Register now to get rid of these ads!

Is there a problem with this setup???

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by pjones, Oct 1, 2007.

  1. pjones
    Joined: Sep 8, 2005
    Posts: 16


    I am plotting and planning my '31 Sedan build....I have read a ton of posts regarding rearend setups....Frankly my brain hurts from all of the opinion, and counter opinion....I can actually see the point that everyone is trying to make....My plan does not include Split Rear Bones so that is out....I am not worried about conforming to traditionalist building (not there at least as it is going to be totally hidden), and I would prefer not to go through a bunch of 4 link 3 link stuff if I don't have to....Especially since I don't 100% get it....

    I found this in Choppermans coupe build.....I found him because of his new Sedan build.....Which last I saw was stalled with trouble locating the upper arms of the triangulated rearend.....Again why I was trying to stay away from it....

    With what I consider to be a great build (and most of the HAMB appears to agree) .....
    Why not just do this (see pics hijacked from Chopperman)? I don't think ayone objected or suggested not to due to potential failures (like I see all over the place with split bones)..And I as I understand it he's been rolling it around quite a bit and hasn't had a problem...

    Please Help....I want to get this resolved in my head so I can start melting metal together....And sleep at night!!!!

    <!-- / message --><!-- attachments -->
    <FIELDSET class=fieldset><LEGEND>Attached Thumbnails</LEGEND>[​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    [​IMG] [​IMG]

  2. That would be essentially like a ladder bar setup. With ladder bars, the axle can't twist side to side except for the slight bit of flex in the ladder bars and in the rubber bushings (if it has any). If one wheel goes up, the other wheel goes up. It might work, but the ride wouldn't be too nice. The weight of the car going around corners would put more load than usual on those u-bolts and they might twist loose or the rear of those bars might kink or something. If you want to have a ladder bar type of ride, it's probably easier to just put in ladder bars to begin with. In a 4-bar setup the bars are only in push or pull mode. In that setup the square tubing would have to hold up to twisting and prying in several different directions. Real ladder bars are triangulated for strength so the bars in a real ladder bar setup are also only in push or pull.

    I think the easy setup is to go with parallel four bars and a panhard bar. It's pretty straight forward. I made this one from scratch, but you can buy parts to make something similar from lots of places. You can probably even order a rear axle complete with the brackets for a four bar already in place if you're not comfortable welding stuff yourself.

    Attached Files:

  3. GrantH
    Joined: Aug 10, 2006
    Posts: 523


    I don't want to start another "conversation" about all this as I have done so already, but I wouldn't ride in a car with a 2 link. There is virtually no movement other than up and down. That also means that the pinion follow the rear end, bad pinion angle. Drag cars even have pinion angle problems, if that settles with you well.....then by all means run a 2 link.

    Or spend a little money, and time reading and buy/build a setup worth driving more than a 1/4 mile at a time. You could probably build a 4 link, for under 150 dollars if you got bushings/sleeves local, and notched your own bars, welding it yourself. The steel wouldn't cost you maybe 50 bucks or so.

    A parallel 4 is the same really as a triangulated 4, just a panhard bar added. I am personally run this on my truck when I get to that stage. They all get articulation where it's needed, and keep the rear where it's needed, including pinion angle.
  4. Rootie Kazoootie
    Joined: Nov 27, 2006
    Posts: 8,134

    Rootie Kazoootie
    from Colorado

    You're brain hurts, and you're asking for MORE opinions????

  5. pjones
    Joined: Sep 8, 2005
    Posts: 16


    Got it....Thanks...The last thing I want to do is start another war about how best to locate a rearend.....

    I just felt some mental relief when I saw that one.....I felt like I could throw that together without a ton of thought...Alll well and good...I will just have to go for it, and worst case re-do it if I blow it...

    Measure twice, cut once...Tack it so I can cut it loose easily...

    Measure again, cut again, etc....

