History Rear suspensions (from the past)

I started a thread which was intended to arouse interest and cause others to consider the suspensions of the past. Evidently, others misinterpreted my intentions and the thread was stopped. All right, I'll just come out with it. Among the "big three," Ford and Chevrolet used torque tube drive suspensions for decades. This was while Mopar had an open driveshaft. What is to be realized is that the torque tube, in those early cars, acted like a ladder bar. This required either leaf springs or a Panhard rod and that was it. Modern ladder bar cars use two ladders, but only one is required. An interesting realization, but there's more: Jaguar, in their C-Type, used an asymmetrical 3link to provide equal rear tire loading on acceleration and to win LeMans. The obvious next step was an IRS, which they used on the D-Type. So, the imbalance in rear tire loading, due to the driveshaft torque, can be cancelled many different ways, but, in particular, by proper use of a 3link OR by mounting a single ladder bar to the right of the car centerline. No, I'm not urging anyone to go out and do this. Just don't allow others to block in your thinking. Try to keep in mind the purpose of a suspension and don't limit yourself to that which is being used by others.

 

I have used this design since 1964 exclusively. It works extremely well if properly done. Simple and no binding.
The most interesting thing is the chassis is always level. In my stock suspension 32, a hard shift to second will roll the car considerably. The roadster, with this design, always stays dead level. It also resists rear end squat and dive. I set up one car and application of power would raise the whole car several inches. When you loaded it against the torque converter , it would come up.

 

I am interested in what you have to say, but I need pic's as I am no expert in this area of expertise.

 

Andy, you're one in a million! Your post brings hope to this old man. Many of the suspension problems encountered by dragracers can be traced back to the effect of driveshaft torque. Otherwise, your Aunt Rose could drive the car. In these hard times, I hate to see businesses fail, but, if dragracers were to copy your efforts, they'd put the ARB manufacturers out of business.

 

I've asked the moderator to fix this, but my blog is:
http://www.shopeshop.org/contentsDrag.htm

 

In a light weight (#2000) Coupe, with a short pair (26" 2-leaf springs) mounted with shackles on both ends ( I call a poor mans floater) and a single traction bar, ie: torque arm, would this rubber encapsulated joint be of enough strength for daily use and punishment?

 

Or, should I use something like this for the front of the torque arm?

 

I don't like to put bending loads on threaded shanks. I am really a worrier. I use first year Chevy11 or Camaro spring shackle bushings mounted in pipe. I cut them down. The pipe is only about 1 1/2" long. I use another piece of pipe in the center for the bolt to tighten on. The big diameter and short length lets the roll easily with a load. I always weld them on and have adjustments at the other end.
The first design for this came from not having any traction in a Chevy11 with a stout 327. I found a turned over 50 Olds on some inlaws property and took the two rear control arms off it. I had driven a 50 olds when first driving and knew how they would take off. I had been thinking about how to stop body roll and also plant the right rear tire. I came up with using ane torque arm on the right side. I used one of the 50 Olds arms and put a shackle on the front to take up the differences in arcs.
I had great traction. I have used this design ever since. I have all my friends using it too.

 

Andy, do you have any pictures or drawings of your setup that you can share?

 

Is it like this?

 

I am have used Andy's design ( one of his friends). It works!! He explained it to me in the early '70's when I was a ME student. I did a paper in college on it in one of my design classes. I have it somewhere. A funny story, one of our friends had a mustang he drag raced. We put one of the '50 olds arms as Andy explained above on the car. As there was no frame where we needed to mount the forward shackle, we sandwiched a steel plate above and below the area under the right front seat. First time he ran it pushed the seat up about 4 inches.

 

All my drawing went away when the computer died.
The first design was just a arm on the stock Chevy11 suspension. The second was a modification of a 62 Chevy rear suspension. It was all stock except the little upper control arm went away and the other 50 Olds arm was installed.
The design using now is a radius rod on the left side and is free on both ends. The other side has V type torque arm with adjusters at the axle and the Chevy11 bushing at the front. It uses coilovers and a very low in the rear track bar. It also has a sway bar to make it have less understeer.
40 front springs have also been used on a few cars and they do not need the track bar or the sway bar.
To do it really right, the left bar should attach to the spring and the axle be free to rotate on it.

 

I would have welded the two bars together and used the Chevy11 bushing on the end.

 

I'm trying to picture in my head what is being written.

Would this design be more along the lines of what your describing?

 

Or maybe like this, except use the Chevy II bushing in the front.... ?

 

Yes, That is pretty much exactly it for the torque arm. I have never used any webbing between the bars.

 

GM already used something similar on 3rd Gen F bodies. My 88 3rd Gen Poncho has a torque arm from the rear up to the transmission. I've got to replace the bushing in mine, when you get on it from a standstill, it will bump pretty hard, like a set of slapper bars on a leaf spring.

 

On 3rd and 4th gen F-bodies they had a rubber bushing from the factory.

Aftermarket ones are pretty much all poly or rod end. Or have a poly bushing the front of the torque arm slides in to

 

I got you guys thinking and that's what I wanted to do. Remember the rubber bushings that were used in the front eyes of the truck leaf springs. Or, the cars, for that matter. They were designed exactly for this application. This is what we used in the links for the Ramchargers' "High And Mighty." The suspension was not originally a 4link, but a 3link with the upper link telescoping, to give equal tire loads on braking (which was not really necessary, but some members insisted on it). Shortly after the '59 Nationals, I went back to school and the goals on the rear suspension were sidelined. Of course, any setup requires occasional inspection. With a little thought, you can calculate the offset required to cancel any driveshaft torque, yielding equal tire loads all the way down the strip.

 

that's upper LEFT link

 

I'd LOVE to see an image of your 3-link. Pretty please? Gary

 

Me too!


Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Haven't had the time to read this but I'm looking for ward to it

 

I took some pictures of the roadster rear suspension. This was built in 1990.

 

Andy, thank you for posting the pics. However, I fail to understand how this setup differs from triangulated ladder bars or GM truck arms in geometry. Not being critical, just asking if I am missing something here?

Ray

 

Ray, that was what I was thinking myself before I posted.
I could be wrong but I thought the OP was saying to use just ONE ladder bar off to the driver side. I did have that on my old jeep crawler but it also had leaf springs. The ladder bar also had a shackle at the front.


Sent from my iPhone using H.A.M.B.

 

Ray,
You are one of my heros.
I differs as it is not symmetric. The torque arm on the right pushes up and loads the right rear tire. The off center push also balances the engine torque twisting the right chassis side down. The left side is just a locater bar.

 

Thanks for the reply. I took a closer look at the left side and see what appears to be a single bar, not triangulated like the right side 'torque arm'. More importantly, the left side bar has pivot points on both ends, not 'fixed' at the axle. I think I get it now.

Ray

 

I'm going to remove my pics so as to not confuse other readers or take away from the thread.


Sent from my iPhone using H.A.M.B.

 

Ray,
That's right. With one fixed bar, there is no binding of the suspension. Everything is free to move as it wants. It is getting back to Henry's design, just off center.