I have been trying to get my 34 frame together and I have run into a slight problem. As you can see by the pictures the 36 rear trailing arms are very close to the round tubing of the x member. I have not set the motor and transmission ( flathead and t-5) in the frame yet. My question is, Is it typical to have to shorten these using this motor and trans combo with an open drive? Is shortening them gonna cause any suspension binding in the future? I was just thinking of making a mount somewhere near the rear of the x member. For reference I was going to use hiem ends when I shorten these not the original ends due to hear say of failure issues. Am I going in the right direction? How would some of the hamb genius' do it?
It looks to me that if you mount them on the back of the crossmember they will miss the x member. Shorten the tubes and weld new bungs in them for the heim joints. Or you could grind out the welds and reuse the ones you have. It shouldn't be a problem. Good luck.
This is a Joke right? You do all that custom work of boxing the rails hand building a round tube X member and flatening the rear spring cross member and just now don't know what to do. You got to be kidding us. This part, quote "Is it typical to have to shorten these using this motor and trans combo with an open drive?" really gets me. What's typical here? The Wizzard
Sounds like a legit question...no joke! I think we have all built many things and had a moment where we went ,Oh ****!. What about welding them together and mounting them with one single Heim joint? I think Ch***is Engineering or someone made such a kit, you could look at that and perhaps fab it yourself....shouldn't be a big issue.
I'd think long and hard about that solution... Remember, those arms are the ONLY thing keeping the axle under the car. It better be a BIG heim joint. Yes, I know that's how Henry did it in the first place...with 40hp and 4" wide tires...
I guess you might be right. Looking at the first photo on the Left and seeing the tubes and how they are installed. I think I'd fix that first, then the trailing arm clearance would not be the issue. It's been quite a while for me so I guess I just forgot what an O **** was like. I must just be lucky. The Wizzard
I'd cut and modify the offending round tubes of x-member to get the necessary clearance. How were/are you planning to attach the bones to the cross-tube? Whatever you plan, make sure the bones can freely articulate to avoid binding/eventual failure. Can of worms has now been opened!
Another important issue is the need for a torque arm from the banjo forward to one of the Ford arms. The original design utilized the torque tube to stabilize the rear axle, once the torque tube is eliminated you lose that strength. Check with Ch***is Eng and other web sites for info. Without a torque arm you'll turn the Ford parts into pretzels. Also Hot Rod Works supplies a kit.
on the topic of using one hemi joint strong enough to handle the horse power if you were to tie the two rods together, there is a thread on here about using a ball and socket from a front crossmember. but the yoke on that set up would make the rods even wider than what you have now. like voodo & el Scotto said I would just rework the crossmember first.
Yes, I'd cut the bones back a bit, then pull them inwards a tick, and weld on a 32/34, or even a Model A front wishbone yoke, then add a short cross member for the ball socket mounting point.
Let me elaborate. First of all I bought this frame because it was cheaper and alot easier than ordering all the parts to do it or modifying an original. I can fabricate for your info. I asked these questions because it is my first hot rod. Is it not better to ask questions now before a mistake is made and a do over is needed. There's alot of knowledge on here and I dont know everything about these old cars and parts. I may ask a stupid question but theres always someone willing to help.
This is also one of the questions that I had on my mind. Thanks for the info, I will be checking into these.
My idea on attaching the tubes to the cross-tube were high quality 11/16 hiems and a very strong bracket as used on the modern race suspensions of today. Of course I would make sure they could move freely with no binding or potential failure. I will be setting the motor and trans in to be sure of the location of the bones.
dirt slinger; Nowhere in the first post is anything mentioned about just buying the ch***is as is. It's clear it's fresh fab work. It seemed natural to me to "***ume" you had just done this work yourself especialy since the lower center cross tube is not welded yet but fit. So if you read my second post you'll notice my advise is about the same as the others, and that was to try to help ya with the least amount of re-do. Sorry if I yanked your shorts a bit but try reading it from the flip side and you may have also had the same first thought I did. So there is that "***ume" thing again. Good luck on your build. The Wizzard
http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=511327&page=5 Check out post 91. I used a uniball. Should work like the bell end of a torque tube and let everything move without binding. So far it does. Its not finished and needs a torque rod but you'll get the idea.
