First Look - New Product - Logic Industries Fabricated Spindles

The market here is more interested in I-beams,
and "period correctness", not aftermarket IFS.

Your market for these spindles is probably more of the street rod crowd;
or the Restomod muscle car guys, looking for serious performance.

 

Ackerman involves more than the steering arms. With those arms, a wide range of Ackerman, or Anti-Ackerman, can be achieved.

If you read Carrol Smith's books, he does a good job of explaining Ackerman.

 

These are front steer IFS spindles, the Ackerman is in the steering links (plural, not just a solid tie rod like a beam axle). You get most of your Ackerman in this kind of system from where you mount your rack or your center link in relation to the outer tie rod mounts.

In a front steer configuration, the farther to the rear you move the rack or center link in relation to the steering arm ends, the more Ackerman you induce.

Touche, sir. But not everyone on this forum is a purist. I see a lot of MII stuff kicking around here and there, and that is my intended market on this forum. Why use a Mustang II front end (which is quite possibly the worst front end geometry ever adopted by the aftermarket), when you can do much better strength and handling wise for nearly the same money?

Exactly.

Sharp feller that Mr. Smith.

 

All that is wonderful, but irrelevant, because as designed, these spindles have a factor of safety of nearly ten (10). If I'd have used higher carbon material, they would have needed a post welding heat treatment, AND they would be no more durable. Having a factor of safety of 25 instead of 10 is not a selling point, it's overkill, and adds cost needlessly.

Is a safety factor of ten enough? It's been nearly thirty years since I did my technical training so I can't remember the desired safety margins in terms of numbers, but I do recall being impressed with the notion that a 'critical part' must not and cannot fail. That is to say it may deform even under the most severe stress, but it must not break. That is why forgings are used.
I was also impressed by the forces involved and applied, to critical parts in the event of a crash. In some cases hundreds of tons of force can be imposed on a *part in a moment in the event of a crash, if that part does not fail then the forces may move onto other parts or areas that have been designed to fail and so mitigate the worst effects of a crash.

I strongly urge you to obtain the relevant spec's for this part and to have your 'as built' part tested to ensure compliance. Please be aware it is not just weight alone you design for, you must also design for severe impact. Your parts may very well p*** the tests and I hope they do, but to my way of thinking a factor of x10 seems a little on the light side. I don't want to be the harbinger of doom here, but as a manufacturer you owe it to your customers, other road users and your own piece of mind to be able to include certification as part of your Quality ***urance system. If you take a customers money you also take responsibility for your part, if you have certification you make yourself a smaller target if something goes wrong.

* I do remember seeing an apprentice training film on ball joints. A camera showed a suspension system in service, as the car turned a corner at various speeds the forces were calculated on the ball joint. I recall (I grant you my memory may be unreliable after all this time) that at tyre squealing speeds the forces were over a thousand tons on the ball. Of course all this film and talks were designed to impress on our young minds the importance of forgings and quality control.

 

Why do my threads always bring out the internet professors?

Look, bottom line, I've done the math and referred to the proper reference material to bound my design. I am a degreed engineer, and this isn't my first rodeo.

I understand that you have a lot of experience with forgings, and thusly a great deal of affection and confidence in them, while you have no experience and thusly a fear of built-up fabrications.

Road going parts experience impact loading under normal operating conditions, and this has been factored into the design from the start.

As for certification, present to me the certifications from Fat Man, Speedway, Cl***ic Industries, Mor Drop, and ten thousand others, and then I'll worry about my parts. You can't, because they don't do this kind of testing either. Hell, I sometimes wonder if Speedway even checks their parts dimensionally, much less metallurgically.

The fact is, there is no certification process for aftermarket (or OEM) suspension components in the US. I could test one to destruction, but all that would do is leave me with a piece of paper and a destroyed spindle. There are no uniform standards, no sanctioned procedures, and no certified testing firms, so the data gleaned from such testing would not be useful for anything but my own edification.

The same effect can be had through Finite Element ****ysis (FEA), but at a fraction of the cost. FEA is quite good at predicting strength and deformation, and when coupled with conservative ***umptions, can yield every bit as good a product as destructive testing.

