Register now to get rid of these ads!

Hot Rods Model A body on ‘32 chassis WITH FENDERS- Help!

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by RiffRaffRoadster, Dec 24, 2018.

  1. RiffRaffRoadster
    Joined: Dec 24, 2018
    Posts: 450

    RiffRaffRoadster
    Member

    Well I am learning alot today!
     
    loudbang, Stogy and Blues4U like this.
  2. goldmountain
    Joined: Jun 12, 2016
    Posts: 3,103

    goldmountain

    Here is a picture of my behind the dash master cylinder setup that I made and I agree with those that say keep it on the firewall. It's a lot of fooling around to get a clean looking firewall. If you want a period looking dual master cylinder, go for that GM truck unit but make linkage on the backside that lets the brake pedal push 2 pushrods and use the clutch side as the other brake circuit. This however only works if you run an automatic transmission. IMG_1186.JPG
     
    loudbang and RiffRaffRoadster like this.
  3. Stogy
    Joined: Feb 10, 2007
    Posts: 21,194

    Stogy
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Hey those beefed up rear bones @Blues4U posted look pretty spiffy...I like that... @Blues4U any pics of those installed is that your handiwork?
     
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2019
  4. Stogy
    Joined: Feb 10, 2007
    Posts: 21,194

    Stogy
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    4590059133_aeaa9eb229_b.jpg
    I was just looking at your OP and it may have been mentioned but I believe you have a Hurst saddle mount up front with biscuit mounts...nothing wrong with that...is it still running a mechanical fuel pump at the lower passenger side near the mount?
     
    loudbang and RiffRaffRoadster like this.
  5. Blues4U
    Joined: Oct 1, 2015
    Posts: 5,946

    Blues4U
    Member
    from So Cal

    No, those are just from a google search here on the HAMB. There were a lot more pics, but all I get are red X's now. I can't find any pics, but I've seen some arms just braced with some bar stock welded to the bottom of the arm, the full length of the arm.
     
    loudbang and Stogy like this.
  6. RiffRaffRoadster
    Joined: Dec 24, 2018
    Posts: 450

    RiffRaffRoadster
    Member

    Yes on both. It is a Hurst mount and I believe he fuel pump is mechanical.


    Sent from my iPad using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
    dwollam, loudbang and Stogy like this.
  7. RiffRaffRoadster
    Joined: Dec 24, 2018
    Posts: 450

    RiffRaffRoadster
    Member

  8. RiffRaffRoadster
    Joined: Dec 24, 2018
    Posts: 450

    RiffRaffRoadster
    Member

    You can see a bit of it here
    IMG_2262.JPG


    Sent from my iPad using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
    Vic Walter, dwollam, loudbang and 2 others like this.
  9. Stogy
    Joined: Feb 10, 2007
    Posts: 21,194

    Stogy
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Here's Stogy showing where his chassis tech is lacking...:D

    So if Riff was to get the Fwd Cross mount pictured here (this setup looks to be whats in my Coupe) and beef up the original rear Bones and angle them in correctly would this suffice to accept the fwd end of the Bone? Obviously the originals are longer so do they require shortening or could you just move this bar fwd till they line up and weld it in?

    Note; There is a fwd Ladder bar mount also that's curved to drop under the driveshaft I guess that has similar mounts and may work better...OR the fella working on his car could just fab new mounts for the Bars inboard of the location it is in now on the existing crossmember...also it was noted way back that the rear axle/tires are not centered in the fender...How do you fix that or is it actually a camera angle?...



