Well what a bit of thought! Thanks Bill!!!
I am truly curious and having just started my 58 project I decided to create
an informal survey
on front ends. I will be doing some type of IFS but being the engineer type
that I am I like to
study the subject to death before jumping in. Therefore if you would kindly
spend 2 minutes
of your time to fill out a survey I will collect the info and post the
results on a website and here
on oletrucks if the list MGR gives me the OKeyDOkey. here is the URL to
enter your info.
http://216.149.54.155/IFS_or_Solid.htm
Data collected (& Shared) is:
Truck Brand
Truck Model
Truck Year
Region of US
Region of World
State of front end (original or modified)
IFS Kit used
Clip used and from what donor vehicle
brakes used
hours total time
For those of you who worry about giving info online this survey is just that
and shared only between us.
I am not affiliated with anyone wanting to sell you timeshares or check
cashing locations. I'm just a guy
with a truck trying to make the best decision possible on my front end and
willing to share this collected
data with everyone else. I don't have enough time to "do it twice"!
Thanks
Pete
58 3100 (frame off custom)
62 Falcon Futura (Daddy's little red car)
62 Ranchero (pickup want-a-be)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill & Pam Whittaker" <whittakers@erinet.com>
To: "OleTrucks" <oletrucks@autox.team.net>
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 6:50 PM
Subject: [oletrucks] Thoughts on suspensions
> The ongoing discussion surrounding the virtues of IFS made me think (and
> that's dangerous) that maybe a broader discussion of all the options is
> in order. The following are my personal observations and I'm not going
> to make any judgments one way or the other about which is better. Ill
> just offer them up to stimulate thinking and a discussion of some of the
> options that are available to the average backyard mechanic.
>
> Ive always felt that when making the decision on what type of front (or
> rear) suspension to use one must first decide how they intend to use
> their car or truck once its on the road. In the case of old trucks, if
> you want an original truck that rides like an original truck then the
> solid axle is the obvious choice. Once rebuilt they will provide more
> than adequate service. If you're going to upgrade to a modern V-8 and
> still want to keep the original axle then common sense dictates at least
> a brake upgrade, dual master cylinder, and if the owner is so inclined
> power steering. Many would consider these modifications to be perhaps
> the best compromise between the old and the new, however others may want
> a bit more comfort. If this is the case there are several options.
>
> If you're going to use your truck as a daily driver or as a cruiser an
> IFS system presents several advantages. Remember there is a very good
> reason why modern 2WD pickups use an IFS. It's because this system rides
> and handles much better than a straight axle. If you want your truck to
> ride like a modern pickup then an IFS should be on your list of things
> to do, especially if you're upgrading the drive train. Now days custom
> kits specifically manufactured for these trucks are available from
> literally dozens of sources with a wide choice of brake systems and of
> course power steering. Some are better than others, and the old adage
> that you generally get what you pay for still applies, but none the less
> there are a myriad of choices available.
>
> The most popular of all these options seems to be the venerable Mustang
> II IFS. It has been suggested in a previous post that this suspension
> was designed for a light weight car and isn't really suited for a
> truck. Although designed for a car the Mustang unit is more than
> capable of handling the weight and stress of almost any street rod
> including trucks. When evaluating a suspension for suitability you have
> to look at what the system was originally designed to do and what loads
> it was designed to carry. Without going into a dissertation on the
> details of the design, let me just say this... the Mustang suspension is
> very strong. It was designed to carry the weight of a modern V8 mounted
> directly over the centerline of the suspension. This gives the Mustang
> suspension much more strength than you would think. As an example, the
> first time I used a Mustang II suspension system I was absolutely
> convinced that I needed the heavy duty V8 with air springs to handle the
> weight of the 454 I was going to install. As it turned out I couldn't
> have been more wrong. All that was required were light weight (4 cyl.
> Pinto) springs just as the manufacturer of the kit had suggested. Why?
