Front Parallel leaf susp. Vs. transverse susp.

Quick background... I have a 1943 ford truck cab and front sheet metal that I planned to put on a 48 Merc 3/4 tonne frame.

My vision for the truck is a shop truck/hauler with tall tires (like orig), and some ground clearance to roll on some surfing trail/ country roads from time to time.

The frame is a full roller with it's stock axle and parallel leaf.

Now! I recently I picked up a complete 1940 front end from a sedan...It's all stock and includes a front crossmember... and it has a disc brake conversion.

I'm half thinking about swapping out the parallel leaf setup and adapting the 40 front end with transverse spring. This option would give me more ground clearance up front, and save me the pain of restoring the stock 3/4 tonne suspension.

My question is...is that axle/suspension heavy enough to carry the truck I have envisioned? I don't plan to haul anything crazy...maybe the odd motor...sheets of plywood...**** like that.

Opinions are appreciated

 

Are you planning to change the rear suspension to match? You would pretty much have to.

If you are going to all that work have you considered a newer suspension, or possibly a whole frame?

 

Who says so and why?

 

I did, because he asked.

 

You would only need the m*** of metal in parallels for real trucking, heavy loads.
For something being used basically as a car, the transverse has some advantages:
The stance is wider, with spring running out almost to the wheels, while the parallels have to mount inboard to allow clearance for steering
and transvers has drastically lower unsprung weight, one of the key features Ford chose it for light cars. You have one spring with the heavy part carried on the frame, while parallel carries the heavy part of two springs on the axle.
Driver versus oxcart technology.

 

There is a reason Henry gave the trucks 4 springs.

 

As usual...Bruce is the resounding voice of reason.

Thanks buddy, you've made me comfortable!

-Steve

 

There's no need to change anything in the rear susp at all....except to maybe take a few leafs out to soften up the ride.

The later/heavier truck frames are flat on top...easy to make stuff work...no X member...just straight cross members.

When I adapt that 40 ford front crossmember into my heavy frame, I've got a Hurst front motor mount to go with it
....
boom! got the motor mount situation solved, a better frontend for my purposes, discs and cross steer.

Just have to fab up a trans/wishbone mount and I'm golden.

 

He gave them 4 springs because back then people actually used trucks to haul ridiculous amounts of stuff.

I don't plan on filling a high sided box with 2 tonnes of coal...I'm just going to have a bigger truck and use it to haul some medium stuff that I can't fit in a car....motors, front ends, surf boards, lumber...etc.

 

A pickup based on the truck frame would me much more equivalent in capacity to a modern pickup...actual '40 pickups are much closer to today's compact ones. Unless planning really heavy truck duty, get rid of the parallels...also, another disadvantage of the parallels in the modern world: Nothing except springs control braking torque, not a big issue long ago but likely troublesome with modern discs. Springs would likely have to be stiffer than desirable just for that factor.