Register now to get rid of these ads!

Technical Acceptable front axle spring shackle angle

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by 01mikep, Feb 5, 2016.

  1. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 18,389

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Of course, if it is a gasser the chassis should be level, not nose high, as were the rules of the class.

    The nose high thing comes from pictures of cars mid-launch, and ushered in the "steet freak" fad.
     
  2. Fordors
    Joined: Sep 22, 2016
    Posts: 3,724

    Fordors
    Member

    I don't recall there being a rule about setting the chassis up level, but there was the 24" rule. The c/l of the front of the crank could be no higher than 24".
    Think about it, a guy could build a chassis with the car sitting level but the crank nose angled up to 36".
    Not a Gasser, but look at photos of Pure Hell when it ran the SBC, the engine angle was extreme, and some Gassers were set up the same way BITD.
     
  3. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 18,389

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Someone must have an old rule book.
     
  4. 01mikep
    Joined: Jul 26, 2014
    Posts: 125

    01mikep
    Member
    from California

    I'll bring an old thread of mine back up for a moment. I haven't posted or done anything car related in the last 3 years or so as I've been stationed out of country again. Now that I'm back stateside again I should be getting this car out of storage this month.

    I haven't changed the spring pack out yet so angles have not changed (get to it before it's a driver but it serves fine to roll the car around for now). No, it's not a trailer spring, Morse spring company made it based on measurement and weight load numbers I gave them. My measurement was longer than needed. Next will be shorter.

    I did make a lot of changes to the steering as several recommended. The tie rod is now behind the axle and Ackerman angle is correct.
    image.jpeg
    image.jpeg image.jpeg image.jpeg
    These are the only pictures I have of the front suspension on hand till I pick the car back up.


    Not sure what you are getting at here?


    Below are pictures I saved of cars I liked and wanted to replicate some of the look of when I put the above car together.
    image.jpeg image.jpeg image.jpeg image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
     
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2019
    clem likes this.
  5. clem
    Joined: Dec 20, 2006
    Posts: 3,411

    clem
    Member

    Whilst I would always prefer the tie rod behind the axle, I was of the understanding that correct Ackerman could be achieved with the tie rod in front of the axle.

    Hard to tell from photos, but it looks like your shackle angle is no different ?
    Not sure if you need more or some diagonal bracing to chassis rails ?
    Otherwise, looking like a neat car ! Love the colour contrasts and simplicity of the whole project.
     
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2019
    01mikep likes this.
  6. oj
    Joined: Jul 27, 2008
    Posts: 6,257

    oj
    Member

    Is it the camera angle or is the axle mounting offset to the right? The distance from batwing to spindlestub on left looks shorter than the batwing to spindle stub on the right.
    If you intend to actually make a pass down the track with that you need to read a rule book and get some SFI chassis specs before you go any further.
     
    lothiandon1940 likes this.
  7. 01mikep
    Joined: Jul 26, 2014
    Posts: 125

    01mikep
    Member
    from California

    Correct. No change to the spring or shackle angle has occurred yet. Car went into storage before I sourced a shorter spring.

    Must be the angle as the distances are the same on both sides.
     
    clem and oj like this.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 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.