my frame is resting on my tie rod, do i bend tie rod arms down?

the dude i bought the cab from also suggested this, so that will be the first thing i do. low down on the front suspension is 49-54 chevy 6 inch dropped axle, low ride height perch at 7 degrees towards cab,49-58 chevy spindles, flat tie rod arms the whole front is speedway kits.
called speedway today and the tech that i spoke with told me they do not have dropped arms for 48-54 chevy he suggested i bush the tie rod, i am going to call posie's after i get the weight of the engine trans on the frame. i really hate to start cutting the frame up or buy a different steering system yet. i am going to try the easiest and cheapest suggestion first then i'll go back to the drawing board. my first build so i figured that there where going to be mistakes. any time i want to drive down a real road i'll take one of my full size bronco trail trucks to the cliffs insane terrain 4x4 park thats near me. i want to get out of 4x4's so this is my first old tin build.

 

i figured the perch screwed me, i'll try the perch spacer also. i dont want to get me or any one else killed or hurt i may get taller tires up front also.

 

I applaud the effort to get your suspension right. Why not do it really right and rethink your idea. Build a proper hot rod, not a rat rod. Shame to waste good parts...

 

Straight frame rails are not the problem. Axle with 6" drop is not the problem. Location of the frame in relationship to the front suspension is. Although dropped arms look to be a simple solution, location of the tie rod is going to change as your collection of parts becomes a vehicle.

Before you put the cart before the horse any further, do yourself a favor, take off the tie rod and dummy in the motor, transmission, radiator (I say dummy because you can't tell at this point where the power train needs to be for adequate ground clearance). Add about 350 pounds of sandbags in the cab. This will show you approximately (a little high maybe, but close) where the frame will be at static ride height with the existing axle, spring, and perch. At that time you can make an informed decision as to whether the perch needs to be moved down, and/or the spring needs to be changed, and/or if you need dropped arms. Don't forget to take into consideration where all the various components will be in relationship to one another at full bounce and droop.

Looking at your pictures, just for openers I'd be wanting to move the perch down enough to mount the spring around an inch lower than the front crossmember tube, but that's just me.

Answering a question not asked, on a chassis as low as you seem to be trying for, it would be easier to use a side steer setup to clear the other chassis components and engineer proper geometry to eliminate or minimize any bump steer.

 

This is what I was thinking too. I've seen lots of frames Z'd at the front of the body where it is hard to see. Also saw one recently where it was done close to the front wheels - that was in a recent magazine IIRC.

 

Yes... Don't start changing ANYTHING until you have a really good idea what your ride height will be will all the weight on the body. If you don't have all the parts, lay a pallet across the front rails and start by adding about 500 lb. about a foot in front of the firewall.

 

just for the record, my tie rod out front doesn't present a problem with the ackeman because I stretched the tie rod to make the telemetry proper....no mater how you do it, you still have to maintain proper ackerman telemetry...and YES, it's a driver...had it out crusin' the streets of Rochester TONITE....70 mph...hands off the wheel..straight as an arrow....lovin life.

 

Is this the car you are talking about? If yes, then the ackerman is way the heck off. Cruzin straight means nothing when talking ackerman.


If it has any turning radius at all, take it to a grass lot and go full lock, real slow. That sucker will plow dirt with one front tire just like a farm plow.

 

Telemetry? Is that related to the fusion defribulator?

 

laid 2 2x2 tubes across the frame. i let the engine rest on the tubing . without having the trans on the engine i can plainly see that there isnt enough room for the tie rod during suspension travel, even with dropped arms. if i z'd the front half of the frame and kept all my suspension as is will the z-ing solve this problem?
back to the drawing board................

 

I don't know about that, but I WAS wondering where the telemetry test van with all his equipment was parked, and how the hell "stretching the tie rod" works? Like a taffy pull, maybe? We won't mention the accompanying changes needed to the steering arms.

 

Looks like you need to zee the frame and raise it several inches in the front

 

Getting into major frame changes like Z-ing and C-ing is making this way too complicated, way too soon. Go back seven or eight posts and re-read my post again.

TAKE THE TIE ROD OFF before you screw it up. Get enough weight in the right places on the frame to replicate the approximate the weight it will carry in the finished vehicle. Get some chunks of square tube and tack weld them to your crossmember perch. Bolt your existing spring to the bottom one. Give you the clearance you need? If the answer is yes, mount the perch there. If no, keep adjusting the spacer stack until you get what you need.

Take a long enough chunk of angle stock to lay on your tie rod ends. With no wheels and tires mounted to the spindles place a floor jack under each kingpin. "Work" the suspension by raising one floor jack until the kingpin on the other side starts to "lift" off the other floor jack. Check your clearances. Check the other side by jacking it up. Any interference? If so, think about what you need to fix it. Changing the perch height again? Different spring? Maybe bending the tie rod ends up or down a little?

As they say, this AIN'T rocket science. Patience, checking everything, and above all, thinking it through can get you there. After you get the front end right, if the damn thing isn't low enough for you, THEN think about Z-ing and/or C-ing.

 

i took the tie rod off before i set the engine on the tubing so its still in good shape.the spacer trick is my next thing to look into. thanks for all the responses here.

 

Just to correct you boys that insist tie rod behind assures proper setup, but tierod ahead will result in setup/ackerman being incorrect; Those assertions are Lame-Brained;
Everything can be got right, or wrong, with the tie rod behind, or in front.

 

i just added an 1" 1/2 spacer betwen spring and perch, i now have room for dropped tie rod arms.i will either make a solid steel spacer or cut this perch off and make one that is lower on the front cross member.

 

This frame was so low we had to put the steering rod on the top side.

 

you guys are making me dizzy!

 

Here is a good article on ackerman
http://www.nationaltbucketalliance.com/tech_info/chassis/ackerman/Ackerman.asp

 

lol...

 

This is going to be really crazy...
run 2 drag links one on each side and no tie rod.
Don't ask me how...I lost myself trying to figgure it out any farther than that.
seriously though i like the high/rear tie rod idea the best

 

everyone seems to understand the ackerman theory but no one knows how to apply it to tie rods out front...read up boys, it's all about gettin educated...if done right, it works fine either way...if you don't believe me come to my garage and we'll go for a ride in my T....and by the way, I'm 51 and this ain't my first visit to the circus...lol

 

Took me a long time to understand that if I'm working too hard to do something, I probably shouldn't do it. There's a good reason for how things are designed on a chassis. Know the rules before you decide to break 'em.

 

I don't think we were questioning your ability to build an ahead of axle tie rod setup with proper steering geometry, only your "telepathic" ones

 

wow, this thread has been very informative for me. i have a spring behind set-up with my spindles flip flopped and tie rod out front. i was wondering if my set-up was a good candidate for dropped steering arms? or perhaps bend the existing?

 

I don't think that putting the tie rod behind the axle on that one would make much difference but the skimpy looking spring perch mounts scare the crap out of me. Remember that all the weight of the engine and front half of the car is riding on those two bolts and they are in shear as it stands.

 

On page #4 of this thread is the link to the article on the Ackerman principle.

http://www.nationaltbucketalliance.com/tech_info/chassis/ackerman/Ackerman.asp


Right now you are at the point reached in diagrams 3 and 4 . You need to keep going and get to the outcome in diagram 5.

Problem I see is that to restore proper Ackerman you are going to wind up with the tie-rod ends inside your brake drums.

Run some string lines from centre of rear axle up to the king pin lower side and project the straight line beyond that to see where that takes you.

 

Has been done before. Fergie tractors had this type of steering and some race cars as well . See link below at post 896.


http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=337192&highlight=vintage+midget&page=45