Register now to get rid of these ads!

Technical 36 Ford rear bones?

Discussion in 'Traditional Hot Rods' started by chaddilac, Dec 19, 2016.

  1. chaddilac
    Joined: Mar 21, 2006
    Posts: 13,860

    chaddilac
    Member

    Anyone use a set of 36 rear bones on a non-banjo axle? I've got a set and am planning in my head the suspension set up for my 32 coupe, but already have a 57 Ford f100 rearend and want to run it with those bones. I've looked and googled but haven't found much other than the ebay brackets to weld to the axle.

    Anyone got a link or pics of the same usage of the 36 bones?

    Thanks!!
     
  2. big duece
    Joined: Jul 28, 2008
    Posts: 5,981

    big duece
    Member
    from kansas

  3. badshifter
    Joined: Apr 28, 2006
    Posts: 3,195

    badshifter
    Member

    The brackets weld to the tubes regardless of banjo or any other rear end. There is no difference, other than the slight taper in the banjo tubes. The same brackets will work on any rear axle tubes. You don't have buy brackets, you can make your own.
     
    chaddilac and big duece like this.
  4. big duece
    Joined: Jul 28, 2008
    Posts: 5,981

    big duece
    Member
    from kansas

    Depending on the width spacing you use, you could use a '40 ford front spring for the rear. Rides a bit softer that the '40 rear spring. and will fit in the 32 crossmember without grinding. I have one for sale, NOS.
     
    chaddilac likes this.

  5. Given the angle the middle of the rear x member is leaning back at, you must be going to run a heck of a rake to bring it to level when finished!
     
    RICH B likes this.
  6. A torque arm should be used as the 35-36 rear bones are not strong enough on their own to handle and kind of power. They are the strongest of all Fords rear radius rods but they never carried power loadings and weren't designed to. JW
     
  7. big duece
    Joined: Jul 28, 2008
    Posts: 5,981

    big duece
    Member
    from kansas

    Looks like that rear crossmember could be moved around 180 degrees and the spring pack would set closer to home. The crossmember spring mounting pad needs to be on the same plane as the spring mounts on the rear bones.
     
  8. Ric Dean
    Joined: Dec 20, 2007
    Posts: 477

    Ric Dean
    Member
    from Central NY

    A torque arm should be used as the 35-36 rear bones are not strong enough on their own to handle and kind of power. They are the strongest of all Fords rear radius rods but they never carried power loadings and weren't designed to. JW

    Amen to that!
    … There are many other posts on the HAMB where 36 bones were ruined using them for other than the original intent. 36 Bones were engineered to be run with a Toque Tube not to twist etc. Build yourself some ladder bars for a 1957 3rd member and save those 36 Bones for us Traditional Rod guys. Sorry for the negatives man but you can’t go down to the corner store anymore and get dem bones. Ric
     
    26 T Ford RPU and big duece like this.
  9. big duece
    Joined: Jul 28, 2008
    Posts: 5,981

    big duece
    Member
    from kansas

    Overlooked but good advice. If you want that look, you do need additional strength.
     
    26 T Ford RPU likes this.
  10. metalman
    Joined: Dec 30, 2006
    Posts: 3,278

    metalman
    Member

    chaddilac likes this.
  11. alchemy
    Joined: Sep 27, 2002
    Posts: 15,758

    alchemy
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    I did it with a 50's pickup rearend in my 40 Ford, using a wishbone ball welded into the front. That car is still a project that's never been driven.

    My little brother did it as well with a 9" in his A pickup, and he has thousands of miles on his. He also welded a wishbone ball on the front of the 36 bones. He didn't install any additional torque arm, and has run the truck a few times down the Mokan strip without twisting anything apart yet.
     
    Kato Kings and chaddilac like this.
  12. chaddilac
    Joined: Mar 21, 2006
    Posts: 13,860

    chaddilac
    Member

    Thank you fellas!! You've gotten me on the right track now!!!


    Jalopy kid... what's the measurement between the shackle studs?
     
  13. chaddilac
    Joined: Mar 21, 2006
    Posts: 13,860

    chaddilac
    Member

  14. burl
    Joined: Nov 28, 2007
    Posts: 649

    burl
    Member
    from Minnesota

    9 inch.jpg using them on a 9 inch in my coupe.Need to finish welding everything after finishing mockup.I cut the stock bones apart at the joint,welded in a solid block with a notch for a solid 7/8 rod that fits inside the tube.Harv117 had a tech thread on doing this a while ago.Should be strong enough but will probably run a additional arm on the top to make sure
     
    chaddilac and alchemy like this.
  15. Good catch, holy spring bind batman!~
     
  16. chaddilac
    Joined: Mar 21, 2006
    Posts: 13,860

    chaddilac
    Member


    That looks good Burl!!
     
