Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board - Reply to Topic
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > Tech Help> Suspension - Brakes - Steering> Adapt midget suspension to rod?
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Thread: Adapt midget suspension to rod? Reply to Thread
Title:
  
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
11-13-2012 06:01 PM
azlogger thank you both. i might just do it that way somehow i like it.
11-10-2012 07:32 PM
Chopt 48 Mike Minnet (sp?)out of the Dallas area had quarter epileptics on all four corners of his T bucket in the early 70's and it seemed to work great and maybe better than some of the other suspensions available for similar rods at the time.

There might be an issue if you had long springs or a lot of difference in length between the spring and the upper bar. Most of the ones I have seen use a reasonably short spring that is also fairly flat without a lot of curve to it.
11-10-2012 06:37 PM
OneMoreTime it will work fine on the rear..just look at how you make the control arms so the pinion angle does not change all that much..

Sam
11-10-2012 05:58 PM
azlogger i realize i'm bringing an old, dusty thread down from the attic, but i am just wondering if anyone sees a serious problem with this setup for the drive axle. Will the throttle/ braking torque cause the car to ride up or down because of the extending of the spring? this will also cause the pinion angle to change a little...
06-19-2007 07:06 PM
cboy
Quote:
Originally Posted by robin58
I wasn't sure whether the bar from the top of the mount on the axle maybe was intended to serve that purpose?
I believe that top bar (arrows) is the friction shock.

It is not attached to the axle, just rides on top as I recall.
06-19-2007 06:05 PM
oldbogie
Quote:
Originally Posted by cboy
Sorry if I didn't ask my question clearly enough. I wasn't asking what this setup WAS (it's pretty clearly stated in my first sentence that it's quarter ellipticals) nor was I asking if quarter ellipticals have ever been used on a street rod (fairly common as I also noted in my original post).

What I was asking about is the specific setup shown in the midget pictures with the spings under and the adjuster/controller bar over and whether THAT setup would work on a street car. For one thing, I'm wondering if the lack of any shackle or allowance for spring extension would tend to rotate the axle or cause binding during axle travel. Other questions regarding the geometry may arise as well. But that was the discussion I was looking for.
Yes, it will work fine. The upper control arm takes the front to rear axle locating load off the spring and between the spring attachment and control arm attachment the longitudinal roll center of the axle is maintained, this is the same thing the wishbone in some of the other pictures is doing with an additional piece of structure. Either way works, you just have to be careful to keep the rotation centers of the spring and control arm in the same plane so that the axle isn't pulled, pushed, or rotated as the tire moves it up and down.

Bogie
06-19-2007 05:13 PM
robin58
Quote:
Originally Posted by home brew
but there would be no triangulation for the axle to stop side to side motion as in the use of four bars or stock/split/hairpin wishbones.
I thought that too but then in looking at picture #2 I wasn't sure whether the bar from the top of the mount on the axle maybe was intended to serve that purpose? I'd assume there'd be a similar one on the other side which would theoretically hold the axle in the same place crosswise. Of course I might be looking at something completely wrong.
06-19-2007 03:24 PM
OneMoreTime I do not think the bending of the spring would create enough of a difference in length to make much difference..Now when you are running on a dirt track things do tend to get bouncy so it might be hard to tell..WE do live with some deflection in the conventional spring layout so I do not believe it woudl be a great issue..If the springs are mounted directly to the axle with just a pivot point there may be enough resistance to side to side movement to be OK..We live with conventional springs with no panhard all the time..

Nice clean looking setup though..only way I know to prove it out is build it and try..Make your sacrifice to the Hot Rod gods..

Sam
06-19-2007 01:52 PM
cboy
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneMoreTime
If you can imagine a four bar with one of the bars replaced by the spring then you have it...
Sam,

Following up a bit on Brew's comments, I'm wondering if it truly IS like a four bar. The main difference I see is the with the quarter ellipticals, two of the bars are designed to flex...probably by 1"-2" in each direction measured at the tip of the spring. In a 4-bar setup, none of the bars flex.

