Wow that is definitely different. Check out the rear friction shocks. They appear to be mounted to the backing plates. Everythings upside down on this car. Kinda reminds me of the Rocky Mt. Low.
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I'll bet the NSRA guys have a real problem with it. [/ QUOTE ] Ummmmm... who gives a shit about what they think? ------------- I love the wheels on that car... What are they off of? [/ QUOTE ] I just wanted to say that. Those wheels look like something from a high end late '20s early '30s thing. Like the disc wheels on a Chrysler or something.
That is one nice looking car, thanks for posting the photos. Underslung cars are not new, the American was the most wellknown, but Regal, Norwalk and Colby built them. The following photos are of a 1912 Colby chassis.
The first cars fornt suspension will not work correct with the leaf spring arched the wrong way.The rear suspension is fine. Notice on the other cars the leafs are arched correctly per application. even if the car is "hanging" the leafs still need to be in order of main leaf to smallest to achieve a progressive spring rate and hold the car at its ride height.
[ QUOTE ] The first cars fornt suspension will not work correct with the leaf spring arched the wrong way.The rear suspension is fine. Notice on the other cars the leafs are arched correctly per application. even if the car is "hanging" the leafs still need to be in order of main leaf to smallest to achieve a progressive spring rate and hold the car at its ride height. [/ QUOTE ] That was the point I was trying to make, thanks!
[ QUOTE ] I can see no reason why it won't ride the same as an normal setup. There are springs, and there are shackles where required, and just because the springs are not bent in the normal direction doesn't mean they aren't going to flex. Okay, it probably won't work as well as a traditional type setup, but it'll work to a degree, which is as much as most show cars do. [/ QUOTE ] Ok the front will not work with the springs like they are, if they had shackles like the rear maybe... but there is one other thing SHOCKS! I don't see any. And then of course they would not function correctly pulling them instead of compressing them. Yes you can get them that do (newer softails for instance) but I don't think this guy has them..
[ QUOTE ] The first cars fornt suspension will not work correct with the leaf spring arched the wrong way... ......the leafs still need to be in order of main leaf to smallest to achieve a progressive spring rate and hold the car at its ride height. [/ QUOTE ] My Dad's '72 chevy 4x4 has the front springs arched the same way as the first car and it works fine... It's that way from the factory. It's the shackles on the back of the front springs that don't look as if they have the correct geometry. If you look close, you will see that the springs ARE in order. The main leaf is on the top, and the shorter springs are on the bottom in progressive order... I bet it works fine. Shocks? Shocks are for sissies
It seems like the front main spring could be alittle flatter to work better, but all the other springs in the spring pack are mounted under the main spring and would work along with the main spring to soften the ride plenty good. One thing that I do think would really work though, is that with the low center of gravity (the lateral load below the axle line) & with good tires that thing probably corners like it's on rails !! Richard
[ QUOTE ] ................Kinda reminds me of the Rocky Mt. Low. [/ QUOTE ] That's exactly what I was gonna say! For those not in the know it was the Zipper bodied 27 "T" modified owned by Neal East that was on the cover of Street Rodder a couple of years ago. It had a Willys axle on the front mounted the same way. The Model "A" frame under my "T" modified in upside down right now because I was contemplating doin' the same thing but with an early Chevy axle.
Can't see the angle of the front shackles on my screen for some reason, but in this front spring configuration the spring will shorten a little as the suspension compresses. The shackle should be mounted to allow for that. The springs seem to be set up with the smallest leaf at the bottom so the spring rate should be fine. If it were set up with the smallest leaf on top, just the main leaf would be holding the weight. That wouldn't keep the car off the ground if it was parked and empty! I suppose clamp clips would hold the packs together with the smaller leafs on top, but that would be a hokey way to get by! Can't see that guy making a choice like that...the car is too nice!!! 70's Chevy 4x4 DID have front springs with the same reversed layout. Worked fine and gave a soft ride. Shocks seem to be lever action in front...see the mounts on the frame(?) and would still work as designed. Just the dog bone link would be heading up from the shock instead of down to the axle. Forces would apply to the shock EXACTLY in the same way it would if the shock were above the axle. The only POTENTIAL handling issue I see, and it isn't a big deal, is that the drag link is working opposite to the anchored section of the spring. This could add some bump steer...but I doubt its a big problem. The front axle not having U-bolts right around it puts some extra importance to the welding on the pads...a NEW version of the suicide frontend maybe!?!? That builder sure thinks outside the box...but he still did everything right, AND used easy to find parts. Thats tough to pull off most times! I love it myself! Thats right up there with my favorite Mod's now...and I like Mod's!
