Okay, maybe this is a dumb question, but bear with me. I'm new at all this. The chassis I'm looking at using for an upcoming project has a solid front axle mounted on top of parallel leaf springs. I'd like to lower it, front and rear. Now off the top of my head, it seems like that could be accomplished by using lowering blocks on the front, the same as you'd use on a rear axle. Of course the rear axle has no steering components to worry about either. So that makes me question whether this idea would work like I think it would. Any thoughts?
'73 Postal Jeep On the spring de-arching... I keep hearing about that, but can't quite wrap my head around it. If you flatten out the spring, doesn't that make it longer (from mounting point to mounting point)?
Illegal here in California if I remember correctly. Might check if its legal first before spending any money.-Weeks
Theoretically it will work, but you have to look at how close it will put the axle to the frame, look at steering arms for interference...etc Not sure about the legal issue. Better to get a dropped axle, I would think
I can't imagine anybody makes one for it. Though I suppose I could take some measurements and look for something that's similar to try and make it work.
'73 Postal Jeep OK. I'm trying here. Since I opened your post. Why? The answer to your subject question is "NO".
Why? Because I have it available, and it's a solid, short-wheelbase frame that is easy to get parts for (because it's basically a cj without a transfer case), that shouldn't look too hideous under a fenderless ride, and has a running engine, trans and Dana posi rear-end already in place. Edit: It's also left-hand steering already, as it was a dispatch type not used for rural mail delivery. And did I mention I already have it? So it's free? It's not like it's going to be a '73 postal Jeep when I'm done with it. And if the answer to using lowering blocks on the front is, "No," that's fine. But it'd be nice to know why that is (other than it being illegal in California). Is it a safety issue? Or just uncool?
Whatever you do, you will most likely have to notch the frame. Those axles are pretty close to the frame.
Idk just something I remember hearing years ago about the side to side flex/movement in the front end axle within the lowered car community. We have alot of lowered vehicles out here and I have never seen a front end with lowering blocks. Dropped axle, lowered spindles, lowering springs, airbags, but never lowering blocks, remember the lowriders out here have always kinda set the precedent for lowered vehicles so most laws came into effect here first.-Weeks
Yeah. I can't find anything online about it either. So it's likely there aren't a lot of folks wanting to do it. I'll probably rethink the idea, but I just like to know the why of things, if possible.
I don't understand why he couldn't / shouldn't? I would agree that rearching springs or removing leafs would be better...but plenty of people use lowering blocks on rear-ends...and you have power putting more strain on the rear end. I have 3/4" blocks on the rear of my 68 Camaro, and I've beating it up good on a few different road coarses with no issues. If you're just going to do an inch or so, and you had full contact where the spring would normally sit (and don't have to worry about the axle bumping the frame), then why would it be an issue? I could see if you wanted to nuts (like 2 or 3 inches), but for just a little bit...why not?
I'd probably want to go 2, if I were to bother at all. I'm thinking the issue may have to do with the sideways force that could be exerted on the front suspension when going into a turn hard. The rear wouldn't have that so much, because (without the wheels turning side-to-side) the main force exerted back there would be pushing straight forward. Maybe. I dunno, just guessing.
Not being legal in most places has to do with a lot of things... Weight shift under braking will load the front suspension allowing the blocked axle to "S" shape the springs and potentially cause the car to dart. Almost a form of bumpsteer but caused by excessive axle rotation instead of articulation. Side loading on the springs and blocks is much higher in the front due to the engine weight and steering input so there is a potential to spit a block out, or collapse a hollow block...or even the welded on axle bracket if so equipped. Either way the potential is there to lose steering control. Can SOME vehicles get away with no issues from front blocks? I'm SURE some could...but the LAW frowns on any front blocks because they don't have the ability to check each use on an individual basis. Therefore its usually a blanket NO...and unfortunately the reasoning backs it up. Flattening the springs a bit will lengthen them, but you have shackles that can accept the length change. The most you would need to do would be to relocate the shackle bushing on the frame if the shackle angle became too steep. Not a big deal i wouldn't think. What are you building that will need such a short wheelbase though???
Lift blocks are illegal, like what some use to lift the back of 4x4 pickups. The issue is steering control, as Hackerbilt pointed out. I suppose if you were really determined to make this work you could add some short leafs to the top of the main leaf, but your ride would really suck...
A stubby, T-bucket inspired roadster. It won't really have the correct proportions for a T and not much behind the tub, (the jeep wheelbase is 18" shorter than a stock model t), but I think it'll be cute. And it's not going to pretend to actually be an authentic t-bucket. It's going to be it's own critter (I'm going to try - try being the operative word - to scratch build a body). So it'll probably also be off-topic for this site. I just don't know any better place to get technical information. Basically I just want something I can get together relatively quickly that I can have some fun with, while I'm tackling more elaborate period projects later. This is also going to be my first build, so I really don't want to be screwing around with valuable vintage tin the first time out. If I mess up an old postal jeep and some scrap metal, I can live with that. If I messed up a salvageable 30s body & expensive frame, I'd be sick.
I don't know what your frame looks like...BUT with a few mods it might be possible to ditch the parallel front springs and use an early Ford type axle, spring and wishbones, mounted out farther to give a better look and a longer wheelbase. Just a thought...not sure it can even work with your frame layout. I KNOW it's really hard to mess with accepted proportion and get a good look, so I'd do what I could to get the "look" going right from the start. "Different" parts can be cool though. Nothing wrong with building your own stuff as long as your willing to put an effort into it!
The postal jeep frame looks pretty much exactly like the CJ frame shown here, except it's a few inches shorter (like the earlier CJs): http://www.manoian.net/jeep/images/jeep_cj5_frame_dimensions.jpg It doesn't look (to me, but what do I know) like it would be impossible to modify it for an early ford front end, so that's certainly something to consider. I'm not sure how critical the "accepted proportion" will be, though. I mean, it's going to be a bucket, but it's going to be pretty obvious it's not a T-bucket (I'm even planning to weld the embossed "JEEP" panel from the postal body into the rear of the tub). So I'm not sure if hitting the proportions of a T-bucket matters too much, as long as I can find some look that "works" as its own thing... if that makes any sense. I probably won't know for sure until I start mocking things up, and that may be awhile. I'll be trying to get my shop sorted out over the winter (I couldn't build a plastic model car in there at the moment), so it'll likely be spring before I get the jeep in there and much really happens. Right now I'm mostly just trying to think it through and try to spot the areas where I need to do research.
The Jalopy Journal
