Register now to get rid of these ads!

Hot Rods Has anyone ever designed a 35-40 chassis setup that hooks?

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Roothawg, Sep 18, 2019.

  1. Roothawg
    Joined: Mar 14, 2001
    Posts: 18,689

    Roothawg
    Member

    I have been sitting and staring at my 36 Ford pickup chassis, wondering what the best setup will be for a street/track setup. Getting one to hook has always been a problem. Avoiding wheel hop, blowing the tires off etc.

    I have pondered the torque link setup that El Polacko has used on several hotrods. Just thinking out loud here. I'm no engineer, so any advice is appreciated.
     
  2. flamedabone
    Joined: Aug 3, 2001
    Posts: 4,475

    flamedabone
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    You have probably seen my Flamedabone Ghetto Torque Arm Kit (TM) It is hard to tell from the picture, but the small end is as close as I could get it to the driveshaft so it will still roll in corners or over big bumps.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]


    It completely eliminates the risk of wheel hop associated with a manual transmission but the car still lays rubber as long as you have your foot down. Would it hook with some drag radials? Who knows, probably not. Fun to drive though...

    -Abone.
     
  3. Russco
    Joined: Nov 27, 2005
    Posts: 4,064

    Russco
    Member
    from Central IL

    I like flamedabone’s torque arm set up a lot. Another viable option would be parallel leafs with Caltracs, I’ve seen some serious fast cars running that basic set up. .
     
    Roothawg, Tim and olscrounger like this.
  4. 19Eddy30
    Joined: Mar 27, 2011
    Posts: 905

    19Eddy30
    Member
    from VA

    A Real 4 bar installed correct and adjusted , you can make it spin or drag bumper , tire size does matter , but can be as small as 8 inch wide foot print , location of motor , gearing , torque, etc. each road /track surface is different so requires adjustments For the surface conditions @ that time
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2019
    Russco, Roothawg and Just Gary like this.
    Register now to get rid of these ads!

  5. lostone
    Joined: Oct 13, 2013
    Posts: 841

    lostone
    Member
    from kansas

    ^^^^^^^ agreed.

    If looking at the best option to get traction then a true 4 link is your best bet.

    Other options are a gamble, Chrysler bit and went fast with just "super stock" rear leaf springs, but with lots of factory experimenting and engineering. So anything can be made to work even to a certain degree just depends on how much time, money and effort you want to put into it.

    Have a local street 78 camaro with carbureted big block and 28" ladder bars that runs a 8:80`s in the quarter and hooks hard but it took us a lot of tuning and changing things experimenting to get it to do it.
     
    19Eddy30 and Roothawg like this.
  6. gary kessler 1932
    Joined: Apr 16, 2010
    Posts: 55

    gary kessler 1932
    Member

    adjustable 4 bar!!!
     
    Roothawg likes this.
  7. 4wd1936
    Joined: Mar 16, 2009
    Posts: 778

    4wd1936
    Member
    from NY

    Nascar truck bars aka Chevrolet truck, they work very well.
     
    Roothawg likes this.
  8. krylon32
    Joined: Jan 29, 2006
    Posts: 5,866

    krylon32
    Alliance Vendor
    from Nebraska

    I've done several 35/40 chassis over the years using both a buggy spring or coil over rear suspension with P&J ladder bars. They seem to hook up good and are just about indestructible. I do agree that the adjustable 4 bar rear is also a good choice for hooking up.
     
  9. Jerry Moreland's '40 Ford sedan hooked up to the tune of 9.35/148 mph back in 1985 at Fremont.:eek:
    I'm guessing it had a tube chassis & 4-bars::cool:

     
  10. Marty Strode
    Joined: Apr 28, 2011
    Posts: 4,016

    Marty Strode
    Member

    You beat me to it Gary ! As I remember it was an original frame with an Art Morrison 4 link rear.
     
    Roothawg, kidcampbell71 and Just Gary like this.
  11. Roothawg
    Joined: Mar 14, 2001
    Posts: 18,689

    Roothawg
    Member

    I like the idea of the torque link, I have been reading up on them for a year or so. I'm curious how you figure the swivel on the front? How do you figure the arc? Is it noisy or clunky?
     
  12. 19Eddy30
    Joined: Mar 27, 2011
    Posts: 905

    19Eddy30
    Member
    from VA

    The coupe & sedan where fast street ,drag ,Hot Rod car @ that time , Also , I can not remember witch of the two cars
    the sedan or red /orange coupe , One of them had a full cage that was Bolted in /together. NHRA Did not Like , can not remember if both cars where crashed
    After crash HotRod or Carcaft or National dragster did a wright up on how well it held up threw the crash
     
    catdad49 likes this.
  13. alphabet soup
    Joined: Jan 8, 2011
    Posts: 1,297

    alphabet soup
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    I have these on my car. Made some brackets on the chassis end. These allow it to slide back and forth. No bind. Works pretty good. I do have parallel leafs. Gene.
     
  14. Ned Ludd
    Joined: May 15, 2009
    Posts: 3,853

    Ned Ludd
    Member

    You have to plot your longitudinal instant centre. You want it on or just above a line connecting the rear tyre contact patch with a spot above the front axle at the height of the centre of gravity of the car. Do a search: this stuff has been covered on here before.

    My instinct is that a well-sorted triangulated four-link will deliver the goods. It needn't be a conventionally configured version: there are a lot of possibilities once you understand the principle.
     
