This method obviously works, but in the coils would seem cleaner to me. I was considering a shock with a vertical stud mount on the top & cross-bar mount on the bottom. Knock out the cross bar & make a custom cross bar to fit the lower control arm, then make one hole in the frame for the top bushing. But I'm not sure where the top stud would poke through the frame. Probably in a very inconvenient place huh? I never actually tried to measure it. But the real return is that the lower shock mounts to the a-arm instead of the upright, relieving load from the upright. BTW I snapped one of the lower shock studs while driving, and one of my uprights now just has a bolt & spacer in it. That stud is cantilevered a long way from the upright, sees a lot of bending stress, and puts an eccentric load on the upright and its pivots. Inside the coil, the shock loads would be more centered in the system and applied more to the inner pivots. Of course you'd need a stronger shock, as the suspension has more leverage against it, the closer it is to the inner a-arm pivots. BTW, I was running KYB high pressure gas shocks, which rode great, but probably caused that stud to snap.
I have done this mod on 9 cars with this chassis, and I haven't yet had a mount break. Bags, or coils. I have only seen broken shock mounts where a shock was bottomed-out, due to being too long for the application. Shocks should never be bottomed, or topped-out, unless the shock has been specifically designed to do it.
I see you have to bend the Ford bracket away from the frame? About how far out does it have to come out with a typical shock?
I simply spaced off the frame about 1/2 in so there was no need to bend the F1 mounts If you look closely at the mounts you will see that they are not designed to fit perfectly flat against the frame. If the mounts are not heated to the correct temperature before bending they could fracture in use spacing out off the frame will maintains the strength of the mount.
I agree, but the highly cantilevered aspect of the whole business disturbs me. I like direct load paths.
<a href="http://s274.photobucket.com/user/Articmoon/media/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20140307_191859.jpg.html" target="_blank"></a>
Original Ford/Dodge pickup shock mounting arms are forged steel, easily bent hot and slow cooled to last almost forever. Repops are probably cast steel steel at best, cast iron at worst, not good candidates for bending a all. In their raw for easy to tell as forged parts have broad seams and cast ones rather sharp and narrow.
It would not take alot to make a spacer of the req'd thickness out of bar stock, e.g. 1/2 x 1 or 1 1/4, pre-drill the holes at the correct spacing and weld it onto the frame with just a few heavy tack-welds using the bolts to hold it in place and the welds to keep it from shifting. Then the shock mount is where you want it.
To each his own, but the way I posted it in the first place is cheap & easy, and proven on many, many installs. IMO the only way the F1 mount might be an improvement is if you can't weld & don't know anyone who can.
Nobody. The shock would have to be very short, which limits options. Remember, the dampened kenetic energy gets turned into heat. Small body shocks are not as well equipped to dissipate it. Also, it moves the shock closer to the pivot of the lower control arm, where it is subject to very different geometry and force than the stock location. The closer to the control arm pivot that a shock mount is, the shorter the arc that mount travels in, when the suspension cycles. All of which the dampening would have to happen in the very short travel, of a very short shock, against a lot of force. Yes, it would look cleaner. For the extra work, and diminished return, you could just do it the proven way, put the wheel back on, and enjoy the ride. That, and a Jeep anti-sway bar, and you will transform the car.
Could you tell me what year Jeep would have one that would fit over the Mopar frames? Seems I looked at a few at the U-Pull-It and they were too narrow where the first bends are from the straight section and wouldn't straddle the horns.
Hi Gatz its good to explore all the options . The route I went was after some discussion with 4Woody. In my case living in the UK if the chassis has a lot of work it would need to be inspected by a government vehicle engineer which could cause lots of problems . Going the F1 route means it could be done in an hour only requires one hole to be drilled each side and could be reverted back on an afternoon. The shocks travel is smooth without interference. If you take a look at the image above you will see the difference between the original upper shock location position to were it is now. The difference is minimal but there is a difference . 4Woody's method can place the top of the shock in the exactly the right place.
Did you take some measurement to determine this? I'm not so sure it would be shorter than what I have now (which are KYB shocks mounted in the stock manner.) All true, and yet millions of cars were successfully built that way. Every Ford or Chevy I ever owned in fact. However did they manage it? I'm not sure it would really be more work, but at this point I don't know if it would even fit in there at all. I don't have the car set up where I can really look under it right now, so I'm just asking questions here. Right now I still have the stock anti-sway bar in front & a '75 T-bird sway bar in back. It's OK, but some more anti-sway in the front would indeed be welcome. A big issue with the stock setup is the pronounced and unequal bump-steer from the lack of a relay rod and idler arm; but poor damping is the worst really. Because of that I've had some very exciting moments after going over railroad tracks at speed due to the underdamped front suspension. "Pogo" would be an apt description of the motion. And I could just leave it stock too, but that's not the attitude of a customizer or a hotrodder. We're supposed to brave the unknown and go where no man has gone before and all that. . . . . .you know, trying new and different things: stuffing 440's into Hilmans and blowers into Anglias, putting T-5 transmissions in a Dodge, sticking Ford suspension parts on a Plymouth... Sticking to the "proven" means zero advancement for the sport/hobby/business/whatever.
When I'm able to get to this I'll post up my results. there's this minor "house remodeling" issue which is keeping me from working on my cars.
As a true hot rodder you need to get the priority's right Ulu . Do the mods first then remodel the house my house remodeling has been on hold for years
The factory did it in 55-56. The only problem I see on earlier cars is the upper mount, the top of the spring pocket gets in the way and the upper control arm shaft also gets in the way.
Good point. I haven't had the opportunity to look under the 55-56 models to see the suspension differences. Maybe I can dig up some photos hereabouts. Whoa! beat me to it! Thanks Daliant! I really need to drag this car out and start crawling under it again. At some point somebody's gonna have to kill all those Black Widows living there.
Roger that, but I gotta get my ducks in a row before I even really touch it. This car's rebirth will not be a casual nor speedy process. A couple years at the minimum if I don't screw it up. But today I did go measure some 4x6's I'll use to build the work carts for the body and frame to roll on, and to kick off my karma in the right direction I symbolically rubbed a little metal prep on the hood. That 30 year old lacquer (the smattering which remains) is nothing but a spiderweb of rusty microscopic cracks. If you smack the fender with yer palm, chunks of lacquer jump right off. Anybody wanna see patina? I got yer patina right here folks. I'm gonna have fun doing the tin work on this car. I've done lots of mechanical work in my life, but little tin work, and I've never had the time and will to take one off the frame before, but this is gonna get the attention I've always wanted to give it.
I reread this a couple times and I apologize for being smarmy. Also, I had to remind myself that just because the factory does something "that way" doesn't mean they do it the best way. Lots of compromises are made by car manufacturers in the interest of cost and manufacturability. One reason I am considering the spring-in-coil setup is to avoid clearance issues when using dropped spindles and re-bent steering arms. I suspect the factory went this route partly for the same reasons.
The Jalopy Journal
