Print Page | Close Window

INFO: Adjustable strut rod - the holy grail

Printed From: The Ford Torino Page
Category: Model Specific Forum
Forum Name: 1972-1976 Ford and Mercury
Forum Description: Technical discussion for 1972-1976 Ford and Mercury
URL: http://forum.grantorinosport.org/forum_posts.asp?TID=12554
Printed Date: 24-August-2019 at 5:12AM
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: INFO: Adjustable strut rod - the holy grail
Posted By: cggrob
Subject: INFO: Adjustable strut rod - the holy grail
Date Posted: 11-September-2014 at 1:48PM
Working on doing suspension upgrades on my 1972 Torino.  I will have more on the overall later, but for now, I thought you might like to see my solution for getting rid of that big mushy ball on the end of the strut rod.  Obviously it has to have enough compliance to be able adjust caster, but it allows far too many geometry changes when the car is in motion.  This is a big block car with the mushy big block springs and poly urethane bushings in the top a-arms, stock rubber in the lower.  In my opinion, this is the biggest single modification you can make to improve stability and crispness in handling to the front suspension.  It is hard to describe the difference in fell and solidity this makes!



Replies:
Posted By: cggrob
Date Posted: 11-September-2014 at 1:49PM


Posted By: cggrob
Date Posted: 11-September-2014 at 1:51PM


Posted By: cggrob
Date Posted: 11-September-2014 at 1:52PM


Posted By: cggrob
Date Posted: 11-September-2014 at 1:53PM


Posted By: cggrob
Date Posted: 11-September-2014 at 1:58PM
Left side of car looking towards front showing front attachment point on frame
 
Left side - side view on car.


Posted By: Regul8r
Date Posted: 11-September-2014 at 2:03PM
AWESOMENESS!!!
 
We have talked about this before on the site.
Is that an over the counter type bracket?
Looks like the ones you can buy for the Mustangs?
 


-------------
Carl Corey (Moderator/Event Coordinator) Contact ANYTIME!
1976 Ford Elite "Lola Mae"
97 Suzuki Intruder 1400
US Army Retired


Posted By: cggrob
Date Posted: 11-September-2014 at 2:22PM
We have talked about this before on the site.
Is that an over the counter type bracket?
Looks like the ones you can buy for the Mustangs?
 
The bracket is custom machined.  The swedge tube is 6" long form UB Machine in IN.  Everything else is McMaster Carr (ie: off the shelf hardware).  3/4" except the through bolt for the rod end.  Rod end is 5/8", high strength, high misalignment with a 3/4" NF thread extended long shank to match the diameter of the original strut rod.  The original strut rod is cut off and retained where it bolts to the lower A-arm.


Posted By: Regul8r
Date Posted: 11-September-2014 at 3:04PM
interested in making some more of these?
Got a parts list by numbers so others could just go shopping and get all the parts?
Do you have a pricing breakdown?
What was the total cost on doing these?
 


-------------
Carl Corey (Moderator/Event Coordinator) Contact ANYTIME!
1976 Ford Elite "Lola Mae"
97 Suzuki Intruder 1400
US Army Retired


Posted By: Eliteman76
Date Posted: 11-September-2014 at 3:26PM
I've been talking to Rosehill Performance about this very thing. 
OK, I'm game, what's the cost on this?

What's good it this turns the lower arm more into a lat A arm. Why this excites is this will certainly improve things for steering and control.

Now if we could just get roller bearing idler arms, and do something about the slop on lower/upper arm bushings.



-------------
Andrew


Posted By: Regul8r
Date Posted: 11-September-2014 at 3:30PM
I'm with you Andy, these are WORLDS above and improvements on the sloppiness of our steering/suspension!
 
I'd be in for a pair too!
 


-------------
Carl Corey (Moderator/Event Coordinator) Contact ANYTIME!
1976 Ford Elite "Lola Mae"
97 Suzuki Intruder 1400
US Army Retired


Posted By: Billy C
Date Posted: 11-September-2014 at 3:36PM
Very nice work. Thanks for all the pictures.

-------------
-Billy Conturo


Posted By: Billy C
Date Posted: 11-September-2014 at 3:40PM
Originally posted by Eliteman76 Eliteman76 wrote:

Now if we could just get roller bearing idler arms, and do something about the slop on lower/upper arm bushings.
Damn, I totally forgot about that part. Embarrassed 


-------------
-Billy Conturo


Posted By: ilyes
Date Posted: 11-September-2014 at 4:10PM
Looks good, I'll keep that one in mind when the time comes.


Posted By: Rockatansky
Date Posted: 12-September-2014 at 7:44AM
I'm in as soon as available

-------------
72 GT Ute
   


Posted By: Eliteman76
Date Posted: 12-September-2014 at 9:22AM
I'm staring at a pair of strut rods as we speak.
When I spoke with Rosehill, $275 per pair with you supplying your own rods to be modified. His end piece was larger that what's pictured but I'd need to look again.
If I knew dimensions I know local shops that can machine threads as well.

-------------
Andrew


Posted By: 72FordGTS
Date Posted: 12-September-2014 at 2:55PM
These look interesting and should allow for better adjustability of the front suspension.  Normally the caster is adjusted at the upper arms on our cars but an adjustable strut rod should all for additional adjustment.
 
My only concern is that the suspension was originally designed to let the strut rods move somewhat fore and aft.  This new design will not allow for any movement fore and aft.  My guess is this might add some harshness to the ride, but I am not sure if there will be any other adverse effects.


