Register now to get rid of these ads!

Technical Anti chatter rods . Use em or lose em?

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by bct, Jun 8, 2018.

  1. bct
    Joined: Apr 4, 2005
    Posts: 3,099

    bct
    Member

    They seem like they would be necessary 20170701_193831-1.jpg

    Hard to find I may have to make some.
    Opinions?
     
    chryslerfan55 likes this.
  2. hotrawd
    Joined: Jan 24, 2007
    Posts: 193

    hotrawd
    Member
    from lima,ohio

    Without the rods your engine will move forward in the rubber mounts when the clutch pedal is depressed.
     
    LOU WELLS likes this.
  3. Bursonaw
    Joined: Jun 19, 2011
    Posts: 152

    Bursonaw
    Member

    In my experience they do not eliminate clutch chatter completely but they do make a difference.




    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
     
    olscrounger likes this.
  4. Henry probably had a reason.
     
    LOU WELLS likes this.

  5. alchemy
    Joined: Sep 27, 2002
    Posts: 17,086

    alchemy
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

  6. Use them they will stop forward movement of engine . I had them in my dirt modified stock car .
     
  7. AngleDrive
    Joined: Mar 9, 2006
    Posts: 973

    AngleDrive
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Florida

    Definitely use them
     
    HellsHotRods likes this.
  8. cpldale
    Joined: Aug 17, 2006
    Posts: 339

    cpldale
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Naples, FL

    Old Henry Ford was a cheap bastard. He didn't put anything in his cars he didn't have to. My advice is USE THEM!
     
    Just Gary and Boneyard51 like this.
  9. 3340
    Joined: Jun 4, 2010
    Posts: 578

    3340
    Member

  10. Boneyard51
    Joined: Dec 10, 2017
    Posts: 5,069

    Boneyard51
    Member

    I agree that Henry didn’t put anything on his cars if there was no reason, but that true of about everything made. Look at any part, every bump, hole, machined surface has a reason. No manufacturer ever said “ let’s drill an extra hole, here, for shits and giggles”. I used to machine/make parts for the oil industry, every thing done to a part cost money and is only done if necessary. Just something I’ve observed over the years.

    Bones
     
    pitman and Just Gary like this.
  11. bct
    Joined: Apr 4, 2005
    Posts: 3,099

    bct
    Member

    Thanks all . I'd say I better get fabricating.
     
  12. The 39 guy
    Joined: Nov 5, 2010
    Posts: 3,085

    The 39 guy
    Member

    I say use them. I do and have no clutch chatter.
     
  13. 51504bat
    Joined: May 22, 2010
    Posts: 2,928

    51504bat
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    When I first got my '39 p/u with an 8ba it only had one that the PO kind of mickey moused in. When I put in the new 8ba I left the poorly fabbed one out. I had some clutch chatter, mainly in reverse. I finally got around to installing both rods and no more chatter. Just my experience.
     
    bct likes this.
  14. King ford
    Joined: Mar 18, 2013
    Posts: 1,469

    King ford
    Member
    from 08302

    Hey
    Hey Hank!, are you an old READING racer or a GRANDVIEW/ Big diamond guy?
     
  15. Hnstray
    Joined: Aug 23, 2009
    Posts: 12,097

    Hnstray
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Quincy, IL

    I think the so-called 'anti-chatter' rods serve to do a bit more than prevent engine movement when depressing the clutch pedal. Torque tube drive vehicles in general transmit driving forces from the running gear to the chassis in some manner. Motor mounts, trans mounts and rear axle leaf springs in the case of Chevy.

    The rods in question here, as used on Fords, also serve to transfer drive line propulsion to the chassis/body and reduce the shear loads on the engine and trans mounts. In both cases, transfer of drive line forces and clutch linkage stabilization, the rods perform similar, yet distinct, useful functions.

    Ray
     
  16. Use them. I fabricated a set for the Chevy II engine in my AVATAR. Ford usually didn't put things in his cars that weren't necessary, something about spending money.

    Charlie Stephens
     
  17. bct
    Joined: Apr 4, 2005
    Posts: 3,099

    bct
    Member

    would 32 chatter rods work on my 8ba?? . would the length be correct? what about the diameter
    ?
     
  18. Post the question on fordbarn or just wait until you get to that point. They should be easy to make using threaded stock. I don't know if the 8ba block has provisions for them or if you are going to have to fabricate something to attach them.

    Charlie Stephens
     
  19. Dak Rat
    Joined: Mar 8, 2006
    Posts: 443

    Dak Rat
    Member

    8BA blocks don't have provision for the rods. You must fabricate brackets that bolt to the side of the bell housing bolts in order to use the rods.
     
