in any other way to any other casting, only that it's appearance is better than sand casting.
BTW Die Casting has an even better appearance.
Please don't refer to me as an expert as I posted earlier I'm only someone who makes forgings, I am not a Metalurgist.
You like me are en***led to give your opinion here and not be shy to do so. The reason I am so hot about this is, I am concerned about safety. So please (anyone) feel free to give your opinion.
I don't like the idea of guys spending their hard earned on a possibly inferior part that is potentially unsafe. I also don't like the idea of a guy for all the best intentions making a part without fully knowing what he is doing and why. To my way of thinking it's not good enough to say, so and so has been making these parts using this process for years, therefore it will be alright for me do do the same.
This is how little mistakes can turn into big ones, never ***ume anything when it comes to safety.

As far as I know HAMBERS aren't posting from six feet under.

Now I have to get back to work, otherwise the boss (me) will have something to say!!!

 

I thought the modern investment casting (sometimes called precision) process also vacuum evacuated the mold and filled it under some (I don't know how much) pressure. While not an extrusion by any means, it is supposed to prevent any voids or porosity. No grain structure still, but a casting that shouldn't have voids or porosity would be better IMHO than one that usually does (sand cast, and those usually have inclusions, nothing like an internal stress riser). But maybe I'm wrong, and / or OT here.

 

Hello Team

I think these parts are quite impressive and I intend to purchase the steel units for my current project.

As someone noted in an earlier post. The streets of America are filled with Hot Rods built from repop parts. I can't recall one instance of a catastrophic suspension failure being brought to my attention. Even factoring in the increased HORSEPOWER levels attained during the last 75 years. No less than ONE order of magnitude improvement (10x) in this area alone, not to mention the stresses that modern multi piston disc brakes produce on suspension parts. Oh...and don't forget the improved traction stresses brought about from 75 years of tire development.

As an added point, I am also formally trained as an Engineer and we are debating in a vacuum. We can speculate all day about metallurgical advancements achieved during the past 75 years, heat treatment methodologies and forged versus cast ***emblies. Hell, who would ever have thought we'd be using high performance fractured powdered metal connecting rods? Carbon fiber composite leaf springs? Or composite graphite HEMI blocks?

Fact, we have no real DATA to evaluate. Was this product designed utilizing the latest CAD/CAM tools? Was a Finite Element ****ysis performed during the product design? Was there any independent laboratory testing? Beta testing? Do any ASTM or ASME specifications apply? What was the safety factor (typically 2x or greater) employed? Have these parts been destructively tested?

These are the questions we should be asking. In God we trust. All others bring DATA

PS: I think these new wishbones have arrived at the perfect time. They should do quite well.

Warmest regards,

Mike Gibbons
Sugar Land, Texas
gibbons.mike@comcast.net

 

I sure am glad I got a stock good set cause I would have to get a new loan for them bad boys

Rusty

 

Did anyone ever hear back from the manufacturer?

 

"Was this product designed utilizing the latest CAD/CAM tools? Was a Finite Element ****ysis performed during the product design? Was there any independent laboratory testing? Beta..." Since the parts were designed to pretty much replicate the shape of original Ford forgings and tube, does it matter whether they used CAD/CAM or drew the plans on a napkin? They took the original shape and copied it--which would imply that sections and shapes could not have been adjusted to give additional support to the weaker cast material.
I don't have steel specs for original wishbone forgings, but I've posted a summary of steel alloy and heat treat for the axle...Ford put a LOT into parts that could kill you, including testing of 100% of the most critical ones. This thing replicates only the shape...it is a nice scale model, 100% scale, of a Ford part...not a suspension part for long use.