-------------
Vince

1972 Ford GTS Sportsroof - Survivor, One Family car

GTS.org Admin


Posted By: Regul8r
Date Posted: 12-September-2014 at 4:03PM
Other than the obvious SOLID mounting the other issue that need SPECIAL attention.
 
You DON'T want to use this as a Caster adjustment.
You want the lower ball joints to be located at exactly the same point.
IF the lower points are fore or aft of each other you will get a DIAMOND effect like we do with the race cars. This will cause a pull/drift, even if the caster/camber is the same.
This acts just like a rear end being out of square causing a thrust angle type situation.
 
The adjust ability will help with ensuring the locations of the lower ball joints are MATCHED.
 


-------------
Carl Corey (Moderator/Event Coordinator) Contact ANYTIME!
1976 Ford Elite "Lola Mae"
97 Suzuki Intruder 1400
US Army Retired


Posted By: cggrob
Date Posted: 03-October-2014 at 3:01PM
Sorry for the long wait on my reply guys - been working my A$$ off. 
First, I am a P.E. so here is the disclaimer:  the information presented herein is presented for educational purposes only and the parts and modifications shown herein should never be done to a vehicle that will be operated on a public highway. 
 
Therefore, I will not be making any of these for anyone else.
 
Please see rough machinist drawing for the "clevis" piece and washer.  The most critical dimension is that the portion of the clevis which passes through the frame has to have a diameter of 1.445".  the unmolested hole size at the frame mounting point on my car is 1.448", which is a 1972 built in October 1971. Do use some high strength free-machining steel if you can find it, but generally I think the whole thing is a little overdesigned and regular carbon steel (1020 or similar) would work fine.  If using cold roll shafting it will be tough for a machinist to cut the deep U.
 
I used a rod end from the McMaster Carr catalog, part # 6960T42. This is a high-misalignment 5/8" rod end with over size 3/4" long shank (2") and 3/4-16 LH (fine) thread with a 22,000# radial load.  The 3/4" shank allows you to mate with the existing strut rod which is 3/4" diameter, by threading it 3/4-16 RH ( a more common die for most of us).  The 5/8" rod end is less bulky than the 3/4" and allows  high misalignment rod end fit in the existing space.  Do use a high misalignment rod end to permit full articulation of the suspension. The bolt holding the clevis to the car is a 2 3/4" long allen head socket screw with full length thread of 2 3/4" (they are all grade 8), McMaster Carr catalog, part # 91251A047.  The strut rod is joined to the rod end using a UB Machine 3/4" "trailing arm", 6" long, which comes pre-threaded 3/4"-16 RH and LH.  UB Machine part # is 42-0602-A - they are about $10 a piece.  You should be able to put it all together including jam nuts for about $100 if you can machine this yourself.  I think the $275 mentioned for a machine shop to make this up is a very fair price.
 
I have tested this by driving over a road filled with roots that looks like a suspension proving track, and also at highway speed.  My impression is that you really do not need a bearing in the LCA.  This strut rod stabilizes the front suspension so much you really have to experience it and I would do this before I considered doing that.  I also believe it is good to have a little extra compliance in that location (the LCA mounting point/bushing), though this car does have poly bushings in the LCA and UCA now.  You can adjust the caster using the adjustable strut rod if you wish.  The ball joints are going to stay "lined up" regardless - they are 2 opposing points which always make a straight line.  what you may be doing is putting some extra stress on the UCA bushings.  My procedure is to align the suspension using the factory method, and then fine tune in some extra caster with the adjustable strut rod. This will put a little preload on the upper bushings and I don't believe it will result in any premature wear - but then, if you are doing this, that's not going to be a concern.  I also believe this helps tighten up the suspension.  If you are after "factory specs" for your alignment, you can set the caster to what I think is about 1 degree less than factory as your LCA will not be deflecting under load as it did with the rubber bushing, so the dynamic caster will be about factory spec.  It does appear to me that this suspension layout benefits from increased caster, so I am going +1 degree to factory setting giving me what I think is 2 degrees increased dynamic caster.
 
Regular8 said this: "IF the lower points are fore or aft of each other you will get a DIAMOND effect like we do with the race cars. This will cause a pull/drift, even if the caster/camber is the same" and he is correct, so do try to take this into account.  Having said that, think of the factory assembly tolerances and bushing slop in this design, and I think as long as you are pretty close you are going to be OK.  I purposely did a little offset adjustment side-to-side and did not notice any difference in my test drive with street tires - YMMV.
 
Guys I tried to answer all the questions raised but just reply if I missed something.


Posted By: Billy C
Date Posted: 08-October-2014 at 3:48AM
My setup seems to be solid as well. Had it out for 2 weeks or so now. I've run brakes to full lock and hit lots of Pittsburgh potholes at speed. My biggest worry is the factory strut rod because who knows what material that is. Makes analysis way more difficult. Also fatigue is a nasty one.  The other stuff isn't to hard because any grade material can be used and calculated accordingly. 

I actually think ride quality improved over the rubber bushings. Then again it's hard to tell when there's no interior and a big loud V8 roaring at 5500rpm. I'm sure "ride quality" for me is not what Ford designed originally.

As far as alignments specs go. I think as long as the lower ball joint relative to the chassis on both sides is the same then it's fine.  Check rear axle alignment. It's astonishing how much that is out on my car. I'd say a couple degrees at least. Probably from all the sideways action. Evil Smile


-------------
-Billy Conturo


Posted By: aquartlow
Date Posted: 08-October-2014 at 9:36AM
Originally posted by Billy C Billy C wrote:

 Check rear axle alignment. It's astonishing how much that is out on my car. I'd say a couple degrees at least. Probably from all the sideways action. Evil Smile
 
X2^^^. I also couldn't believe how far "out of square" my rear axle assembly was until I ran string lines while attempting a "shade tree" front end alignment. I then had to do both a front AND a rear alignment Ouch.