Let me be the first to say that I DON"T like that car. I can appreciate what the builder was trying to do, but it just looks too funky to me. Take the tires off and you've got one hellava cool snow sled. Just my opinion (ain't worth shit) Josh
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I can see no reason why it won't ride the same as an normal setup. There are springs, and there are shackles where required, and just because the springs are not bent in the normal direction doesn't mean they aren't going to flex. Okay, it probably won't work as well as a traditional type setup, but it'll work to a degree, which is as much as most show cars do. [/ QUOTE ] Ok the front will not work with the springs like they are, if they had shackles like the rear maybe... but there is one other thing SHOCKS! I don't see any. And then of course they would not function correctly pulling them instead of compressing them. Yes you can get them that do (newer softails for instance) but I don't think this guy has them.. [/ QUOTE ] Firstly, the front HAS shackles, like the rear. Secondly, you don't 'pull' on a leaf spring, you bend it, and just because it is curved the opposite way doesn't mean it won't act like a spring. Thirdly, I don't see any mechanical similarity with a Harley Softail, as they use coil springs, in compression, though externally they look like they are being 'pulled'. Fourth, shocks just stop you pogoing down the road, not make your springs work any differently. Leaf springs have a certain degree of natural damping, though they still work better with some shocks on. Whatever, I think the guy was just looking to build something that looked 'different', and he certainly succeeded in that.
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] The first cars fornt suspension will not work correct with the leaf spring arched the wrong way... ......the leafs still need to be in order of main leaf to smallest to achieve a progressive spring rate and hold the car at its ride height. [/ QUOTE ] My Dad's '72 chevy 4x4 has the front springs arched the same way as the first car and it works fine... It's that way from the factory. It's the shackles on the back of the front springs that don't look as if they have the correct geometry. If you look close, you will see that the springs ARE in order. The main leaf is on the top, and the shorter springs are on the bottom in progressive order... [/ QUOTE ] i stand corrected. the springs are in the correct order.Regarding the shackles, I also think they are set up wrong. It seems to me that if they are arched that way they would work better if they were a little bit longer, maybe have a little more leverage to get them to move.
The comments about the frame being upside down is just the kind of thinking fostered by someone who is unable (OR UNWILLING) to LOOK at something that's unusual and study it and try to understand the concept. If a few minutes are taken to follow what happens when the suspension works it will become clear how THIS setup works. Getting old sucks, but at least us old guys don't have to EAT our words (as often) because we're unwilling to observe and evaluate. Keeping in mind you youngsters are a whole smarter than we are. Frank
<font color="red"> Someday I hope to build a car that shakes the tree as hard as this one and the too short Model A have. That's when I'll know I've made it. </font>
Beautiful modified!!! All it needs is FRONT BRAKES!!! Out of the box thinking. I have a cat that shits out of the box.
I like it alot it is different. It has shocks in front and rear. THey are friction styled with rods connecting. You can look closely by the front tires and see the front ones and the rear are mounted on the rear end , where the rear spring shackles usually connect, Should work great. BEsides these aint Cadillacs there oversized gokarts
There is a pic of that car in the new Street Rodder mag, it was in the Grand National Roadster Show. Says it is owned by a Richard /riddle, is a 25 Dodge and is running a big block mopar.
The Jalopy Journal
