I can't say enough to say how much I enjoyed reading this. I use a protractor. On paper or cardboard I draw out a "V" that has the desired degree I'm wanting. Next step (as in your case) I measure how long a run it is (side wall ball park let's say) 22". Next step would be to see what the gap measures between the two line from the bottom of the "V" up to the gap @ 22". That gap size now is my "ballpark" degree (space needed) between my level and top of the tire with out the math. And I approve this method because none of my car's go to the alignment shop.
Never expected to see the term "free body diagram" used on here but with the amount of knowledge here I am not surprised. Now I know of a few of us who are familiar with the term. While I could see using the bottle jack and chains on an I-beam, has anyone thought of potential kinking the tube on a tube axle while doing this and the weakening it could cause? Maybe someone needs to develop an axle truss like ones used on 4x4's with a straight axle if these wheelies persist.
My car doesn't wheelie...except for that one time, and it was only about 4", and a nice soft return to earth. I think the 11,000 miles on the car with the wonderful roads in this country, had more to do with it. The tube is about 5/16" wall thickness, and bending it one degree won't kink it.
I noticed on a few hotrods with bias plys the tire that had the draglink going to it always seemed to have a little more wear and a slightly different wear pattern I just attributed it to being the steer wheel , figuring the other tire is more of a follower and that the steer wheel would be the initial responder before the energy travels through a tierod , tierod end,kingpin and then wheel bearings to the next tire To further my theory I have noticed it on the driverside on stock type push pull steering set ups and pass side on cross steer I have also noticed wierd wear when one spindle arm was bent different from the other on a crude old hot rod , in a turn radius one tire would drag and scrub a little
Had this weird dream last night, I was doing an alignment on a '63 Caddy... and in a flash I had the answer to Jim's camber issue. Fit a Caddy upper ball joint to the upper a-arm. Those had a camber adjustment on them. Woke up... realized that Jim's car has no control arms. Went back to sleep.
In the just wondering department, has anyone tried / or recommend, negative camber on straight axle front ends? Gary
if you were road racing and had a solid axle, it would probably be the way to go. When I finally get around to building my fake Indy car, I'll let you know
With modern radial tyres [and roads] 0° to 1/2° Negative would be ideal on a street driven car with a beam axle. Because camber makes the tyres behave like 2 cones apposing each other ,there needs to be toe adjustments to counteract camber thrust Toe-in is not desirable on Negative camber, and toe-out makes the car twitchy when braking on uneven surfaces so zero toe is the best compromise. Too much toe-in causes excessive inside tyre wear when there is + Caster.[ I hope the OP checked the caster on each side in this thread] Ideally 1/2° neg and zero toe would be good on a street car with radials. Road racers use a lot of - camber to counteract body roll induced camber change with A-arm suspension.[this doesn't happen with a beam axle]
I caught your joke about not using a smartphone to check the alignment this car. I admire your dedication to the period on this car, but I think you might be a little nuts.... But in a good way. -Abone.
Jim ,could you buy another spindle and offset the king pin bore and bush it back to where you needed it ?
I’m thinking that at some point during the last three years Jim has sorted this out.... Sent from my iPhone using H.A.M.B.
The Jalopy Journal