-------------
www.supermotors.net/22468
Yeah, It's a Hybrid...It burns gas and tires.

No matter how good she looks, somebody, somewhere, is tired of her sh*t.

Beauty is skin deep, ugliness goes clear to the bone.


Posted By: Billy C
Date Posted: 08-October-2014 at 5:52PM
Kind of off topic but how can the rear end be aligned without adjustable links? I know the factory had slightly eccentric bushing sleeves of some sort but with polyurethane bushings I don't think it's the same.

-------------
-Billy Conturo


Posted By: aquartlow
Date Posted: 08-October-2014 at 11:31PM
Originally posted by Billy C Billy C wrote:

Kind of off topic but how can the rear end be aligned without adjustable links? I know the factory had slightly eccentric bushing sleeves of some sort but with polyurethane bushings I don't think it's the same.
 
Billy C,
 I had to elongate the upper/lower control arm bolt hole brackets on the rear axle (drivers side toward the rear, passenger side toward the front), re-install the upper/lower control arms with longer grade 8 bolts through HD 1/8" thick washers on each side of the factory upper/lower control arm brackets. Once positioned "square" in the chassis(with ratchet straps) and had same offset on each side using a string line, I tacked, then welded the washers in place on the brackets after removing the arms so I didn't burn up my urethane bushings. No more "dog-legging". Using a string line on each side before "squaring", one string touched the passenger side tire but the other was off the driver's side about 1.5" or so. I apologize for being off topic and/or taking up space on this thread explaining my situation/remedy.


-------------
www.supermotors.net/22468
Yeah, It's a Hybrid...It burns gas and tires.

No matter how good she looks, somebody, somewhere, is tired of her sh*t.

Beauty is skin deep, ugliness goes clear to the bone.


Posted By: Regul8r
Date Posted: 28-December-2014 at 2:06PM
brought this back up during the UCA discussions.


-------------
Carl Corey (Moderator/Event Coordinator) Contact ANYTIME!
1976 Ford Elite "Lola Mae"
97 Suzuki Intruder 1400
US Army Retired


Posted By: bata747-8
Date Posted: 28-December-2014 at 6:39PM
Originally posted by aquartlow aquartlow wrote:

Originally posted by Billy C Billy C wrote:

Kind of off topic but how can the rear end be aligned without adjustable links? I know the factory had slightly eccentric bushing sleeves of some sort but with polyurethane bushings I don't think it's the same.

 
Billy C,
 I had to elongate the upper/lower control arm bolt hole brackets on the rear axle (drivers side toward the rear, passenger side toward the front), re-install the upper/lower control arms with longer grade 8 bolts through HD 1/8" thick washers on each side of the factory upper/lower control arm brackets. Once positioned "square" in the chassis(with ratchet straps) and had same offset on each side using a string line, I tacked, then welded the washers in place on the brackets after removing the arms so I didn't burn up my urethane bushings. No more "dog-legging". Using a string line on each side before "squaring", one string touched the passenger side tire but the other was off the driver's side about 1.5" or so. I apologize for being off topic and/or taking up space on this thread explaining my situation/remedy.


Would the Sphon rear arm set have allowed you to solve this same problem without welding washers or other actions?

-------------
Forum Test Account

(formerly a spam bot account)


Posted By: californiajohnny
Date Posted: 28-December-2014 at 7:14PM
for what it worth... i too saw that eccentric bushing in the factory shop manual, but when i tore my 74 apart(original rotten rubber bushings) there was no eccentric anywhere on any of the rear arms!


-------------
JOHN
74 GRAN TORINO S&H CLONE
74 VETTE CUSTOM
90 S10 BLAZER 4X4 LIFTED
77 CELICA CUSTOM
75 V8 MONZA SUPERCHARGED
79 COURIER VERT. SLAMMED
75 VEGA V6 5 SPD
70 CHEV C10 P/U
68 MUSTANG FB CONVERSION


Posted By: Big Bird
Date Posted: 10-January-2015 at 5:37PM
Feb 2007 hot rod magazine 51 merc with Banjo Mathews NASCAR clip...

Strut rods with adjusting sleeves like tie rods have.



-------------
"What we do in full frontal view, is more honest than your cleaned-up mind."
Randy
1979 T-Bird
2005 F-150 STX RCSB 4.6, 3.55 LSD
How the Heck does a REGULAR CAB SHORTBED weigh over 5200 pounds?


Posted By: californiajohnny
Date Posted: 10-January-2015 at 6:33PM
i like the boxed lower control arms, i thought about doing that to mine but you would have to cut out a large hole for the shock and two for the strut rod bolts- so i didn't, but this still looks tempting

-------------
JOHN
74 GRAN TORINO S&H CLONE
74 VETTE CUSTOM
90 S10 BLAZER 4X4 LIFTED
77 CELICA CUSTOM
75 V8 MONZA SUPERCHARGED
79 COURIER VERT. SLAMMED
75 VEGA V6 5 SPD
70 CHEV C10 P/U
68 MUSTANG FB CONVERSION


Posted By: lynchster
Date Posted: 15-January-2015 at 3:07PM
Nice work on the strut rods. I've got to replace mine and have been considering something like this since finding replacements in better shape than mine is probably not going to happen. 