Honestly, I take umbrage at your not so thinly veiled suggestion that my design is shoddy and weak. Especially given that you have not seen the data in question, and do not possess the expertise to critique it if you did. You say yourself that you have no idea what forces we're talking about, and then go on to declare my FS too low anyway. In the states, we call that talking from one's ***.

Also, think about what you've just said. Every design should be submitted for destructive testing and (phantom) certification. I am specifically targeting one of a kind custom stuff here, so that means every pair sold would actually have to be made twice, one set to destroy and one set to deliver to the customer. That'll be cost effective for sure.

In addition, I strenuously disagree that some parts must never ever break no matter what happens to them. You will not find even a modern car that can be involved in an offset frontal impact and not break a ball joint, spindle upright, or wheel lug. Hell, I've bent OEM spindles on my race cars before just because the track was rough, no contact at all, just bumps and ruts, and I've broken OEM spindles in racing wrecks. Nothing survives every impact.

Eventually, you will find an impact speed that the part will fail at, regardless of what it is made of, or how it is made. To suggest that a spindle must withstand the impact of hitting a tree or another car at highway speeds without rupture at any point is ludicrous. Once the vehicle has sustained an impact of that magnitude, it is a ballistic object, no longer under the control of the driver at all. This is true whether all the wheels are attached or not.

Also, just as an aside, one thousand tons of force (IE 2,000,000 LBS Force) is ridiculously huge for a suspension load. It's even rather huge for a crash impact load. Think about it for a minute. For a 6,000 LB car to generate 2,000,000 LBS of force on anything, it would have to apply an acceleration of 333 G's. That's turning people into soup territory.

No ball joint in the world could withstand such a load. A 1" dia bar of full hard 4140 (hardness of 56 Rc) will withstand a shear force of ~102,200 LBS. I don't know of many (if any) OEM ball joints with a stud as large as 1" in diameter, or made from material that hard or strong, but even at that, the load required to shear it in half is only 5% of the load that you suggest a ball joint must withstand. IE, you're FOS on this one.

You've latched onto this so tightly that I am beginning to suspect that you market a line of forged aftermarket spindles which I might be compe***ion to. . . . . . . . .

Seriously though, enough.

If you don't think they're strong enough, you are free not to buy them, that's your prerogative. However, I would appreciate it if you would stop ****ping up my thread with your ill informed opinions.

 

Great looking part!

 

Thank you!

 

Home made upright made out of sheet metal...

 

Wow, Great thread, beautiful part Ryan, I love to listen to you engineers go at it, obviously I'm not one, but I have to believe you are spot on with your experience and fabrication. Thanks,.... from all us dummies

 

Quote from my thread.
"Why not just use a Ford or Anglia spindle? I have issues with a fabricated spindle and king pin. If it was the proper way to do it, you would see it throughout the race car industry, but I have never seen it done this way in 50 years of playing with drag cars. The only such spindles I've see made this way are on Go Carts!"

That was just one of several I got.

I bet you thought when you sat down and designed these that people would think it was good idea or at least interesting. The design and bracing alone should make anyone curious. Apparently though here if the part doesnt come off a 60 year old engish Ford it is no good. I learned that the hard way.
I personally applaud your design. Very nice work. Thanks for posting it. Be careful though. If you actually make things you will need thick skin here.
Don

 

Holy **** that is gorgeous, who makes that?

 

Excellent work. That looks to be laser cut, yes? Very nice part. What's it go on? How are the ball joints anchored? I don't see any tapers. Can you PM me a link to the thread where you construct them? I'd like to read about the whole process if I could. I like to see how other people go about doing the things I've done.

Thank you sir, though I've been called a dummie more than once in my life as well. Don't ***ume we're all that much smarter than you are. We might have read different books, but I've noticed that hot rodders and racers in general are a pretty sharp bunch, even the ones who say otherwise.

Yeah, I'm getting that feeling. lol

When offering the new and different to folks who are happy with the old and familiar, you are likely to encounter resistance, but sometimes it gets a little ridiculous.

In this instance, it not even something new, spindles have been ***embled like this for decades.

