Anyone have any info on a Watt's link? Purpose, design, blueprint/cad, adjust-ability, etc I "think" I understand the basics, and think I may want to try it in my up coming Model A project. I am leaning toward the style that mounts off the back of the housing, not on top
a fellow from another forum found this, and shared with me, figured I'd pass it along http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt's_linkage Amazingly technology from over 200 years ago still regarded as one of the best ways to set up lateral movement in a suspension!!
a fellow member sent me this link when i asked this same question...going to run the watts link in my topolino..olds rear end i bought for it was set up at one time with a watts...bought a watts link off evil bay for $40 shipped...new in sealed plastic in the box from speedway... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5fvPfReX3Q&feature=related
Mumford. Here's a hot-rod application: It's a work in progress: http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=374184 The advantage of the Mumford Link is that you have much more flexibility in locating the roll centre. Here I was aiming for close to ground level.
3 extra joints, 2 extra moving linkage bars, 1 extra frame mount, and lots of extra weight. More complicated and the geometry isn't perfect, in fact it likely worse than the standard panhard bar. Waste of time and effort.
Late model Crown Vics have Watts linkage, it would be a cheap doner, it's mounted to the top of the 8.8 rear though, not the back.
I have briefly touch's on the Mumford, but honestly still trying to take in everything I can about the watts link. However the little that I did read shows the Mumford to be an upgraded variation of a watts link... so it intrigues me also.
The watts link is used on a narrow frame as in a T bucket, on a model A frame go with the panhard! Its so simple & easy to adjust, works great, why look for complications & trouble. If i could convert my watts on my T over to a panhard i would, think i'll look into it!!lol JimV