-------------
Chuck
72 Gran Torino Sport
91 F-150


Posted By: Eliteman76
Date Posted: 19-January-2015 at 6:04PM
Eccentric bushings on the rear axle lower arms from my understanding are a 72-73 thing. Not sure to be honest I've seen it on the 74-76 cars. It's detailed in the chassis book in 72 and 73.

Concerning the rods, my issue still stand of a failure of the OEM rods.
I've pulled a few out and surprise! rusted bad enough they went to the scrap pile.

As far as our cars go, with the new joint, in effect doesn't that turn the lower arm into effectively a large "A" arm?
Bill {CDMBill} over on Bangshift runs his Mustang and a few years back had a strut rod failure from a poly bushing. Snapped the factory rod. I'm waiting to hear back from him about his setup, thinking he used a total control replacement.







-------------
Andrew


Posted By: Eliteman76
Date Posted: 19-January-2015 at 6:28PM
A couple interesting reads.
http://www.fordmuscleforums.com/all-ford-techboard/447883-strut-rod-failures.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.fordmuscleforums.com/all-ford-techboard/447883-strut-rod-failures.html

Vendor for kits, but not our cars. Decent reference pictures however.
http://www.streetortrack.com/Street-or-Track-Adjustable-Strut-Rods-pr-16135.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.streetortrack.com/Street-or-Track-Adjustable-Strut-Rods-pr-16135.html
http://https://www.streetortrack.com/pages.php?pageid=5&mode=preview" rel="nofollow - http://https://www.streetortrack.com/pages.php?pageid=5&mode=preview

Regardless, Poly Bushings are still sounding like a no-fly zone.


-------------
Andrew


Posted By: Billy C
Date Posted: 19-January-2015 at 6:59PM
It was already a large A-arm because of the solidly bolted connection to the lower arm. 

   Part of me is worried about the limit on all the factory parts since I don't know it. Even chopping the OEM rotors off the hubs I was amazed at how easily the cast iron cut. It made me start to worry about them too. I ran a quick analysis on the hubs assuming it was a basic cast iron alloy. With 100% load transfer in the front and 1g of cornering acceleration on a 27" tall tire they should be close to failure. Shocked Not knowing the actual material is a big issue in figuring out how strong things are.

   When I cut the threads in the radius rods the material felt good. It felt like a high quality steel. Not as gummy as a 41xx series but I'm sure it was at least a basic structural alloy similar to something like A36. I feel confident in the rods. The factory thread is a 5/8 course thread. The minor diameter on that thread would be the failure point of the rod when in tension. We are re-cutting a 3/4" fine thread which barely removes any material compared to the factory thread. 

   New tire compounds change everything. The way I toss my 4000lbs around, I'm just waiting for the next component to break even if it's just a completely unaltered OEM part. I'm only getting stickier with the tires so we will see.



-------------
-Billy Conturo


Posted By: Eliteman76
Date Posted: 20-January-2015 at 7:59AM
Billy, I'm going to simply sleeve mine with Dom thick wall tubing, fish mouth the ends for good weld coverage and move on. How much do you want to machine up a set of strut rods for me?


-------------
Andrew


Posted By: Big Bird
Date Posted: 20-January-2015 at 10:07AM
Seems to me a Heim joint at the front might be an improvement over a marshmallow bushing???

-------------
"What we do in full frontal view, is more honest than your cleaned-up mind."
Randy
1979 T-Bird
2005 F-150 STX RCSB 4.6, 3.55 LSD
How the Heck does a REGULAR CAB SHORTBED weigh over 5200 pounds?


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 02-September-2015 at 4:46AM

Really interested in getting this sorted.

 
I did find this in Australia.  Got a quote and spoke to them about modifying it for a Torino.
 
http://www.rrs-online.com/strut-rod-adjuster.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.rrs-online.com/strut-rod-adjuster.html
 
Seems that the spherical bearing approach would be easier to maintain.
-John


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: robot9000
Date Posted: 02-September-2015 at 8:22AM
Sort of off topic, when I replaced all my front bushings with urethane, I also replaced the strut rod bushings.  What I did not do was torque them down all the way. I noticed that at the same torque spec, the urethane hardly moved, so yeah, there is pressure on the rod.  Back off the bolt and it still keeps everything tight, but allows the rod to move. Acts much more like the rubber.  I am sure there is a durometer/squish/torque relationship here, but I am but a humble IT guy, not a Materials  Engineer.

-------------
1973 Gran Torino Sport
2010 Mazda 6
2007 Jeep Wrangler
2011 Damon Daybreak 35BD


Posted By: Big Bird
Date Posted: 02-September-2015 at 1:27PM
Another take on this idea:
http://www.ridetech.com/store/1965-1970-chevy-fullsize-strongarm-lower-front.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.ridetech.com/store/1965-1970-chevy-fullsize-strongarm-lower-front.html
it's for a G.M., but these cars also used the narrow LCA with a radius rod.
Also available for Mustangs:
http://www.ridetech.com/store/1967-1970-ford-mustang-strongarm-lower.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.ridetech.com/store/1967-1970-ford-mustang-strongarm-lower.html
 
 


-------------
"What we do in full frontal view, is more honest than your cleaned-up mind."
Randy
1979 T-Bird
2005 F-150 STX RCSB 4.6, 3.55 LSD
How the Heck does a REGULAR CAB SHORTBED weigh over 5200 pounds?


Posted By: 72FordGTS
Date Posted: 02-September-2015 at 2:17PM
Originally posted by robot9000 robot9000 wrote:

Sort of off topic, when I replaced all my front bushings with urethane, I also replaced the strut rod bushings.  What I did not do was torque them down all the way. I noticed that at the same torque spec, the urethane hardly moved, so yeah, there is pressure on the rod.  Back off the bolt and it still keeps everything tight, but allows the rod to move. Acts much more like the rubber.  I am sure there is a durometer/squish/torque relationship here, but I am but a humble IT guy, not a Materials  Engineer.
 