    Second question there is already mounts on the rear end can they be heated and angled in or does that have to be cut off and renewed...to the new adjusted angle? tour-1932-ford-pickup-presented-by-ford-performance-parts-24.jpg
     
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2019
    loudbang likes this.
  10. RiffRaffRoadster
    Joined: Dec 24, 2018
    Posts: 450

    RiffRaffRoadster
    Member

    IMG_2615.JPG

    You can see the welded mounts here



    Sent from my iPad using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
    dwollam, loudbang and Stogy like this.
  11. Stogy
    Joined: Feb 10, 2007
    Posts: 21,194

    Stogy
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Yes they are angled already...I wonder if that angle is correct for a center install and was mounted to the side but I suspect the angle should be correct to the original side frame mount.​
     
    RiffRaffRoadster likes this.
  12. Stogy
    Joined: Feb 10, 2007
    Posts: 21,194

    Stogy
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    RiffRaffRoadster and loudbang like this.
  13. Blues4U
    Joined: Oct 1, 2015
    Posts: 5,946

    Blues4U
    Member
    from So Cal

    As the saying goes, there's more than 1 way to skin a cat. There are different ways to go about mounting the radius rods. I posted links to a couple of threads that show how others have done it, but there are a lot more. Some time spent doing a search on this site and reading threads on rear suspension, or rear radius rods, rear radius arms. Read all you can find.

    These guys have a neat solution: https://www.hotrodworks.com/product/1935-1940-ford-radius-rod-mount-kit/

    They also have a torque arm you can use and then you don't have to beef up the stock radius rods. One end goes to the top of the diff, the other end mounts to one of the radius rods where it mounts to the chassis: https://www.hotrodworks.com/product/1935-1940-ford-torque-arm-kit/

    The torque arm will handle rotational forces under acceleration and deceleration, so the radius rods don't need to be beefed up.

    Also do a search on torque arms, you'll find a bunch more information that will be helpful.

    As I said above, there's more than 1 way to do this. It's all up the creativity of the builder.

    Some guys use a Johnny Joint to mount the front of the radius rods, that's another search term you can use. Johnny Joints are used frequently in Off Road 4 x 4 suspensions to provide a lot of articulation. Being stout enough to handle that abuse they can take the loads from a hot rod very well.
     
  14. Stogy
    Joined: Feb 10, 2007
    Posts: 21,194

    Stogy
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Thanks Blues....;)...Did you get that @RiffRaffRoadster...:rolleyes:...Good info...
     
  15. Hey Riff, I've been watching quietly from near day 1 and really am impressed by your ability to embrace a concept you apparently were not even aware of before coming here. Congratulations.
    The reason I am chiming in now is ensure you don't invest the time to try and incorporate this dual piston master cylinder concept suggested by Mr. Mountain. No disrespect as I thought this was a great idea a few years ago myself, and did just that. Here's the project https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/700r4-in-a-62-chevy-truck.677173/. It didn't work! After doing some math I realized I had doubled the area of the master cylinder piston face, which then required double the pedal force for the same amount of pressure at the wheel cylinders, in short, didn't stop for S#!t.
    Best of luck with your roadster, and thank you for letting us all tag along on your journey.
     
  16. I agree with Fan Attic, brakes don't need to be complicated just to do there job. I believe in K.I.S.S. We're talking about a Car at or under 2K lbs. and we all know by now that Locking up the Brakes is not a good idea. Biggest issues I've found with bad brakes is that the last person to work on them only changed some of the parts and didn't address the rest of the job. The next issues are the Mix-n-Match parts that were 1-800 supplied by some Book Smart bench racer.
     
    RiffRaffRoadster likes this.
  17. Stogy
    Joined: Feb 10, 2007
    Posts: 21,194

    Stogy
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    @RiffRaffRoadster here another take on this rebuild specifically thinking chassis level...on the approach...the builder your working with seems to be working on high end vintage cars and perhaps has worked on even vintage Hotrods.

    So back in the day many things were custom fabbed using a host of tubing, angle, welding, riveting and bolting.

    No two were alike. So this builder may have a very ingenious way of just getting it done in a tidy appearance...and really the essence is building with a thinking mind much as builders were back in the day...thinking is traditional...which does include some ruff around the edges as so many were...thinking the Kookie T...

    You just have to look at some of his custom fabbed or reproduced parts...if it looks respectable go with it sharing gleaned knowledge here...;)
     
  18. I agree with Stogy. It's difficult for a 90's builder to think like a Kid of the 50's. They've had it way to easy. We never had Trick of the Week stuff or 1-800 bolt on's. Wrecking Yards were our internet of parts. Few of us had Welders and Torches. I was one of the lucky one's thanks to my Dad and Uncles. They were a Bad influence on me.
     