when looking at your photos first thought I had was to alter the crossmember, because that us the problem. After reading the thread I see I would be infinity +1 to think this. Before I cut anything, be it the bones or the crossmember I would mock up the rest if it. As in torque ARM, removable trans crossmember, just to make sure the modification settled all issues without creating others. That crossmember is not designed to be used with bones or p&j style ladder bars. You are finding this out. You could reinvent the wheel and keep chasing issues or you could fix the crossmember. Better yet, remove it entirely and get one more suitable for the rest if your traditional stuff, flattie, banjo, bones, spring behind rear. That's a lot if cool stuff, the frame crossmember doesn't go with it, or work with it. It's only 4 pipe welds, could be out of there in 30 mins flat
I still flatly reject this theory (sorry Fogger,.. no offense intended),... In January I posted a thread challenging this theory and with 134 responses and 11,220 + views it was never proven. Please post detailed pictures of "Failed, 35-36 rear Wishbones" No back to your problem,... I agree with BEAU when he said "You need to make the mount below the output shaft U-joint." or just a little short of that if the projection of the rear wishbone would intersect in this location ( if longer). I agree with modifying the lower tubes...... But remember,... you don't want to finalize the wishbone mount location until you have a loaded suspension so you can set your pinion angle (With a open drive shaft),... you only have one shot to get this right,.... A number of things come into play,... Loaded suspension, rake, tire size and angle of the output shaft from the trans. Mount your engine so its level for & aft as well as side to side at the carburetor flange.
You didnt yank my shorts and I do understand you reading from the flip side. Definitely any criticism and ideas are greatly appreciated whether positive or negative. I say no harm no foul. Just not sure about some things, so many ideas.
In reference to HarmsWay. When I first saw this post it appeared that the bars were the later '37 type. You are absolutely correct that the '35/'36 bars are thicker walled and thus much stronger. My reference was based on installing '37s on my own car where I used a torque arm. I read your posts and enjoyed the entertainment. Especially SamIyam's video illustration.
Again... You are going to have to have your engine/trans mounted before you can even think about the rear end (coming from somebody who has never done this, but has done a TON of research). I'm using the 35/36 arms on my modified and I need to shorten them A LOT when I get to that point. The way I understand it is in this order- 1. front suspension/frame mods 2. engine and trans 3. rear suspension/frame mods to make #1 and #2 work 4. the rest. I have to imagine that you output is going to be quite a ways behind the location the arms come together Refer to this tech- http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=677460&fb_source=message
I do agree with the mocking upi of motor and trans, mounting thebones below output shaft. I would make sure to final weld it in last. The reason Im trying to investigate at this stage is exactly what you said, "I only have one shot to get it right".
In a couple days I will have the motor and trans mounted and try to have it on the ground with proper rake, etc. Thanks guys for all the help and guidance. I will be back with more pics and questions. The solution may be simple or it may be a total rework. And just so everyone knows, let the comments and ideas keep coming and I do respect everyone and their opinions.
The 36 radius rod tubing will work if you don't get carried away with more than 200 hp and big gummy tires. More than that and you need to fabricate some "A" style radius rods out of preferably 4130 tubing. YOU DO NOT NEED A TORQUE ARM ADDITIONALLY. The pivot point of the wishbone needs to be exactly under the U-joint cross and up as close to it as possible. Heim ends do not last too long on the street even with the seals on both sides. Here is a couple pics that have been posted on here before..This setup has been working for 35 years on 3 different cars. These are of the front wishbone but the rear is exactly the same except double tube with cross braces. The end is a tie rod end from a Kenworth truck.. This setup is plenty strong. I have a 450 hp SBC in this car right now.
The Jalopy Journal
