Just a quick thought on the Panhard bar instalation. This is the last fabrication item that you need to do because of how it operates. Unless you are an engineer-type and can figure the CG on paper. The panhard bar center needs to come close to the fore-aft CG line. closer the better. So the right way is to have the car assembled and do a CG location with scales. Anything else is just a guess and could hurt rather than help.
I'll post up some stuff if it happens they are now calling for rain. My truck handles really well but skinny bias plies,no power steering, large steering wheel, and not so great turn radius are gonna kill me.Anyway weather permitting Im gonna try it just for kicks.
Sometimes people want to turn a horse into a zebra...or a weasel, or.... anyway all sorts of things can be done. But the handling thing is a little subjective. How good is good? Do you want a real race car? Do you want to really compete? Do you want top build something that will score well on numbers (g's etc). My wife has a late model Alfa, I have a late model Ford and I think my roadster handles as well or better than either. In other words I don't feel my roadster is handling challenged and it has a similar layout to C9's. Re. engine setback, remember these cars have the engine set way behind the front axle centreline - way further back than in a late model car where the engine is right over the front axle centreline. The only issue I see is the unsprung weight thing and 9 inchers, steel wheels and all that are heavy! You also can't use all hot rods as exhibit A. Mainly because the fact of life is that not all are put together right. Some work, some don't work as well as they should or could. I also have a sneaking feeling that there is a prejudice against live rear axles generated by journalists in 'sporty' car mags and their like. Even more so from people who live in or are indoctrinated in the Euro way of the 'correct' ways of doing things. I await the bullets.
Prejudice against live axles, Ok maybe, but I could not blame journalists for my views, more personal experience of lighter european vehicles where the large mass of a live axle was found to hurt handling, Independant springing on all four corners was a big step forward, And while car makers have largely used the advantages to allow them to make cheaper cars rather than better it would be difficult to justify any arguement for the handling advantages of the Hotchkiss drive over even the crudest independant system. As I say here in Europe where cars have tended to be smaller and lighter, so the mass of that whole axle going up and down tends to give us greater problems than it will in the USA where larger machines and higher wieght are more the norm. For a 'Hot Rod' where lighter should be part of the aim the arguement for IRS and IFS giving better results becomes strong.
With "Hot Rod" being a key point here, how many independent rear axles can handle in excess of 500 pounds of torque? European or US....
Oh, absolutely...but still as a focused Traditional site we tend to lay the common sense of modern design aside and press on regardless. Without getting into carbon fibre, aluminium A frames and inboard brakes etc, theres still loads of room for improvement just thru basics! Many cars have been built that astound in the handling department despite having the ball and chain of antiquated suspension. Thing is...we aren't trained racecar drivers so the chance of us really taking any car to 10/10's is remote...but we can get closer to the limits at a slower speed with the old stuff and therein lies the fun!
about the same number as solid axles. maybe more, most non US major auto makers have made a high powered flag ship, and while I appreicate in the USA many of these are considered 'exotic' it not like they don't exist, just not as easy perhapes to lay one's hands on as the usual 9inch ford ( if you happen to live in the states ). Anyway rather than wishing to be branded as anti-Hotchkiss, I still think that weight split, weight transfer and polar momment probably have a far greater effect than all the trick suspension in the world, so in princible lowering, chopping, sectioning, and engine set back are all heading in the direction of making handling better, so in many ways the aims of the 'traditional hot rod' are not anti-good handling, even though the choice of suspension maybe.
Absolutely! I don't want to stray too far from the basic architecture of a traditional suspension, but I'd like to do everything possible in all stages of the build to make it a decent handling car. No, I'm not looking to build a racecar, and I don't plan on driving it at 10/10ths everywhere I go... but I want it to handle. Thanks again for all of the input guys!
The unsprung weight issue is far more important than other issues with IRS...it takes a lot of engineering to get actual tire positioning as good with IRS as you get automatically with solid axles! I'm just saying do some research on available rears. A light car justifies the expense of something like the midget all-aluminum QC or a hunt for some oddball light furrin car rear, as you are really pushing for light weight, and your 215 engine gives you extra latitude on rears you can use without automatic destruction. As an example from a racer...a veteran of the Danbury Stock car league that ran flatheads into the 1970's told me that every attempt to use 9" Fords to save $$ failed because of the handlig effects on the light coupes, and everyone ended up using QC rears with as much aluminum as they could afford! That was before you could buy aluminum everything for a 9", but at that point the price of a QC would start looking a lot better!
Well I just got home from running the autocross in my truck and I did pretty good considering what I was driving. I will start a new thread with video and pics later but I had a blast. For now I'll tell you there was me and a 67 mustang in my class and I won the class.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awdBGE8SbUI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IP6_l6pxOws I thought it did pretty good, but tall skinny bias plys don't hold the corners. I got to try Radials. Buflochp
The one I built in my tech artical is a good example of the heaviest QC buildable but they can be built light too, i doubt a v-8 weighs much more than a normal ford rear. there is no reason a v-8 rear cant be built live axle too, they did it in the early 50's track jobs with success, i'm not sure if they were differentialed or not but something to also look into
Can a traditional hot rod handle? Well enough to make the sportscar sanctioning bodies make rules to chase the hot rod hathens away. Take a look at my favorite hot rod, the Baldwin-Payne Special: http://www.tamsoldracecarsite.net/BaldwinSpecial2.html Lots of Jaguar and Austin-Healey guys hated to see that car on race day.
One more thing: Shocks work only across the travel of the suspension, so more travel is better [no camber change with solid axles] giving the shocks more milliseconds to work their magic. Adjustable shocks would be good so you can play with damping and avoid too-stiff springing. And realize that a smooth road is the best friend of solid axles.
The Jalopy Journal