I think the general consensus was with stock strut rods your best to stick with rubber bushings.  There have been some reported incidents of stock strut rods breaking with urethane bushings since they were designed to work with flexible rubber bushings. 


-------------
Vince

1972 Ford GTS Sportsroof - Survivor, One Family car

GTS.org Admin


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 03-September-2015 at 6:44AM
Has anyone looked at modifying/adapt a 71 Torino strut rod to replace the 72-73 strut rod??
 
http://www.globalwest.net/asr-8.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.globalwest.net/asr-8.html
 
1.  Looks like the length is a little different which can be compensated with a longer threaded sleeve.
2.  The bushing mount uses the same size bolt, if the hole in the frame is slightly different size then a bushing can be replaced to fit.
3.  The biggest difference is the Lower control arm mount.  The foot is a different angle.  This appears to be the most difficult to modify to adapt this option.  Weld more material and redrill?


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 03-September-2015 at 6:52AM
I've had some email correspondence with Leslie/Eric and littleshopmfg.com
 
They are willing to fab an adjustable strut arm if we can get 8 peeps together to order.  Anyone interested?   I'm ready.
 
I'd be happy to produce this part if you could get at least 8 people committed to purchasing it. Lots of people asking/wanting it but no one has set up something to make it happen. If you want to organize that, I'd be fine with the manufacturing side of it. 
Rough figure would be $250-350 for a pair. 

-John


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: madmaxtorino
Date Posted: 03-September-2015 at 7:32AM
Im in for some. Shop is about two miles from my house, so I could help with getting him strut rods or even a car for mock up. Allan

-------------
Allan
Revelation 6:8
When there is no more room in Hell, the dead will walk the Earth.


Posted By: Big Bird
Date Posted: 03-September-2015 at 9:34AM
So, they are making something like this:
 


-------------
"What we do in full frontal view, is more honest than your cleaned-up mind."
Randy
1979 T-Bird
2005 F-150 STX RCSB 4.6, 3.55 LSD
How the Heck does a REGULAR CAB SHORTBED weigh over 5200 pounds?


Posted By: Rockatansky
Date Posted: 03-September-2015 at 11:17AM
8 doesn't sound that hard to do, maybe get another forum in on it to help?

-------------
72 GT Ute
   


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 03-September-2015 at 1:44PM
Originally posted by Big Bird Big Bird wrote:

So, they are making something like this:
 

Ahhhh nope...that is a complete replacement suspension.  Different subject.   

Its a stock replacement adjustable strut arm to fix the problem of the bushing binding and A-arm getting knocked out of alignment thus adding to more bumpsteer and other screwy effects.

Just like the ones for the Mustangs and the CPP arm for 71 torino.    No one else interested in the group buy other than Alan and myself?

No word from Andy?   would he be interested?



-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: 72FordGTS
Date Posted: 03-September-2015 at 2:36PM
I'd actually be interested just not now.  All my cash is going into my motor and trans next.  Once that's done, I'd commit with a deposit if necessary.  Even though I want my car to appear basically stock, I think this would be a subtle and worthwhile upgrade to ensure that the suspension geometry stays put.

-------------
Vince

1972 Ford GTS Sportsroof - Survivor, One Family car

GTS.org Admin


Posted By: Billy C
Date Posted: 03-September-2015 at 5:56PM
There are a few different designs floating around now. I'd be interested to see what design is chosen for a small run. Any ideas?
I count 3 bolt on options.

Originally posted by Global West Global West wrote:

 

Originally posted by RRS RRS wrote:

 

Originally posted by cggrob cggrob wrote:


I personally like how easy the RRS is.

I was kinda playing with a similar design for our stock rods. Like this.. 

Obviously with a spacer between the bearing and the seat that the washer usually sits. I left out all the hardware and stuff too. The caster is adjusted by swapping spacers. This could be very cost effective and a totally bolt-on affair. I just don't like axial load on sphiricals but using a safe number of 15% radial load limit for the axial load limit, a bearing to fit this application wouldn't be anything exotic. The rod is weak in comparison. The only reason I didn't do this is because I don't think the rod is strong enough for what I am doing around that 5/8 thread and of course the axial loading issues.

I could make a ton of something like this for cheap.


-------------
-Billy Conturo


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 04-September-2015 at 3:25AM
That is basically that RRS solution.  Worth a try.
 
I think the heim bearing option looks good especially if they fabricate a better strut rod to go with it.  Its proven, easy to maintain, easy to get parts to replace the rod end if needed.
 
I'm thinking that you don't see that much axial load on that strut arm.  Its the suspension compression and forces from a bump from something like a pothole that would shock the arm.  If you can figure out the loading with the suspension compressed and the shock load from the lower control arm pulling on the rod while the suspension is compressed that may be the max load you'll see. 
 
 I have no way to know for sure.  Your guess is better than mine. 
 
 
So far we only have 2-3 people interested in a group buy for an adjustable strut-arm.  Is there anyone else to contact that would be interested?   We need 8 people to sign up. 


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: Billy C
Date Posted: 04-September-2015 at 3:50AM
Axial load is the load that wants to pull the ball out of the socket. Its the only kind of load in the design above and I do believe it's significant.

-------------
-Billy Conturo


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 04-September-2015 at 4:04AM
Translation...
You believe the rubber bushings absorb much of the shock if the wheel gets hit hard.  When you go to the hard mount strut rod your concerned that the rod itself may be a failure item because its not designed to take that shock at the threaded end near the bushing?
 