  20. bct
    Joined: Apr 4, 2005
    Posts: 3,099

    bct
    Member

    Thanks . Im away from the shop and that helps.
     
  21. bct
    Joined: Apr 4, 2005
    Posts: 3,099

    bct
    Member

    Found these pics in the classifieds. Future reference for me and ?
    downloadfile-22.jpg downloadfile-10.jpg downloadfile-19.jpg downloadfile.jpg
     
  22. 19Fordy
    Joined: May 17, 2003
    Posts: 7,270

    19Fordy
    Member

    Here's a few photos of the 7/16 in. dia. anti-chatter rods I made when I installed an 8BA in my 40 Ford.
    I had to weld ears to the 50 Merc bell housing and welded tapered style connectors on the other end for the frame.
    Make sure they don't get in the way on the clutch and brake pedal when depressed. You can also find after market style anti chatter rod kit that bolts to the bottom of bell housing and hooks on to X member. Fordbarn site shows how to make one. You can also buy brackets that bolt to your bell housing. read about it here.
    https://www.fordbarn.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27566&highlight=anti+chatter+rods
     

    Attached Files:

    bct likes this.
  23. bct
    Joined: Apr 4, 2005
    Posts: 3,099

    bct
    Member

    Thanks for takin the time to show me all that.
     
  24. 55styleliner
    Joined: May 11, 2015
    Posts: 558

    55styleliner
    Member

    It’s my understanding that they are not needed on an open driveline. When releasing the clutch with a closed driveline, the torque on the wheels will push the engine forward. That in turn messes with clutch disengagement, thereby causing chatter. So whether you need them or not is answered by which type of driveline you are using, open or closed. My AV8 with open driveline does not have them and I do not have issues with engine movement
     
    Hnstray likes this.
  25. bct
    Joined: Apr 4, 2005
    Posts: 3,099

    bct
    Member

    Yes . I never mentioned my driveline is closed.
     
  26. Kerrynzl
    Joined: Jun 20, 2010
    Posts: 2,283

    Kerrynzl
    Member

    This man speaks the truth ^^^^^

    On a closed tube , the forward propulsion [axle thrust] needs to be transferred into the frame for the car to move forward [via the back of the gearbox]
    If the driveline had parallel leaf springs and a slip joint driveshaft ,the front 1/2 of the leaf springs do the same task.
    A 3600lb car accelerating at 0.3 G would have 1080lbs forward thrust transferred into the frame .

    I doubt if the clutch pedal would have that much force against it
     
  27. mkubacak
    Joined: Jun 20, 2005
    Posts: 199

    mkubacak
    Member

    What years were these used in stock applications?
     
  28. Grandview was my track .
     
  29. 55styleliner
    Joined: May 11, 2015
    Posts: 558

    55styleliner
    Member

    I believe all Ford V8 cars with closed drivelines had them originally. Model As had rigid mounted engines and did not need them.
     
  30. Bruce Lancaster
    Joined: Oct 9, 2001
    Posts: 21,682

    Bruce Lancaster
    Member Emeritus

    Question...I see an early Ford frame, an early Ford transmission, and an early Ford rear end. I see the rear brace rods or fabricated equivalents, which are pretty strong but not what I would like to see acting as the rear suspension link, pressed into service as the swing arm for the rear suspension.
    WHY??? The general reason for dumping the torque tube is to find a quick and easy way to use a modern rear and trans. You are doing work here for a weaker locating system and one that, if those rods don't end in a single ball joint, is still subject to twist that the much stronger torque tube eliminates.
    The Torque tube is the suspension locater, with the angled rods serving as simple braces of the tube-to-banjo installation. They seem similar visually to the front wishbone, but the front stuff is meant as a suspension system and is radically stronger than the rear bones, which were never meant for high loads. I see NO reason for any of this in an all-Ford chassis.
    Many early V8's used the anti-chatter rods...but the goal of blocking fore-and-aft engine movement was handled '42-8 by simply making the rear mount rigid in that plane. Hurst (which supplied the mounts for many thousands of OHV engine swaps in early Fords) supplied a dirt simple and ridiculously cheap substitutes:
    [​IMG]
    Look closely at the nut atop the central bolts on the mount biscuits. The device is simply a piece of steel strap bent 90 degrees, drilled with two holes, one of them tapped for a tension bolt. I've never used those but have heard that they function well. You'll need just the strap, a vise, and one tap...
     

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.