> Because in most street rods as well as in our trucks the motor is
> mounted behind the centerline of the suspension. Every inch the center
> of the mass of the motor is behind the center of the suspension shifts a
> surprising amount of weight to the rear of the vehicle. Therefore the
> Mustang suspension winds up only seeing a fraction of the stress and
> weight it was designed to handle. Here's another example. I keep a
> spare set of the V8 springs (the ones mentioned earlier) around the shop
> to use in projects while they are under construction. In my '53 3100
> with a 354 hemi and TH-350 transmission in place, even my 250 lbs
> jumping up and down on the front of the frame barely forces the
> suspension to move. Additionally the springs are so strong that the
> lower "A" arms are at an extreme angle. Because the center of the mass
> of the motor is significantly behind the centerline of the suspension
> there just isn't enough weight to compress these springs more than an
> inch or two. For this truck (750 lbs of Hemi with air conditioning) a
> simple set of 6 cylinder without air Mustang springs will be more than
> adequate. So much for the strength of the Mustang II suspension.
>
> There are of course other IFS options if you don't like the Mustang
> setup. The Jag as mentioned in an earlier post is definitely a viable
> one. It's just not as easy to install and repair and you can't go into
> your local parts house and pickup new bushings or ball joints for the
> Jag suspension like you can for the Mustang unit. This is one of the
> drawbacks of using something different. On the other hand the Jag
> suspension definitely has more sex appeal than most any other conversion
> I can think of. Yet another option is the Pacer front suspension. But
> this unit has the same problems as the Jag when it comes to parts. You
> just can't get parts easily and I think everyone would agree that the
> Pacer system certainly lacks any kind of sex appeal. There are other
> options such as torsion bar suspension etc., but these require
> fabrication skills which are beyond most backyard mechanics abilities
> and I'm not going to go there.
>
> The next option is the sub frame. This isn't my cup of tea but for some
> people this is the only way to go. The sub frame has the advantages of
> a modern suspension system, good brakes, and all the mountings necessary
> for a V8 all packaged into a single unit. The drawbacks are that
> extreme care must be used in mounting a sub frame both for overall
> safety and proper suspension geometry. Also one must exercise good
> judgment in choosing a sub frame in order to end up with something that
> fits well and looks good. Nothing will lower the value of an old truck
> more than an amateurish sub frame installation. If you must go this
> route, pick carefully and have the welding done by a certified welder.
> Do not pick a sub frame that requires narrowing. The amount of problems
> you'll create by narrowing a sub frame are directly proportionate to
> every millimeter it's narrowed. You just don't want to go there. Keep
> in mind also that a using a sub frame will require significant
> fabrication when it comes time to remount the front sheet metal. Very
> often people seem to forget this little but significant fact.
>
> Perhaps the most drastic option is the complete frame swap. For me this
> would be a last resort. There are just too many options available to
> make an original frame ride and handle well to just throw one away.
> But, when you have a truck that has significant frame damage, either
> from rust, and accident, or just a previous owner's hacking with a
> torch, sometimes this becomes the only option. Again careful selection
> is the key. Just buying a donor car (or truck) because it's available
> and cheap won't do. Take all the measurements you can and pick a frame
> that closely matches your dimensions. Its not terribly difficult to
> make minor adjustments when mounting the cab either forward or back to
> adjust for an inch or two of wheel base difference but you want to keep
> these compromises to a minimum. The last thing you want is a wheel base
> that's too long or a track that's too wide, unless of course you're
> looking for that East LA tires outside the fenders look. In that case
> as the Pontiac add says, "Wider is better". Also just like the sub
> frame option, mounting the front sheet metal (and bed in this case) may
> require significant fabrication and alignment.
>
> Before choosing a suspension system, you the owner must decide what you
> want your truck to be when it grows up. Do you want an original truck
> that rides like an original truck or a cruiser that rides like a new car
> or something somewhere in between? You ultimately have to make that
> choice and you have to live with it. If you build your truck to satisfy
> everyone else, you are the one that is going to be the least satisfied
> with it.
>
> OK, I'll get down off my soapbox now.
>
> Bill
> '53 3100 Hemi
> oletrucks is devoted to Chevy and GM trucks built between 1941 and 1959
oletrucks is devoted to Chevy and GM trucks built between 1941 and 1959
|