  6. DualQuad55
    Joined: Mar 5, 2005
    Posts: 1,377

    from Epsom, NH

    RustyBolts and GrantH both bring up very good points. I ran a similar setup in the Buick a while back, although I had the 'links' welded to the rear housing. To make a long story short, I HAD to change the setup after it ripped out the second time, this time tearing the housing tubes through the seams (55-56 OLDS). This was largely caused bu the inability of the setup to 'roll' when cornering or goining over bumpy/uneven roads. For a strictly drag setup, it can work well if the pinion angle is setup correctly, account for suspension movement etc...
    I would not recommend this for the street though.
    I currently run an adjustable ladder bar set up. The pinion angle is a give and take situation-set it up to launch and hold under acceleration, and suffer under normal highway driving. I have it at a reasonable compromise, but not perfect in either aspect.
    Ladder bars are about the easiest way to go, but there is not much more involved in the four bar setups.
    Before I went to the setup you are thinking about, I might do parallel or quarter eliptical leafs.
    I am like many, willing to put up with a lot of discomfort etc... to make something 'work' on the street, but I think if you go this route, you will be doing it over to one of the other ways listed in the future-saving your self absolutely no time, effort or money in the longrun.
  7. Rex Schimmer
    Joined: Nov 17, 2006
    Posts: 743

    Rex Schimmer
    from Fulton, CA

    Do a 4 link with a panard or a triangulated 4 link, do not do the type that you have pictured! When you do that type of location, basically at ladder bar set up, you make the rear end housing into a big anti roll bar and it is really stiff so every time you go around a corner you are trying to twist the rear axle housing! Not good and it will handle like shit unless you are going in a straight line.

  8. the "eliterate"redneck
    Joined: Jun 26, 2006
    Posts: 341

    the "eliterate"redneck

    sounds like youve got a good idea on the fab part...and thats the hard part. good luck.

    oh ,my 2c. i love tri 4 link. like mustangs,old camaros.
  9. GrantH
    Joined: Aug 10, 2006
    Posts: 523


    redneck brings up a good point....

    look into old caddies, mustangs, and other manufactured cars. If you can get the links from them, and get some measurements mounting wise, it may be easier to setup and act correctly. Though, it's not HARD to do in the first place.
  10. Vergil
    Joined: Dec 10, 2005
    Posts: 785


    When I mounted the rear end in my '31 coupe I used the triangulated 4 bar link and works great but I think the 4 bar with panhead bar would be easier to build and If I build another one I would probably go that route.
  11. Hackerbilt
    Joined: Aug 13, 2001
    Posts: 6,251


    LoL...Hi Grant!!! :D

    I AGREE with you in this case...! :eek:
    Short, parallel arms suck, and will offer no articulation. NOT a great idea.
  12. pjones
    Joined: Sep 8, 2005
    Posts: 16


    I think I'll go the 4 bar route...I can figure it out....And the parts are easy to source.....I was just hoping I was overlooking an obvious simple solution...Perhaps not the best, but I wasn't building it to roadrace or drag.....

    This rig won't be under my A$$ more than 100 miles a year, but they don't need to be miserable OR dangerous miles!!!

    See I knew there was a reason that I don't see that more often.....Enough said.....
  13. The old Mustangs and Camaros had leaf springs in the rear, until '82 for Camaros, maybe '79 for Rustangs.
  14. f6fhellcat00
    Joined: Nov 20, 2005
    Posts: 21


    This setup works well Hello!!! 1966 to 1972 chevy trucks run this setup! The only thing wrong with your set up is that you need pinch it in together at the front mounts.

  15. The much longer truck arms,with big rubber bushings in front,
    that Chevy used can twist.The body can roll.

    That is why they are angled in towards the center.
    When the front pivot points are closer together,
    they act more like one point.Similar to what Ford used.

    Shorter pieces of rectangle tube,mounted parallel,
    don't want to twist.They are no different than ladder bars.
  16. striper
    Joined: Mar 22, 2005
    Posts: 4,498


    Not to make this debate fire up again but Henry was a cluey fella. If you can't use a torque tube and wishbones, you can certainly imitate the idea. The whole axle housing pivots from a single central point. Triangulate the axle top and bottom arms so the axle can't roll and bring those arms in to a central pivot or very close to it and it all becomes very simple with few moving parts.
  17. Goztrider
    Joined: Feb 17, 2007
    Posts: 3,066

    from Tulsa, OK

  18. Chopperman
    Joined: Sep 26, 2006
    Posts: 1,265


    Been running it for almost a year now with no problems.. Is their a better set up ? Yup, always is.

    I',m running a triangulated 4 link and coilovers in the sedan I'm building now. Of couse I only spent about 100.00 on the above set up and we all know what a bling coilover set up can run right?
  19. Eddie's chop shop
    Joined: Sep 4, 2006
    Posts: 592

    Eddie's chop shop

    I am still learning myself, but always willing to help. I am local too. Did my four link and am happy with the results. Drove the shit out of it today!

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!


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.