At any rate, thanks for the kind words. Maybe PM me a link to your thread? I'm always looking to read about similar design work done by others. It's a good way to make sure I'm not out in left field.

 

CoolHand, calm down. I am talking to you about your product, I am not accusing you of anything untoward. I am aware of how 'precious' one can get when one has invested heavily in time, energy and money to develop a product.

There is a hysterical and shrill tone to your last reply, try to avoid this. Some of your observations are relevant and informative and I stand corrected.

I am not nay-saying your product, however in raising my opinions and putting my case and concerns I seek a well reasoned and well put explanation, comment or re****al in reply.

Your comments on destructive testing for example are glib. As a proffesional engineer you would know that only one piece needs to be tested, after that you can produce unlimited quan***ies. I am surprised at your claim that no certification procedures exist in the USA even for OEM equipment, or indeed that no certified testing facilities exist to test such parts.

I mentioned critical parts should be designed for severe impact, yet in reply you advance the scenario for a catastrophic collision. Your response is shrill and unworthy of a proffessional talking to a tradesman. I did qualify my statement on applied forces by stating these were from my memory of events in technical school back in the late sixties/early seventies. To hold me so ridgidly to that and then to expand your re****al to include the personal is to take the path of least resistance or, the cheap shot.

Remember my first post to you was in query of your claim that your part was superior to a forging or a casting in steel. Did I say your claim was ****alogical? Did I claim you were talking out of your ****? No. I am for a well reasoned debate and well put argument. Yes you possess advanced knowledge that I and many others here don't, but to advance your positon or argument, (and in doing so inform others), there is no need for hysterics, drama or table t*******, let alone insults and denigration. Why get yourself so worked up and red-in-the-face over something so common as a fabricated part. Or your partly fabricated response?

One thing we do agree on, enough is enough.

 

Damm! nice work!

 

Had to get in the last word though, right? lol

I love the internet.

BTW, you need to tweak your tone detector. That wasn't shrill, that was irritation fueled insomnia. Very different. I don't really do shrill, but I'm thinking that if I did, there'd be more capital letters and exclamation points involved.

Maybe visual aids too. . . . . .

 

"Umbrage"? I never thought I'd see that word on the H.A.M.B. You guys rock!

 

Umbrage - isn't that a region in Italy? I saw it in a travelogue once...

 

What can I say?

I've got me one of them "Word-O-The-Day" calendars.

 

The concept of a fabricated, hollow, spindle is nothing new.
Howe, Senneker, Dillon, etc have been making fabricated
spindles for oval track cars for at least 25 years.
They live in a VERY harsh environment.

And fabricated spindles have been used on Formula Cars for at least 45 years.
Probably more. I've seen them on a Honda F1 car from the 60's.

The advantage is you can put the metal where it will do the most good.
For a given strength, you can have a lighter part.
Labor costs are higher than a forging or casting, but the tooling costs are minimal.

If Coolhand says he has calculated the safety factor at almost 10:1,
I think he knows what he is doing.

 

Hi, Coolhand, nice work on the spindles but why cant you adapt one of the stock car IFS spindles to your application, seems like it would be a lot cheaper and less time consuming, the wide five hubs all take a similar snout. Since its an autocross car and you didnt indicate control arm length, if you have a lot of roll during cornering, whats the the amount of camber gain with that inclination angle. Any way nice job but you need to make friends with they guy with the lazer cutter, thats a nice light weight hub. Nothing like access to expensive machines for toys.

 

I looked for months trying to find a ready built spindle that would do what I wanted, but it was for naught.

The biggest problem is that 99% of LMS and Modified W5 spindles are not symmetrical from side to side, which is fine if you only turn left, but kinda ****s on the street.

In fact, I have a set of Lefthander spindles on the shelf here that I bought with the intention of using on this project, but the LH spindle would have had to have been cut apart and reworked to match the RH one, so I determined that it would be less trouble to start over.

Plus this is a way to extend my product line in a useful direction, and show off my shop's capabilities (as well as my own ). You know how it is, sometimes you build rather than buy, simply to prove to prospective customers that you CAN build it, even if you don't end up doing it that way very often.

