The Jalopy Journal
Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by squirrel, Nov 27, 2017.
There's a solution to every problem!
True all. Coil overs became standard equipment by 68.
Yes, it requires more chassis, therefore weight.BUT, do you want a flexible chassis or a stiffer one ?
You will still need to support the rear of the body
How can you make it street worthy AND roadworthy?
How can you make it safe?
How "authentic" can you afford and how 1966 do you want to go?
What kind of motor will you build? A 426 can make all the power you want, but what DO you want ?
Unsprung weight is the enemy here. You can put the weight where you want it.
Too light might not be good. Remember these cars DID FLY, though I doubt you are going to get 160 mph!
Probably! He carries as much as 300 pounds in that trunk!
It did happen on all the factory cars though. All that ballast didn't help1
I know, totally irrelevant but I couldn't help myself.
None of this has much to do with what's being built here but here's a slew of fun facts.
A theme throughout is discussion about weight reduction, both sprung and unsprung.
This is from # 63
The Hemi Under Glass was intended to be a go fast exhibition race car.Like it's cousin, Little Red Wagon it's tendancy to wheelstand quickly became the focus!
Your "Twilight Zoning" yourself. Paper and pencil is nice but science doesn't work that way. It will evolve.
It needs to be stiff enough to support the suspension, and other concentrated loads. The cage will help the stiffness considerably. It helps to attach the loads within the confines of the cage.
There isn't much load at the back of the car, just the weight of the body, and the chute attachment point.
I can afford more than I want to spend
I'm not sure yet how far I want to go. I know the car won't be all 1966, and I know for sure it won't be all race car. I'd like to do as much 1966 as is reasonable....I'm pretty happy with how Plan II represents the period. I don't know that I'll go that far with this car.
I want as mild of motor as I can get away with. That means making it do less work, by making the car as light as possible, and having everything about the car all work as well as possible.
I read the Plymouth Dealers Association article again recently... I know it will be a fun ride...
Mopar strap style regulator will.
I'm planning on up and down windows. It will be easier to do that with a hardop, than to make sliders work, anyways.
Here's a crappy scan pf The Dutchman's rear springs!
I hear ya Jim!
It's certainly a fine line. The Hemi Cuda wasn't the only car to fly! In HRM Jim Mcfarland called for a BAN on funny cars because of this! In 66 or 67!
Well if you can't then I guess it can't be done.
If you could go back to that era and take with you every advancement in drag racing and the almost common sub 9 second street cars and build a car to be competitive and win how would you build it? There weren't many rules. Would you have the discipline to possess that knowledge and not use it to win? Is it cheating if you're smarter than the other guy?
Just to get your wheels turning, not suggesting you do your build this way as I'm sure you'd leave the AC for the next guy.
This car runs 8s.(projected) looks stock-ish, sanitary engine bay, they hid the goodies. The package could be wrapped in any body configuration or build style you wanted. Much cooler if you could build an 8 second street car with all old school parts and period technology doing it today- nobody could or did back then.
That's the thing...I don't really get excited about all the advances in drag racing over the past 50 years.
I was thinking about this recently. Seems to me, right about the time they introduced the Pro Stock class (1970?) things got boring, because all the cars pretty much worked the same way. Before that, it was "run what you brung". It was fun, it wasn't work. But Pro means Professional, it's a job...it's not fun any more.
Curses, foiled again!
My feelings EXACTLY!
In the old days nobody was sure what would work and what wouldn't!
AND there was more than one way that worked.
It didn't cost hundreds of thousands ( or the equivilent ) to go racing.
Millions for nitro.
Cars were great looking, had personality,NAMES. drivers weren't corporate stooges, from 65 or so until 70, nearly every week was a different story! TRULY was! ET's dropped about TWO SECONDS for AA/FD cars, THREE or more for funny cars. Tires SMOKING, wheelstands, every damn thing you can think of!
And 1966 was a watershed year.Half smokers, half slipper clutches.
It was exciting as hell, if you missed it you can't begin to imagine.
DOZENS of dragstrips everywhere, HUNDREDS of nitro cars, more THOUSANDS of altereds, other dragsters and gassers!
You could drive a cool car to the track then.Watch cars very similar to yours race.
In many ways, technology sucks, has taken ever ounce of humanity out of everything, certainly racing.
I said earlier, 1000 FT 3 second 330 mph.Yawn.
They have managed to make that boring!
Wally Parks fought for many years to keep racing from being professional, now we understand why.
I think my eyes are going to Hell. No matter how hard I try I can't see the front half of the rear springs on the Flying Dutchman's car. I do see a coil spring in front of the shock and what may be the front half of the spring really looks like the Trailer edge. I honestly can't see any spring leafs in front of the Axle Housing.
I can't see for squat. I can't see either. I even thought it had a coil spring.Who the hell knows!I do have SOMEWHERE a magazine that shows this car under construction,It was the same basic car as the topless one. Semi elliptic springs were VERY common then, although they would be backwards here! Almost every gasser used them! Including the Flying Dutchman Willys.
I'm going to try to get ahold of Jay Howell to get his thoughts on this, IF he has any.So far the pro car builders I have asked have begged off saying Jim is as good as they are and will make the best decision.
We need all the Car Craft, Drag Strip and Popular Hot Rodding magazines from 65 to 67!
I agree, there don't seem to be any springs ahead of the axle. Don't worry, it's not you!
Graebers car, leaves.
I KNOW This car has been restored! But NOBODY ever takes pictures of suspension! Be interesting to see!
I remember the chassis on this thing, very large.It might have been Howell.
AHA! What does this tell us? I dunno!
Thanks guys, I feel better now. Makes me wonder if the Axle is solid mounted. Would like to see a side shot of it on launch. Does the tire profile change in the opening with front tires in the air.
Exactly, the first Pro Stockers were OK, but when they started calling non-production cars, ie V8 Vegas and the like, Stock is when I lost interest.
And I'd be careful about how much inner structure you remove around the rear window... unless the cage and the rest of the frame stiffen the body up a lot. You'll get a lot of flex in the area where the top meets the rear window and quarter panel. As I learned with my OT '67 big-block Barracuda; first the paint and then the sheet metal started cracking in that area.
Makes me think it was one step behind being a Flopper
Semi - elliptical
Quarter elliptical is the word
I think in this picture you can clearly see shackles in the rear
Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
^^^^^Backwards traction bars. Pulls down rather than push up.
Separate names with a comma.