![]() |
Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Home · Bulletin Board · Project Journals · Tech Article Wiki · Knowledge Base · Photo Gallery · Classifieds · Company Reviews · Calendar · T-Shirts |
|
|||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others
I have a 1931 Ford Model A 5 window Tudor Sedan. I will start on it this winter and I was wondering what front suspension is the best for a good ride? I want to use disc brakes in the front. I have seen a lot of Mustang 2 IFS set ups for this car, also some dropped straight axles such as the Pete and Jakes. I like the look of the P&J but how is the ride quality. Of course each manufacture says they have the best ride, but hopefully someone can share personal info on each type of set up. Thanks guys.
Steve ![]() |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Ride quality
The ride quality of any vehicle is dependent on having enough travel in the suspension to allow it to work..that and the selection of springs and shocks...
Now if a fellow puts the car right down in the dirt so there is very little travel of the axle or A-frames in the case of and independent suspension so there is only an inch or two before it hits the bump stops and then to top it off puts on some very stiff springs and stiffly valved shocks then that car will cause you to lose your dentures over a speed bump or railroad tracks.. Now if we put it together so we have a good amount of travel and can use a softer spring and shock combo then we can acheive a better ride.. To get a better idea..look at some of the offroad racers..some of those things have a foot or more of suspension travel and can take the whoop-de doos at a high rate of speed and still get a good ride.... It is all about how you make the design compromises in view of the "look" or the performance of the suspension system.. I do not think it woud matter too much if you went with the traditional beam or the IFS actually..at least as far as getting a good ride..Cornering and handling we get a better deal with the IFS that is if the roll centers and bumpsteer..as well as scrub radius is in the ballpark.. MY thoughts OMT
__________________
If it don't work it ain't pretty!!!! |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
re: Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others
I am in the straight axle camp..........on pre 1933 Fords. On 33 up Fords there is room for them to work and fenders to hide the ugly things.... The A arms cannot be parallel on a Model A and 1932 Ford ........with fenders on them. That's the only way the A arm can function better than a straight axle...........properly set up and parallel. A LOT of kits do not even get the A arms correct IMHO.. correct..........advertised as a BOYD built car..... No where near OK.......IMHO. Looks cleaner, and rides good All of the above images were taken from eBay.........BUT I have a straight axle under my 32's......... When the A arms are not parellel........the wheels will NOT stay flat on the ground when the suspension moves up or down. Just my nickel....
__________________
I went to the school of hard knocks ... where the tuition is high but the retention is exceptional ! |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
re: Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others
Flat and Parallel isn't exactly the best way to set up A-arms if you want the car to handle (corner) well. If you want to go in depth we could do that but there are MANY things you want to look at to design a suspension...even if you don't want do design it it helps to know some of the right questions to ask to see if the guys that designed the suspension know what they are talking about.
Last edited by Deuce : 07-05-2005 at 06:00 PM. |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
re: Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others
If you are running fenders then you might also want to consider the F-150 twin I-Beam IFS. I prefer the '78-79 units which are rear steer and most closely resemble a straight front axle. Here is a shot of the IFS on my pickup. You get the ride of an IFS and the traditional look of a straight axle. And you can also use air bags as was done on the pickup. (If you are interested in the twin I-Beam, there are more shots and a complete installation shown in my journal.)
![]() |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
re: Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others
Quote:
I agree with Deuce. On pre-33 cars there isn't enough room to run a Mustang II IFS and fenders unless you make some mods to the fenders to allow the upper "A" arms to clear. Pre-33 cars almost always work better with a straight axle, good shocks and a good set of springs. The only thing you really need to be aware of is if you use a tube axle you should use a 4 bar setup rather than single hair pins. If hare pins are used the axle may twist. If you use an "I" beam axle (like a Super Bell) then the single hair pins are OK.
__________________
Centerline HotRodsAndHemis.com "Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
re: Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others
Quote:
Handle and Corner........ was not the question....Ride was...... A top heavy Model A sedan with a short 103 inch wheelbase is not going to be a road race candidate.
__________________
I went to the school of hard knocks ... where the tuition is high but the retention is exceptional ! |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
re: Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others
Thanks guys, all of this is a big help. Sounds like the kit that I was looking at from Jim Weimer Rod Garage will not work, because I want to run the fenders. The ford Twin I beam as cboy had said looks good except I think I would need to cut it narrower to fit??? What do you guys think of This. Do you think I could run the fenders??? Also I would like a bolt in or weld in front suspension if I could. Thanks again
Steve |
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
re: Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others
Looks doable.......but I hate air bags.....what happens when one fails and you are in Broken Arrow, New Mexico ? ? I find the ride in a properly set up 4 bar straight axle ride pretty good. I have driven mine home from Louisville (almost 600 miles) in 1 day and went to a cruise in that night. I have a TCI 4 bar, and a 4 inch dropped axle under my 32 roadster and will have the SAME thing under my 32 3W....... Most folks get too large and heavy a set of wheels on the front ( and weight hurts the unsprung weight and KILLS the ride ) But it is YOUR Model A.........get some opinions, ride in a properly set up Model A and then decide........
