Hot Rods Wishbone 3-link information please

I would like to see a bunch of hot rods with torsion bar suspensions. I'm really suprised more top end builders aren't using them. Been wondering that for many years.

 

Thanks gimpyshotrods. I guess we down here are off on our own little tangent, and apologies if some of it is not making sense to some up there. Great that you can "translate" so all can stay on track.
Steve

 

a boner, from what I have found on the subject, the sprint/speedway car stuff is perfect for what we need. Lots of different spring rates, lengths and good parts. A big plus for a torsion bar system (front or rear) is the ability to adjust ride height without changing spring rates, as long as the setup is designed to still have enough travel. It can also have a "minimal" look about it. You can even hide the bars in the frame rails if you want. I agree, more builders should investigate it.
Steve

 

No problem. There are a lot of folks here in the states that are not fully aware that there are not only vehicle models from brands we know that are not sold here, but that there are entire automakers that do not sell in the US, at-all.

We did get a LS2 powered Holden Monaro, re-badged as a Pontiac GTO, about a decade ago, before GM snuffed out Pontiac. It was cool, but now it's gone.

 

Food for thought. Google is your friend.

 

Anything anyone wants to know, just ask. There are quite a few hambers down here and in New Zealand. More than happy to help, or even source stuff and send.

 

Check out the Model T in this thread https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/purpose-built-autocross-hot-rod.481023/page-4

 

Wow!!!
But lets not get too far off topic here. Street driven bucket/track-t that could be run daily, while still keeping a somewhat traditional look.
But again.... WOW!!!

 

Steve,
First off, I sure didn't mean to hijack your thread. I'll try a new thread, but I doubt it will fly for long. Gary

 

It can be done with a bit of planning ahead, instead of throwing a shitload of Hi-Tech [off topic] parts at it.
We can all learn from our history books from the likes of "Chapman, Mallock, Broadley". These gentlemen had to use whatever parts were available from various manufacturers inventories, and rearrange them on their chassis designs.[road racing "hotrodders"]

To make a T bucket streetable the suspension stiffness needs to be soft [eg: 70 lb/in in the rear or less] and you'd need at least 4"ground clearance with a 2-1/2"to 3" maximum suspension compression.

Because of the soft suspension, the roll stiffness needs to be helped of Anti Roll Bars ,
OR
you need to get the CGH do a "Lewinski" [it needs to go down on ya]
The Lower the CGH , the less lateral acceleration via bodyroll. so smaller ARB's are required [if at all]

The soft suspension, would be great for street driven, autocross, or tight road courses. But put it on a steep banked superspeedway and the suspension will try to bottom out.

You can never built it "Too Light", Too Low", or "Too Wide" [or have the tyres too wide]

 

Thanks Kerry.
Any opinion on the Toyota Stout front and rear axles?
What about other Japanese ute/pickup rear axles (Mitsubishi, Nissan, Ford/Mazda)? Any of these worth considering?

 

No reaction or comment from anyone about the Model A Roadster torsion bar front end???
Thought that picture would ignite some curiosity and debate. Maybe you are all too busy searching the net for more pictures and ideas. The HAMB has quite a bit about it if you search.
Steve

 

Seen it. It's not anything new...

 

I had to google "Toyota Stout" as we never got them [ours were designated "Hilux"]
So it depends on what year [and how much grunt you're going to shove through it]

The 78-83 the 2wd hilux diff is the one that all the Escort boys use because it is almost the same width, and being a G series has a large choice of dropout diff heads.

Look at Nissan C20 Vans, they are narrow also [but only 4 stud]. They have a light and heavy version.[you'll want the heavy version]

Aussie assembled Nissan/Datsun B210's [Sunny] had Borg Warner "78" diffs that are quite narrow.
This diff is the same as the "9 Bolt" 3rd Gen Camaro, Nissan R31 Skyline, Ford Falcons, VL and newer Commodore.

If you build your T lightweight enough, Torque will be transferred into acceleration [not broken parts]

 

Ok. The hunt can begin. Was going to start on front end but still a bit of working out to do there. At least I can find a rear and start to take all the mounts off and get it ready. BW78 opens up the options a lot. Would falcon be too wide?

 

Good info on mini truck sites

 

The Stout was a heavier-duty Hilux with a beam axle in front. We had them here for a time, but they're getting rare. I've also wondered about the usefulness of a Stout front axle. It mounts to longitudinal semi-elliptics. I'm not sure that it might be the same as the lighter Dyna (2-ton etc.) front axles of the '70s and '80s.

 

These boys are South of the Equator.

Not everything interchanges.

 

Kinda' like this? I started building this '34 frame about 18 years ago, but got sidetracked over the years. Don't know how it was gonna work in practice, but I had it all worked out in my head at the time!
Biggest issue is oilpan and tie rod clearance ( if you want to get a low ride height). Not really HAMB friendly, but more traditional than a Mustang 2! (By the way, this is at bottomed out height)



I'll probably get back to it as a retirement project someday...

