Hot Rods Cheap Hot Rod axle

The u-bolt idea is great, you could adjust the axle width to fit any car out there. This idea is genius,ha,ha...... Sorry ,couldn't help myself.

 

I never looked at them but they might make good disc brake donor spindles for a homemade tube axle. Pay attention to kingpin inclination - thats what determines the castor. I built a axle with 1st generation econoline spindles & volare disc brakes years ago. A wise man taught me to take a tape measure, flashlight & notebook to a salvage yard & spend a few days looking, measuring & taking notes.

 

Did I say castor ? I meant to say camber. Its been a long day.

 

BINGO! I also have never seen one under a car. Also, the America Motors Pacer was the Motor Trend "Car of the year"!

 

I'll give you this much woodienut: I haven't seen one of Flaming River "Dominators" under a car either; course it could have something to do with the fact that it's relativeley new compared to traditional dropped axles and costs a whopping $3675 for their standard kit. I have seen one of Fatman's kits, although kinda pricey at $600 or so when you have to provide your own axle and related parts. I like his better because they're not strictly a twin I beam so much as an independent 'acting' split I beam joined at the center on a spring mount bracket.

 

Jeez, rigid. Involve yourself here a little more often than just dropping by once a week "to look at pictures", and maybe you'll start to realize that the vast majority of the members here are golden. Don't judge the entire H.A.M.B. for a few smart-mouths. And next time you remind an "old bastard" that he's gonna die, remember that you'll be one yourself...way sooner than you even suspect. Be cool man. Feel the love. Or...just keep wearing that stupid hat, and posting once every few years.........whoops.

 

A visual of this thread as I look at it.

 

Or better still......brazed!!!eek:!)

Mart3406
=========================

 

I think I've figured it out. You don't want to give the guys a Straw Man. That is, from Wikipedia:

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B disregards certain key points of X and instead presents the superficially similar position Y.
3. Person B attacks position Y, concluding that X is false/incorrect/flawed.

Avoid the potential for a Straw Man, and you'll be fine.

The OP's actual mistake was apparently not noticing that he's got a twin I-beam front end, which was an honest mistake if perhaps brought about by over-hastiness. That's why, after my bit of fun (mea culpa), I encouraged him to keep looking for solutions in unlikely places, but to look more thoroughly than he apparently had.

I don't think he was suggesting using a Ford twin I-beam as an alternative to an axle, which is what many here were attacking. He certainly didn't suggest bolting them together with U-bolts! (mea culpa again)

In fact the twin I-beam is worth a second look: which is exactly what Flaming River did. The earlier solution devised by Allard and reprised by Fatman Fabrications has a swing-arm less than half the front track and consequently puts the roll centre just above the pivots. Because of the drop in the half-axles it acts more like the old Mercedes-Benz low-pivot swing-axle IRS, which was way better than the VW/Renault/Triumph type. By the same analogy the Ford/Flaming River set-up is more like a semi-trailing-arm IRS, which is that much better again. The TIB puts the roll centre somewhere between the pivot height and the ground.

Moreover, the TIB gains a little bit of positive camber with roll, like the vast majority of wishbone or strut IFSs, which suits the OEMs because it dials in a bit of understeer. That is why, paradoxically, a front anti-roll bar reduces understeer in many cars with IFS. The Allard/Fatman system will gain negative camber on roll, which is better for ultimate grip even if it creates a small possibility of front-end jacking. Both, being independent, will give a softer ride for any given amount of roll stiffness than a solid axle.

Hence, there's no reason a TIB won't make for a safe-handling hot rod. The fact that it comprises two separate axles is an advantage as far as track is concerned: within limits you can space them according to the track you want.

Would I use them, however? Probably not. The roll centre is still 3" higher than I'd want it, and the positive camber gain is more than I'd want.

 

You seem to have come to the conclusion most of us,,in your own words are "OLD BASTARDS" and that some questions are labeled as stupid and a few members poke fun at the original posters expense.

OK,I'll agree that it happens,It's not the end of the world,I know i've ask a lot of stupid question and received the same treatment,but I read the responses to this thread and I really don't see anything out of line,,It's not a good idea and the reasoning has been pointed out.

The "As a community it is pretty sh*tty " statement,you must live under a rock!