__________________
I went to the school of hard knocks ... where the tuition is high but the retention is exceptional ! |
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
re: Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others
Deuce is that the TCI setup in the picture? And can I run front fenders with it? And do they make it to fit the Model A?
Steve ![]() |
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
re: Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others
YES........ It is a TCI setup and you can run fenders with it.....I took the photo from their web page...... www.totalcostinvolved.com The photo is a actual pic of a Model A set up from them..... TCI got it's start making Model A frames for street rodders..... They go to a lot of the major shows.........with chassis for display. They will be at Louisville at the NSRA NATS.......and others....I bought a complete rolling chassis from them for a 40 Ford........back in 2000. All the front end stuff under my 32 is TCI and I will be putting the same TCI stuff under the 32 3W........in a few months.
__________________
I went to the school of hard knocks ... where the tuition is high but the retention is exceptional ! |
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
re: Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others
One of the magazines (Rod and Custom?) did some test and compared handling of MII IFS equipped rods (all early 30s) and traditional straight axles. The IFS road about the same as the straight axle ON GOOD ROADS, better on rough roads. There wasn't a significant, testable difference in handling. In a slalom and skid pad both performed well with no significant difference. They figured the straight axle worked so well because camber doesn't change in turns. All the cars used good radial tires. Put bias ply tires on and the IFS would have performed significanly better by keeping more tire planted. Tire design has equalled things out a bit!
That said, Fatman makes a "vintage IFS". It's a tubular straight axle that's hinged in the center. A bracket bolts under the spring mount and the inner ends of the axle pivot from there. Works much the same as the twin I beam but smaller. If this is set up right with the correct camber when the car is at rest it should work great. Camber will be off a little on hard turns, but tires (60-70 series, anyway) will make up for most of that. The important thing is on rough roads one front tire can bounce without affecting the other and you still have the straight axle look. The kit is $649, but you have to have an existing tubular axle setup. Won't be as low as twin I beams either. Should be the same height as running a straight axle with transverse spring. |
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
re: Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others
Farna speak with straight tongue concerning the radial/bias ply tire difference. When I first got my '53 Chevy truck running in stock condition, it still had good tread on the old bias tires so I decided to run them. The truck handled like a truck! Got thrown all over the road by every crack in the -pavement and steered very hard. Once I put on a set of radials the ride and handling improved immensely and steering although still quite hard got somewhat better. In fact I am keeping the stock I-beam suspension on my ground up rebuild 'cause it works great and with the power steering I added the last shortcoming is overcome. Also can't beat getting 60,000 miles out of a set of tires. Try that with ANY independent suspension. Don't run anything but radials.
|
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
|
re: Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others
Just talked to Bob over at Jim Weimer Rod Garage, he said that there MII kit has the perches low enough to clear the front fenders, just have to modify the brace support. Has anybody used Jim Weimer Rod Garage kits, and if so did they work OK?
Steve ![]() |
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
|
re: Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others
Quote:
BUT is the top A arm parellel to the ground ? ? In the yellow 32 coupe car in the photo I posted ......the top A arm would clear the fenders.......... NO A arm kit I have seen can clear the fenders and have the upper A arm NOT at a big angle Just because someone sells something.............does not make it work...or be correct engineering wise. The Fat Man kit just adds about $650 to the price of doing a straight axle.....IMHO.....and actually stiffens the ride.......so I have heard. I can tell that it allows the front wheels NOT to be parallel to the ground .....unless the spring is just right and adjusted up/down correctly. The arc radius is half of what a twin I beam setup would be. Make your own conclusions.......
__________________
I went to the school of hard knocks ... where the tuition is high but the retention is exceptional ! |
![]() |
Back to top |
| This discussion has been added to the Suspension - Brakes - Steering Discussions category of the Hotrodders Knowledge Base. |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads for: "Front suspension!!! Mustang 2 or others"
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Chevelle front suspension refresh | mark2002 | Suspension - Brakes - Steering | 8 | 10-11-2003 12:02 AM |
| Mustang ii Suspension | 41fordcoupe | Suspension - Brakes - Steering | 14 | 06-11-2003 07:12 PM |
| Lowering Truck with torsion bar front suspension | jtbaca | Suspension - Brakes - Steering | 0 | 03-03-2003 08:09 AM |
| Mustang II Front End | PaddyWagon | Suspension - Brakes - Steering | 14 | 02-26-2003 04:22 PM |
| Front suspension - 42 Lincoln Continental | Yukondude | Suspension - Brakes - Steering | 1 | 10-20-2002 09:42 AM |