  17. I'm not sure. It's my friends car, and using an aftermarket socal spring that's narrower than a stock spring.
    I'm pretty sure in a stock setup they're 48" apart.


    Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
    chaddilac likes this.
  18. Marty Strode
    Joined: Apr 28, 2011
    Posts: 5,056

    Marty Strode
    Member

    I used 35-36 bones on my '40 PU chassis with a 66 F100 rear end (shortened 4-1/4" on one side) and used a 42-48 passenger car rear spring. The reason was, they are 1-1/2" shorter than a 35-40 spring, allowing more clearance at the rear shackle. I have used a 35-40 front spring on 32 chassis, but the ride was not that great, the So-cal spring is a better choice on a '32. IMG_3143.JPG IMG_3146.JPG
     
  19. alchemy
    Joined: Sep 27, 2002
    Posts: 15,758

    alchemy
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Marty did you add any other strut rod? Have you put the pedal to the metal?
     
  20. Marty Strode
    Joined: Apr 28, 2011
    Posts: 5,056

    Marty Strode
    Member

    I haven't had the time to complete that project, a few more got in the way. I do plan on adding a light truss to the arms, so I can burn rubber with reckless abandon!
     
    barrnone50 likes this.
  21. TexasSpeed
    Joined: Nov 2, 2009
    Posts: 4,618

    TexasSpeed
    Member

    Bass did on his hemi coupe..

    Kind of. He didn't use the whole bone, just the ends for both shock and spring placement.

    IMG_1482463069.801773.jpg
    IMG_1482463077.237245.jpg


    Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
  22. The37Kid
    Joined: Apr 30, 2004
    Posts: 27,254

    The37Kid
    Member

    chaddilac likes this.
  23. el Scotto
    Joined: Mar 3, 2004
    Posts: 4,352

    el Scotto
    Member
    from Tracy, CA

    Sam Strube has a post on here asking if anyone has ever actually broken a pair of properly engineered 35/36 bones and I'm not sure if anyone ever posted anything that was the fault of the bones themselves. I don't have a link but I remember reading it with interest.

    I'm running these on the '32 frame with a '66 Bronco 9". No seat time yet, still building.


    Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
    chaddilac likes this.
  24. Bones alone? Yep, bent and broken have been posted. I've seen them bent up whacking the floor. And once they bend like that, they stay bent.
     
    chaddilac likes this.
  25. A mate had some 3ft long on his Hemi powered T Bucket, they got a good curve to them over a few years. The longer they are the more chance of them failing due to them trying to lift the front of the car/truck. JW
     
    chaddilac likes this.
  26. Andy
    Joined: Nov 17, 2002
    Posts: 4,607

    Andy
    Member

    Here is some weird stuff. The lower you mount the bones below the axle , the lower the bending load. In fact, if the bones could be at road level, there would be no bending stress at all. It would be just thrust and drag.
    The tire is producing thrust and it makes a torque about the resisting point. As that point moves up, the bending load increases. Moving it down reduces the load until the point is at the same level as the thrust. Then there is no bending load applied.
    Free body analysis!
    I put a set of bone under a friends car and did not add a torque arm. It has a 383 sbc with an automatic. No bending . The bones are mounted low. It has seen 10 years of use.
     
    F&J and chaddilac like this.
  27. 1932tub
    Joined: May 31, 2005
    Posts: 395

    1932tub
    Member

    [​IMG]

    This is a 34 Tudor that I built back in the '70's. Had a 57 9" on 36 bones, a strong 351 and C4.
    Never looked like bending the bones despite drag racing and thousands of miles of use.
    Bones were standard length with a heim joint through the eyes mounted to the stock X member.
     
    stillrunners likes this.
  28. el Scotto
    Joined: Mar 3, 2004
    Posts: 4,352

    el Scotto
    Member
    from Tracy, CA

    Post pictures. Proof is in the pudding.


    Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
  29. It's all been posted before by me and other people. I'm not going to do it all over again. Again.

    And this won't be the last thread on the subject either, that's a certainty.
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2020 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.