    AHotRod likes this.
  15. Fat Jack's coupe crashed. Moreland's sedan is being, or has been recently, restored to it's former glory.
     
    Roothawg likes this.
  16. Petejoe
    Joined: Nov 27, 2002
    Posts: 10,078

    Petejoe
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Zoar, Ohio

  17. Roothawg
    Joined: Mar 14, 2001
    Posts: 18,689

    Roothawg
    Member

    I have looked at the triangulated 4 link. I may use this if I run a coil spring rear setup.
     
    Ned Ludd likes this.
  18. jimmy six
    Joined: Mar 21, 2006
    Posts: 4,562

    jimmy six
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Fat Jacks coupe crashed before the lights taking out the right side et/mph board. The faster it went it appeared to me that the rear end of-the car was lifting. It ran pretty good with Al Ventura’s big block and him driving. The added blower the next year really picked up its speed. I was at 3/4 track and watched it happen. Some air vents behind the rear window from under the car or a spoiler would have been an asset IMO.
    Our 1940 Chevrolet coupe rear started lifting at 150.
     
  19. I'm not FlamedABone obviously, but can comment on the front end of his torque bar. It needs to have that little link for adjustability as the length required changes with suspension travel. Otherwise it would have bind. The leaf springs arc around the front spring eye, which is considerably less distance from the rearend than the front torque arm mounting point. If the front torque arm mount was just the rod end, those two arcs would be fighting each other. With the small link, it allows the torque arm to not create binding, but does allow it to hold the torque reaction from the rearend trying to rotate.

    To take this discussion a step further, if you have a torque tube drivetrain like an old Ford had stock, and you split the rear wishbones and mount them to the frame, you have the same binding problem.
     
    Roothawg likes this.
  20. flamedabone
    Joined: Aug 3, 2001
    Posts: 4,475

    flamedabone
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    These are CalTracks from Calvert Racing.

    CalTracs.jpg

    The guy who owns Calvert Racing has a Fairlane that is in the 8s on leaf springs and CalTracks. Simple, easy, effective. The only drawback is the front mount hangs down a bit for a traditional hot rod.

    -Abone.
     
    Roothawg likes this.
  21. Roothawg
    Joined: Mar 14, 2001
    Posts: 18,689

    Roothawg
    Member

    Understood, what I am talking about is how to determine the amount of arc and travel so that you don't end up with a noisy slapper bar. I have seen some that use shackles for the pivot point. Some have bushings like this one. https://www.summitracing.com/parts/upi-2203-b?rrec=true
    I have read that a lot of the complaints from the G body crowd is the noise.
    I also would like it tucked up out of the way, not looking obviously out of place.
     
  22. Andy
    Joined: Nov 17, 2002
    Posts: 4,449

    Andy
    Member

    I have used a single torque arm and a locating rod on my roadster for 30 years. The torque arm is engineered to use the upward force of the end up push up on the right side of the frame and there fore to push down on the right tire.
    It balances the tire load side to side and also eliminated body torque over. You can run thru the gears and the body never leans. It also can not bind.it gives a lot of lift on launch and also anti-dive when braking. It hooks up great with the lift and equal tire loading. I have never needed a posi since using the design. I attach pics of a frame with the design.
    The end of the torque bar has a welded on sleeve for a rubber bushing. It has no threads in bending
    . frame 3.jpg frame 2.jpg
     
    AHotRod and kidcampbell71 like this.
  23. Roothawg
    Joined: Mar 14, 2001
    Posts: 18,689

    Roothawg
    Member

    Andy, I don’t get it. I’m a simpleton. What is the advantage of a single over 2 if they intersect at a single point? I would think the end result would be the same as a ladder bar setup. When I am talking torque tubes, I am referring to one that runs parallel to the driveshaft, like Flamedabone. It isn’t a new design, Ford new this in the beginning, but the late model autocross guys are revisiting this technology. It plants the tires pretty hard, from what I have read.
     
  24. Andy
    Joined: Nov 17, 2002
    Posts: 4,449

    Andy
    Member

    The offset load point is what makes everything cancel out. You could make two torque arms and have them meet in the center like Henry did. The offset cancels out the frame twist and the unloaded right tire by using the axle wind up to reverse the loads.
    I had a 375 hp Chevy II, 4sp posi and it would just spin the tires. I did a version of this and the car would launch and go straight.
    I put the same basic thing under my 3W. It has been there for almost 50 years. The whole car lifts on launch and hooks.
    PS, There is a bit of math to get this right.
     
    AHotRod likes this.
  25. TA DAD
    Joined: Mar 2, 2014
    Posts: 101

    TA DAD
    Member
    from NC

    I am putting Super Stock springs on a 47 Studebaker truck. I have things clamped/bolted together as I sort it out. I will probably use sliders on the rear instead of shackles. The springs marketplace 010.JPG marketplace 012.JPG marketplace 013.JPG are stiff and the right side is biased and it will sit higher than the left if you run the springs paired the way they are designed. You can buy different weight springs and they all have a 20 inch front segment. The springs in my photo are stock A body ( Duster ) springs.
     
    Roothawg likes this.
  26. Mike Colemire
    Joined: May 18, 2013
    Posts: 956

    Mike Colemire
    Member

    A friend had a 39 plymouth sedan with a stout 421 sbc in it. He had leaf springs under the rear with the sliders on the rear. That thing would hook on a dirt road. Can't remember what spring he used.
     
    Roothawg likes this.

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.