Coleman used to make a steel bolt-together spindle, but they don't seem to anymore. They still make an aluminum version, but it is high dollar (like over $600 a piece). The steel versions were pretty pricey too, though not as bad as the alum version.

Even counting the protracted labor involved with this prototype set, it's cheaper to build them from scratch than to either buy and modify the asymmetrical ones, or buy the bolt-together ones outright.

Now, as for camber gain curves and the like, I'm not letting that one out of the bag right now. Obviously, the whole system is made to work together to arrive at a tire that is vertical at full load and body roll. I will say that the kingpin angle is 10% on my spindles, which is the same as the Lefthanders I was going to use.

BTW, I don't need to schmooze the guy with the laser machine, 'cause I've got a CNC plasma machine of my very own.

It isn't exactly the same as far as cut quality and accuracy goes, but it is certainly precise enough for fabricating parts to make up a welded ***embly.

I also don't care much for the two point contact on the ball joint studs in that laser cut ***embly. The laser and forming/bending work is spectacular, don't get me wrong, I just wouldn't have done it that way myself.

I'm not going to say it's weak, or even wrong, 'cause I have no idea how or what it's used for or the loads it will see. It is purely a difference of design opinion thing.

 

Just think, though. If we made entire cars like this, we'd never have to take them to the shop for crash repairs. And we could make airplanes out of them... we'd never have to see another NTSB crash investigation again. The airline would just sent a truck out to refuel the "crashed" plane so it could take off again!

 

Nice job! How long did it take to actually build them?

 

Thank you.

I have been working on them on and off for a couple of weeks, maybe two or three hours at a time every day or two.

All told, I have about twenty four hours in them total, so they could be built in three solid days pretty easily if I had to.

It took two or more weeks this first time because every burst of productive work was preceded by an hour or more of studying the the CAD plan and going "Hmmmmm. . . . . ." to make sure I wasn't screwing something up.

I hate making s**** more than almost anything else, so I am somewhat cautious when prototyping, especially when I've got a lot of machine work tied up in the cons***uent parts.

Like I said above, it would have been easier to just find something out of a catalog I could have lived with, but that's just not my style.

Besides, what have I got all this cool machinery for, if I'm gonna buy all that stuff out of a catalog, right?

 

Yeah, it would be just like vintage Indy roadsters where they'd hit the wall and kill the driver, then have the tires changed, and the ****pit squeegeed out, and sent back out to practice again with a new pilot.

Thanks for seeing the humor in such an idea though, it never ceases to amaze me how some people suggest that suspension and ch***is parts need to be built to survive wreck type impacts without being destroyed, as though you still need to be able to steer a car after it's undergone a frontal impact severe enough to overload the suspension parts.

Once you make that first impact, you and your auto are a singular ballistic object at the mercy of physics alone. Best to hold on and hope for the best at that point.

Glad to see you got your water pump troubles sorted out. I have found myself locked in just such a death grapple with an inanimate object on more than one occasion, so I certainly sympathize.

 

What's the SAI on those?

Doesn't the welding warp it quite a bit?

 

Gotta help me out here, SAI? One man's acronym is another man's random jumble of letters.

The welding is done in sequence such that each induced shrink is pulled back flat my the next subsequent weld.

They ended up quite flat and square. You have to take the shrink and pull that each weld is going to cause into account and plan your welding order accordingly.

 

just for fun, i have used spindes like this on my race cars for years from manufacturers mentioned and have beat the **** out of them and crashed them and they survive alot of ****, i`m definitely not an engineer, but an end user and trusted my **** to manufacturers who told me less than this fellow has and have come to the conclusion he knows his ****.........yes, these things will break and bend under the right cir***stances, but anything will especially normal car spindles, the steering arms on most are very weak and will bend at the slightest bump, these will take alot more than stockers in that respect.....and if the steering arm bends, you are still moving for a while so crashing is gonna happen, you break a ball joint, you don`t go far........i say nice work, and just because you never seen it before doesn`t make it alien....these have been around quite a while.....

 

Thank you, sir.

 

I made some fabricated spindles in the late 80s,
would have been nice to have plasma and CNC then.