Bear

 

Where we drive on the right side of the road, tomorrow happens yesterday, and you can hear your echo before you speak.

 

Good example. Some may correct me here if this is wrong, but could the centre lower links be changed to a single wishbone arrangement with one attachment point on the axle and a semicircular (horseshoe) shape at the back to go around each side of the oil pan back to the rear side mounts? Sort of like -(

 

Hey Gary, no problem. Stick around here for a while. Looks like we are about to get some ideas thrown into the mix.
Steve

 

Kerry,
3 link suspension front and rear seem to allow the roll centres to be kept low, but also for them to be "fixed" in their positions (ie: not changing due to suspension movement, etc). I am thinking this would be an advantage for tuning of the suspension? Is this the case? A bit of info about the workings of this principle would be helpful.
Steve

 

Yes it can be changed to a true "A" frame.
The main difference is the A frame has the roll-centre at the "exact pivot" and it never changes.
Having 2 triangulated bars puts the RC at an imaginary point where the 2 bars meet [slightly in front of the axle] The RCH is dynamic [meaning it moves up/down when the suspension moves]

Due to the cantilever effect of the bars being behind the axle and the RC in front of the axle , the RC will move upward during dive [hard braking] which would effectively stiffen roll resistance.
This can cause induced understeer on corner entry with trail braking techniques.

On a street car, a correction could be made by using softer springs [getting the benefit of a better ride] and the RCH goes up and CGH goes down during dive [increasing roll stiffness]

If this scenario is switched to the rear [common theme on upper triangulated 4 link] the rear RC would move down more during dive softening the rear stiffness causing the rear to be "tight"

The combined affect of front and rear Roll Couple would aggravate the understeer even worse.

On corner exit, during acceleration the opposite happens, the front end will be "pointy" and the rear end will be loose [and aggravated more with torque applied to the rear tyres]

If you like "hanging the ass out" on corner exit, this can be a fun setup.[but slower]


Please understand, these traits only happen at the 100% limit of the tyre's capabilities. Any less than that and most drivers wouldn't even notice

 

So, is having the roll centres "fixed" a good thing or not? If not, front and rear could have the 3rd link under the axles, but attached somehow to keep the roll centres floating. (Hang on a minute. Getting the feeling I just said something really stupid. You probably get to choose one mounting method or the other ).

But like you said, on a street car, would it even matter?

Do you have recommendations as to how far the links should mount above and below the axles (front and rear / 3rd link at bottom).

 

Roll centres on any A-Arm suspension is dynamic [even F1 and Indy cars] but the RCH on these cars move in the same direction as the changing CGH.
Having a cantilever effect of triangulated links makes the RCH move opposite to CGH.

The only lateral locating device that keeps the RCH the same position to the CGH is a "Watts Linkage" with the bellcrank attached to the frame and the 2 links attached to the axle.
This is how Aussie V8 supercars located the rear end.

If you ever have an urge to "autocross" or "track day" your car, you might as well build your car with a fixed height RC now.
If you are going to use a tube front end, bend it up with the drop as low as possible . Then weld 2 tabs behind it for the A frame pivot. [the A frame will be protected by the front axle]

Understand that thrashing a car on a mountain road [Fast and the furious bullshit] would be lucky to get to 60% of what you can achieve "Corner Carving" on the track.
And even if you have developed some good skills, there will be some hotshot genius talent that will go even faster.
It is at the extreme limits of adhesion where one end will let go first.[which end? depends on roll couple and grip]

Attached is a Vid of the great Aryton Senna thrashing a Honda NSX [no helmet and wearing Gucci loafers]
Senna helped develop the NSX which was considered the best handling car in the world [at that time]
He had the skills to out drive that car and bring out the flaws in it's handling.

At the 1:38 mark watch how he is tapping the throttle to "roll the rear tyres into oversteer" to correct an understeer problem that the likes of you and me would never notice.[his steering response corresponds with throttle input]

Enjoy...... even though it is off topic

 

Rear suspensions (from the past)
Older thread but interesting

 

Thanks for all your help with this Kerry. Between info here, and a lot of research, I am ready to tackle the design work for the front and rear setups. May PM you and run them past you at a later date if the offer is still open.

Great video of Senna in the NSX. Working hard, yet looking like he is not working at all. Oh to be able to drive a quarter as well.

 

here are pics I said I would find, not very good shots of the rear triangle radius rods, don't have pickup anymore, I drew a drawing of what it was to help. you can see the box welded to top of olds rear for one big hime joint.
it worked great many miles towing also to river towing boats, lakes, Bonneville towing roadster etc.
PS: any body see this pickup ever? 289, auto, mustang steering, using boxed stock frame, shortened bed. stock grill???

 

Thanks for digging up the pics gege. That is the concept. With it set up the way you had it with the single attachment point on top of the centre, that point was your rear roll centre. I will be doing it inverted, with the triangulated bars attaching under the centre of the rear end, and the two outer straight links above the axle tubes. Works the same but drops the rear roll centre lower. (Virtually just turn your drawing upside down).
By the way, that looks like it was one cool pickup.
Steve