Read some of the auctions posted for Breeder,remember Hambandy?ever read any post about guys who have just lost a parent,wife or child?

The,,"You old Bastards are going to die someday" comment,you assume we are the only people that are gonna die & are the only ones that "Beat down ideas"

The Hamb is a great community and Ryan has created a Utopia for guys like You and I,but to take full advantage of it you need to take a active roll and get involved.

Sometimes it's not all warm and fuzzy and shouldn't be!

BTW,you haven't hurt my feelings and you have essentially done the same thing whit your rant.

You have accused all us "OLD Bastards",your words again,of "beating down" a tread and turned it into why you don't care for the older guys or the hamb in general.

Another thought from the "Old Bastard" standing on the proverbial soap box at the moment,,the comment that you are not missed.

You are correct,you are not missed along with all the other guys that have some kind of preconceived notion that all the "OLD BASTARDS are out to get them or for fear that their ideas will be torn apart by the rabid dogs of the Hamb.

I pick my battles and this thread would have never receive a response from me but your blatant assessment of the elderly members and lack of respect spured me into a reply. HRP,,an "OLD BASTARD"

 

I am in total agreement with this statement,,I have had a 65 Ford pickup for almost 40 years and it never had excessive tire or alignment problems.

These twin I beams are great for what they were designed to be,,truck suspension. HRP

 

If you want inaccurate and negative info about brand X, ask the person who's never driven one.




.

 

"Old Bastards"? I thought this place was full of young punks. That must make me an...

 

it's the punks versus the bastards



.

 

somebody call?

 

I wonder if the bad rep might stem in part from guys who want to lower there Ford pickup? You gotta admit that the suspension design does make it quite a pain to lower.

Not that anyone on the HAMB would ever want to lower a pickup.

 

That's a possibility,but there is a company that makes a dropped twin I beams. HRP

 

My '96 F-150 has the twin I beams under it.....

 

That's their down fault it costs a lot more money to properly drop an TIB frontend compared to a chevy. Sure there are a few outfits that have made lowered TIB axles, but few were any good. Always easier,cheaper and faster to drop a twin A-arm set-up.

 

One and the same!

'less of course it's Young Punks and Old Bastards....than it's just an age difference.

Resume.....



Oh. somewhere on here, there was a discussion of using twin I-beams as rear radius rods, was pretty thought inspiring....Hmmm, where was that now?

 

Ok we have concluded that those front ends actually work reasonably well under the trucks that they came under. No big news as there are a few million of them running around the world with that front end under it.

But do they fit the general criteria for something that the majority of Hambers want on their hot rods" NO, because as I said before the assembly is just too big and bulky to put under and early chassis and not have it look like a big scabbed on piece under there.

It isn't about "cool young guys' vs us "old Bastards" it's about having your car look right and work right and lot look like you scabbed something on as an afterthought or because you got a "great deal" on it.

 

Interesting idea.

 

I also vaguely remember something about using twin I beam stuff as radius rods.

 

Heavy, but ugly radius rods. (Butt Ugly ?)

Actually, the bloke that started this cluster was on to something.

Use one half of the TIB for a dropped axle three wheeler !

May have to jack some weight into it, or maybe a lot of weight !

 

You sir are very incorrect. Ford started using the twin I-beam in 1965 in trucks,and still uses it to this day in the E-series vans. Obviously they do work worth a damn.....being in service for 45+ years!!! They are very durable,and are right at home in a truck. They have no place in a traditional hot rod though.

As for the comments about eating tires......yah,any worn out suspension will do that. My 186k mile E350 doesn`t eat any tires though.

 

More incorrect info,my van has ball-joints on the twin I-beam,it must be special.

 

I would never use one under a hotrod, but the thought has been to use them under a tandem axle trailer. Would sure make it ride a lot smoother.

 

Here is a car that i'm working on for a customer, i'm using the twin i-beam radius rods for same. The tie rod will pass through the big oval hole and above the frame and under the engine. The web behind the axle will have a spring mount bolted to it. I did have to make some bushings at the axle mount, all will be polished when done. I think they look pretty good...imo.

 

Can you explain what you're thinking on this?

 

this is actually a pretty clever idea.....not my cup of tea, but clever.
Like to see people re-imagining what stuff can be used for.