I guess its worth looking at the mustang rods from the likes of Total Control Products, CPP, etc. and find out what material they used (prolly chromoly tubing) and the size of the rod to get an idea of the shock load they designed it for...just a thought for a reference.
 
 
 


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: 72FordGTS
Date Posted: 04-September-2015 at 4:28AM
Originally posted by BackInBlack BackInBlack wrote:

Translation...
You believe the rubber bushings absorb much of the shock if the wheel gets hit hard.  When you go to the hard mount strut rod your concerned that the rod itself may be a failure item because its not designed to take that shock at the threaded end near the bushing?
  
 
Yes, this is why I believe some have seen strut rod failure with urethane bushings.  When Ford engineered this suspension, they wanted the lower control arm to move fore and aft with road impacts.  The rubber cushioning of the strut rod allow for this.  Remember most suspensions from this era were primarily designed for smooth ride first. 
 
That said, a properly engineered rod will ensure the lower control arm will always be in the correct position and ensure that suspension geometry is maintained under all conditions, at perhaps a slight increase in ride harshness.  I think looking at the Mustang rods is a good start.  I wonder though if the Torino's have more load on their arms due to the great weight and the spring being on the LCA? 


-------------
Vince

1972 Ford GTS Sportsroof - Survivor, One Family car

GTS.org Admin


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 04-September-2015 at 4:59AM
I think the shock/load from an impact would be the same regardless of the vehicle weight.  for simplicity, assume the vehicle mass absorbs a negligible amount relative to the wheel shock of an impact from a pot hole (for example).   Just thinking about simple vectors of the car forward motion vs the mass of the wheel/suspension.
 
I think the poly bushing failure mode is more complex.  I'm thinking its also the repeated up/down motion of the wheel levering on the bushing which is more rigid due to the "hardness" of the poly bushing.  All the pics from the Mustangs and other cars with this suspension show the breakage occurs right at the threads near the nut.  Its as if the arm is prying up/down near the nut until the metal fatigues (over time and usage) until it fractures.
 


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: mlachance112785
Date Posted: 04-September-2015 at 8:06AM
Any idea on price?

-------------
77 Cougar XR7 460/C6


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 04-September-2015 at 8:19AM
Originally posted by mlachance112785 mlachance112785 wrote:

Any idea on price?
 
From previous post on this thread:
I've had some email correspondence with Leslie/Eric and littleshopmfg.com
 They are willing to fab an adjustable strut arm if we can get 8 peeps together to order.  Anyone interested?   I'm ready.
 
I'd be happy to produce this part if you could get at least 8 people committed to purchasing it. Lots of people asking/wanting it but no one has set up something to make it happen. If you want to organize that, I'd be fine with the manufacturing side of it. 
Rough figure would be $250-350 for a pair. 
 
So far we have 2 people.  Maybe 3.
-John
 


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: JimW
Date Posted: 04-September-2015 at 8:57AM
I am interested!  Perfect time to do the A Arms and new springs..
  

-------------
1976 S&H Gran Torino

460/C6/4.33 13.05@105.6

545/C6/3.56 11.52@117.8

More to come!!!!

463rwhp/495rwtq

two tons of fun

see it and hear it at:

www.torinocobra.com

www.st


Posted By: Rockatansky
Date Posted: 04-September-2015 at 11:10AM
I'm 5/8 in

-------------
72 GT Ute
   


Posted By: lynchster
Date Posted: 04-September-2015 at 11:23AM
Are these to be completely new strut rods or modified factory ones?

-------------
Chuck
72 Gran Torino Sport
91 F-150


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 04-September-2015 at 12:26PM
My understanding is they are new strut rods.  I've asked the question and awaiting the response.  It would be a bad idea for a company to produce anything but a new rod just for liability reasons unless they dont require any mods to the OEM rods.

So far looks like 4 solid people.  I'll start a list now.
John 
Allan
Andy
JimW 




-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: 72FordGTS
Date Posted: 04-September-2015 at 1:39PM
Originally posted by BackInBlack BackInBlack wrote:

I think the shock/load from an impact would be the same regardless of the vehicle weight.  for simplicity, assume the vehicle mass absorbs a negligible amount relative to the wheel shock of an impact from a pot hole (for example).   Just thinking about simple vectors of the car forward motion vs the mass of the wheel/suspension.
 
I think the poly bushing failure mode is more complex.  I'm thinking its also the repeated up/down motion of the wheel levering on the bushing which is more rigid due to the "hardness" of the poly bushing.  All the pics from the Mustangs and other cars with this suspension show the breakage occurs right at the threads near the nut.  Its as if the arm is prying up/down near the nut until the metal fatigues (over time and usage) until it fractures.
 


I still figure that a 4000 lb car will hit a pot hole with more force than a 3000 lb car, and this force will be carried through the front suspension...

You're right about the poly bushing failure though, the up and down motion would likely have more on a fatiguing factor on the strut rods than the fore and aft.  But bottom line is that the factory rods were never intended to be used with an inflexible joint that the poly bushings create.

I hope you guys are able to get enough interest in these rods....I just wish I had the cash to commit now.


-------------
Vince

1972 Ford GTS Sportsroof - Survivor, One Family car

GTS.org Admin


Posted By: Big Bird
Date Posted: 04-September-2015 at 2:27PM
Originally posted by BackInBlack BackInBlack wrote:

I think the shock/load from an impact would be the same regardless of the vehicle weight.  for simplicity, assume the vehicle mass absorbs a negligible amount relative to the wheel shock of an impact from a pot hole (for example).   Just thinking about simple vectors of the car forward motion vs the mass of the wheel/suspension.
 