Won't this flexing or bending of the lower bars on the midget setup cause the attachment point to lengthen and shorten as the length of the lower bar (the spring) is lengthened and shortened during the bending action? And the axle itself is prevented from twisting or rotating to accommodate that movement by the upper rigid bar. I'm just wondering how much actual travel you could get on that front axle before it it would bind up.

The other difference I see between the midget and a 4-bar, is that with a 4-bar all four bar ends are designed to pivot so that the bars can always remain parallel. In the midget setup there is one bar end (the frame mount for the elliptical) that is rock solid. To me this would change the entire dynamic of a 4-bar system if any one "pivot" was suddenly welded solid to the frame or to the axle.

Obviously the system works, at least for this type application. But does it really follow the rules and design principles of a 4-bar setup?
06-19-2007 01:04 PM
home brew For discussion purposes - some thoughts off of the top of my head.

That is a very interesting use of quarter elliptical springs. It seems the only reason for the top bar would be to adjust the angle of the axle; but there would be no triangulation for the axle to stop side to side motion as in the use of four bars or stock/split/hairpin wishbones. I know that the early 20's Chevy's didn't use anything other than the spring to attach the axle to the frame but it was built with a slight angle to the frame not parallel to it like this midget. They also didn't use shackles to mount the spring to the axle. I would think this type of setup would place a lot of strain on both the control bar and the spring mounts on the axle. Maybe going around in a circle only one way would not subject the system to the same stresses of the street. The solid mounting of the spring as part of a four bar setup would also make it act a bit like a torsion bar so maybe that would take the strain off the mounts. But then again the need of the spring to return to its original shape while being twisted might create quite a loss of stability on the street when the tension was released and it returned to its normal position.
06-19-2007 11:33 AM
OneMoreTime If you can imagine a four bar with one of the bars replaced by the spring then you have it.. WE do not use this in the sprint cars any more because of the need to be able to adjust spring rates to track conditions at times..Other than that it seems to work just fine..Takes a bit of engineering to make it work well..

Sam
06-19-2007 09:31 AM
Chopt 48 Oops, I guess I missread your first post sorry about that.

Anyhow that style of suspension doesn't use a shackle. the spring eye bolts through the brackets below the axle and acts as the bottom half of a 4 bar setup. The upper link has the same pivot track as the spring and is adjustable to adjust caster.

From admiring your work previously I can imagine you would find ways to clean up the setup for a very slick appearance.

I think it would work great with the proper spring rate and shocks for the application.
06-19-2007 09:27 AM
dinger That's an interesting set-up. I was wondering if there is enough "give" to the springs to keep the tires firmly planted, would the frame bottom out if a guy hit a pothole or going down a steep driveway? Dan
06-19-2007 08:56 AM
cboy Sorry if I didn't ask my question clearly enough. I wasn't asking what this setup WAS (it's pretty clearly stated in my first sentence that it's quarter ellipticals) nor was I asking if quarter ellipticals have ever been used on a street rod (fairly common as I also noted in my original post).

What I was asking about is the specific setup shown in the midget pictures with the spings under and the adjuster/controller bar over and whether THAT setup would work on a street car. For one thing, I'm wondering if the lack of any shackle or allowance for spring extension would tend to rotate the axle or cause binding during axle travel. Other questions regarding the geometry may arise as well. But that was the discussion I was looking for.
06-19-2007 08:42 AM
Chopt 48 That is what is called a Quarter elliptic spring. It is actually a somewhat popular setup. I first saw it on all four corners on a T that a gent named Mike Minette, (spelling may be off) built in the early 70's in Texas.
here are a couple of photos of a T that was at the Run to Roslyn in Wa State two years ago.




I have no idea who built this car but the front end is pretty simple and wouldn't be expensive to duplicate. It appears to have a late 40's early 50's pickup front axle with brackets bolted to the original spring pads on the axle to connect the spring eye to. The springs are just as you mentioned above, springs cut in half. These may be 46/48 Ford pickup front springs cut in half.
This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.