  19. goldmountain
    Joined: Jun 12, 2016
    Posts: 3,103

    goldmountain

    Thought to comment on the beefed up '36 radius rod picture that Blue4U sent. There have been lots of comments on the HAMB about how much you need to beef these things up to withstand the torque so here is a picture from Rod&Custom #10 from 1979 of a '36 wishbone gusset on Tom Medley's '40 Ford. That car later morphed from buggy spring to twin semi-elliptical leaf and finally to Jag rear end so who really knows how well it held up but I copied that gusset on the '36 bones on my coupe. Hope it works out. Scan-190301-0001.jpg
     
    loudbang, RiffRaffRoadster and Stogy like this.
  20. Here's my take on that little gusset. All it did was move the fulcrum point a little further out on the bone. If it was going to bend at all before the gusset, now it will just bend at the end of Gusset. To me that was wasted effort.
     
    brad2v, Stogy, jimgoetz and 1 other person like this.
  21. jimgoetz
    Joined: Sep 6, 2013
    Posts: 423

    jimgoetz
    Member

    I think the idea of that gusset was just to make the place where the tube was joined to the forging stronger. I always heard this was the weakest point and if it failed it would be at the weld. I don't think this would do you any good if you have a non torque tube rear end. You need something to stop the axle from tryin to rotate.
     
    loudbang, RiffRaffRoadster and Stogy like this.
  22. goldmountain
    Joined: Jun 12, 2016
    Posts: 3,103

    goldmountain

    O.K. I humbly stand corrected. Nothing quite as good as first hand experience.

    Sent from my SM-T350 using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
    loudbang, RiffRaffRoadster and Stogy like this.
  23. Your right in that the Joint is a weak point. I have seen the Forged end separate from the rod before. Never as of yet in a factory closed drive system. If what your trying to do is make that specific joint stronger it takes a Band all the way around and overlapping the joint and welded to both sections. Do you think the 2 bolts holding the Forging, one for and one aft is any different than 2 bolts one above and one below the Axle Housing has any different effect on keeping the housing from rotating?
     
    RiffRaffRoadster and jimgoetz like this.
  24. jimgoetz
    Joined: Sep 6, 2013
    Posts: 423

    jimgoetz
    Member

     
    loudbang likes this.
  25. The radius Rods were designed to keep the axle housing square with the torque tube the torque tube kept the axle from rotating, while accelerating. Simple yet functional. This set up keep the car more flexible on the roads of the day.
     
    loudbang and jimgoetz like this.
  26. jimgoetz
    Joined: Sep 6, 2013
    Posts: 423

    jimgoetz
    Member

    No two bolts below the axle doesn't make anything stronger or very little stronger in resisting rotation. What you really need is a torque arm something like what Blues4U posted about.
     
  27. RiffRaffRoadster
    Joined: Dec 24, 2018
    Posts: 450

    RiffRaffRoadster
    Member

    loudbang and Stogy like this.
  28. goldmountain
    Joined: Jun 12, 2016
    Posts: 3,103

    goldmountain

    Somehow I knew that I would get called out on this one but I thought that it was an issue that Riff should be aware of with '36 bones. My take on it is that the gusset should spread the load, it's 3/8" thick and solidly welded in place so I should get away with it. The builder I copied is Kent Fuller who should have some idea as to what works with an open drive. On top of that, I drive like a little old lady anyways. This subject has generated lots of opinion on the HAMB.
     
  29. RiffRaffRoadster
    Joined: Dec 24, 2018
    Posts: 450

    RiffRaffRoadster
    Member

    just dawned on me it may not have been smart to post my VIN on here. What is the risk?
     
    loudbang likes this.
  30. mkebaird
    Joined: Jan 21, 2014
    Posts: 337

    mkebaird
    Member

    I don't see a problem as long as you've got a title with that number on it.
     
    loudbang, RiffRaffRoadster and Stogy 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.