I think the poly bushing failure mode is more complex.  I'm thinking its also the repeated up/down motion of the wheel levering on the bushing which is more rigid due to the "hardness" of the poly bushing.  All the pics from the Mustangs and other cars with this suspension show the breakage occurs right at the threads near the nut.  Its as if the arm is prying up/down near the nut until the metal fatigues (over time and usage) until it fractures.
 
It's a bit of both, the impact shock and the flex at the same moment. It's not just the up-and-down as the strut rod also keeps the LCA from moving front-to-back as it goes up-and-down. Stiffening the bushing means the rod flexes at the bushing, instead of the bushing flexing, and the threaded area is where it focuses the stress.
The picture I posted above of the nascar suspension still uses bushings, but the rods are heavier, and they used BIG sleeves for adjustment.
If I was going to use a stiffer bushing,  I wouldn't want the strut rod necked down where the threads are.
I would like to see how the Global West design works in the real world, the RRS design seems like it would be good as well. I just wonder where these designs will move the "Fail-point" to.


-------------
"What we do in full frontal view, is more honest than your cleaned-up mind."
Randy
1979 T-Bird
2005 F-150 STX RCSB 4.6, 3.55 LSD
How the Heck does a REGULAR CAB SHORTBED weigh over 5200 pounds?


Posted By: russosborne
Date Posted: 04-September-2015 at 4:30PM
Did I miss what design would be what this company is going to do if there is enough interest?
Thanks,
Russ


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 05-September-2015 at 1:51AM
Im trying to get details on the design.  I was lead to believe it was a heim bearing with a new rod like the Global West rod for hte 71 Torino.   I'm waiting to hear back on the design and will post as soon as i get it.   

We have 4 so far committed, need 4 more.


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: cggrob
Date Posted: 05-September-2015 at 9:31AM
I have the TCP set up on my 1970 Mustang like the attached pic.  Works very well and is really a custom machined bushing with 6 degrees of freedom.  Bearing material in side this is a very hard plastic like DELRIN.  Not something I could reproduce at home very easily, but it maintains all of the stock geometry and suspension layout.  It is harsher on bumps - you can really feel it. 
Since I actually had one of these in hand I was able to compare before making my set-up, and for this reason decided that this could not be adapted.  As compared to my 1972 Torino:
 
1. Angle of the rod to the mounting point on the lower A-arm is different.
2. Bolt size and spacing on the LCA is different
3. Arm diameter is 5/8"  - Torino is 3/4"
4. Length is shorter
 


Posted By: cggrob
Date Posted: 05-September-2015 at 9:37AM


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 05-September-2015 at 9:55AM
I had called TCP also about supporting these class Fords...They said nope, not enough demand.

If we can just get 3-4 more people to sign-up.  Then we have some descent parts available.

I was thinking the same thing...I looked at the Mustang market to see how they are solving the problem.  This was the least invasive way to do it.  

-John


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: Billy C
Date Posted: 05-September-2015 at 12:49PM
Originally posted by BackInBlack BackInBlack wrote:

Translation...
You believe the rubber bushings absorb much of the shock if the wheel gets hit hard.  When you go to the hard mount strut rod your concerned that the rod itself may be a failure item because its not designed to take that shock at the threaded end near the bushing? 

I'm worried about the rod being loaded more and the bearing being loaded in a direction it wasn't fully designed for.  It's just a scary place to be messing around. If that rod where to fail it would only be during a time when the result would be catastrophic.

FMEA is a hot topic in engineering which means Failure Modes and Effects Analysis. This is how different failure types are scaled. It ultimately boils down to this. If the failure mode of a component could be potentially catastrophic to the assembly or system it is scaled higher and quality control and safety factors are higher. If a component just fails and leaves the system in a slightly less functioning state until a repair can be made, quality control and safety factors can be scaled back to save weight and cost.  It usually involves teams of engineers, charts, data, equations, and all that other stuff to analyze complex systems.

I always try to think where the part I am redesigning would fall on a FMEA chart. I've kind of adopted a back yard FMEA in asking "How sure do I want to be of the loads and conditions so I know my safety factors are correct?" or "How much should I just beef it up to be safe if all that stuff is too complex?" Of course that is always scaled against "would it kill someone if it failed the way I predict it would?"

I do believe a solution for a better radius rod is one of the top things in a list of suspension improvements that would be easy for our cars. The problem is it's also a good way to f**k s**t up if it's done wrong. With that being said, a design that everyone agrees on pursuing as well as an amount people would be willing to pay would be a good start.


-------------
-Billy Conturo


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 05-September-2015 at 1:00PM
Originally posted by Billy C Billy C wrote:

Originally posted by BackInBlack BackInBlack wrote:

Translation...
You believe the rubber bushings absorb much of the shock if the wheel gets hit hard.  When you go to the hard mount strut rod your concerned that the rod itself may be a failure item because its not designed to take that shock at the threaded end near the bushing? 

I'm worried about the rod being loaded more and the bearing being loaded in a direction it wasn't fully designed for.  It's just a scary place to be messing around. If that rod where to fail it would only be during a time when the result would be catastrophic.

FMEA is a hot topic in engineering which means Failure Modes and Effects Analysis. This is how different failure types are scaled. It ultimately boils down to this. If the failure mode of a component could be potentially catastrophic to the assembly or system it is scaled higher and quality control and safety factors are higher. If a component just fails and leaves the system in a slightly less functioning state until a repair can be made, quality control and safety factors can be scaled back to save weight and cost.  It usually involves teams of engineers, charts, data, equations, and all that other stuff to analyse complex systems.

I always try to think where the part I am redesigning would fall on a FMEA chart. I've kind of adopted a back yard FMEA in asking "How sure do I want to be of the loads and conditions so I know my safety factors are correct?" or "How much should I just beef it up to be safe if all that stuff is too complex?" Of course that is always scaled against "would it kill someone if it failed the way I predict it would?"

I do believe a solution for a better radius rod is one of the top things in a list of suspension improvements that would be easy for our cars. The problem is it's also a good way to f**k s**t up if it's done wrong. With that being said, a design that everyone agrees on pursuing as well as an amount people would be willing to pay would be a good start.

Amen brother!   I design high reliability electronics and write those god awful FMEAs.  Thats why its really important to get enough people in on buying the strut rod in a group buy.  They will build a solid unit if the A-arm is any indication and it will be a safer piece even over a 40year old NOS part.


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: Psquare75
Date Posted: 05-September-2015 at 3:40PM
Hope this works out for you guys! I put it on the FB page. 

-------------
Paul
77 XR7 460/C6/3.00:1 *SOLD*
78 XR7 523/C6/3.5:1
79 F100 460/TKO500/3.25:1
'I also have some left over potatoes-I understand you can generate electricity from them'- Foote500


Posted By: lynchster
Date Posted: 06-September-2015 at 3:07PM
Originally posted by Big Bird Big Bird wrote:

I just wonder where these designs will move the "Fail-point" to.

We were just having this debate in the garage today.



-------------
Chuck
72 Gran Torino Sport
91 F-150


Posted By: lynchster
Date Posted: 06-September-2015 at 3:12PM
Originally posted by BackInBlack BackInBlack wrote:

We have 4 so far committed, need 4 more.
I'd be interested in seeing the design I'd be committing to.

-------------
Chuck
72 Gran Torino Sport
91 F-150


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 09-September-2015 at 7:33AM
Originally posted by mlachance112785 mlachance112785 wrote:

Any idea on price?
 
Update:
Spoke with Eric at the shop today.  He is willing to work with us to control the price.  He hasn't finished looking at all the options.  
 
Option#1:  Provide the clevis end and parts but leave the cutting threading the rod to the user. (heim rod end)
Option #2:  Global West equivalent (heim rod end)  Full bolt on replacement.
Option #3:  RRS equivalent where there is just a spherical bearing (hope I'm using the correct term) to replace the bushing and reuses the OEM strut rod.
 
The leaning is toward option#2 like the one offered for the 71 Torino by Global West.  He said that he expected to do a Global west equivalent for the same price, $400 at these low quantities.  Nothing decided...just the results from the conversation.
 
I'll keep you posted.  
 
More reference info.  Check the photo on this link
http://www.streetortrack.com/Street-or-Track-Adjustable-Strut-Rods-pr-16135.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.streetortrack.com/Street-or-Track-Adjustable-Strut-Rods-pr-16135.html
 


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 10-September-2015 at 9:13AM
Anyone thought of doing this???
 
This one seems like it doesn't seem like a good option.  It puts the load on the bolt and not on the flat flange surface.
http://s69.photobucket.com/user/OCHOHill/media/DSCF3119.jpg.html" rel="nofollow - http://s69.photobucket.com/user/OCHOHill/media/DSCF3119.jpg.html
http://s69.photobucket.com/user/OCHOHill/media/DSCF3119.jpg.html" rel="nofollow">
 
Or this??
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm161/Deviousfred/2010-04-02085256.jpg" rel="nofollow - http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm161/Deviousfred/2010-04-02085256.jpg
 
Was wondering if something investigated these options and decided it wasn't worth it?


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: Big Bird
Date Posted: 10-September-2015 at 11:34AM
Actually, I've been communicating with Ridetech about the strut rods, The concern they had with heim joints at the front was that it would move the pivot point back and change the front end geometry.
I personally think it wouldn't matter much compared to the factory marshmallow bushings that give you an inconsistent pivot point, and it would be a solid anchor without flex in braking/cornering.
Ridetech makes a LCA with the strut rod integrated and adjustable for the 68-71 Torino and the 67-73 Mustang, so maybe... just maybe they could be of help.
Additionally, Strut rods with a heim joint are used in some classes of racing, and all the parts (Heim joints, tubular struts, and threaded end sections that bolt to the LCA) are available through Speedway.


-------------
"What we do in full frontal view, is more honest than your cleaned-up mind."
Randy
1979 T-Bird
2005 F-150 STX RCSB 4.6, 3.55 LSD
How the Heck does a REGULAR CAB SHORTBED weigh over 5200 pounds?


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 10-September-2015 at 1:46PM
I've checked speedway and other places like Howe Racing.  I've been looking at what the circle track and dirt track guys are doing.   I think the spherical bearing idea puts the pivot point nearly exactly at the bushing point.   I simply dont see any off-the-shelf suppliers doing it that way.  That makes me wonder if there is a design flaw that I'm not thinking of with that setup.   I see way more heim setups and replacement parts like that seen from Global West.  

I'm probably over analyzing it.  Just get-r-dun.


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: Big Bird
Date Posted: 10-September-2015 at 2:37PM
Honestly, the heim joints are used in 4-links for off-roading, so they are plenty strong.
Although we are looking at the bushings as a weak link, they used this setup in NASCAR, something like 30 years. Yes they added an adjusting sleeve like a tie-rod has, and they beefed it up, but when NASCAR allowed the front clip swaps under the fairlane in '66, it was a requirement that everything used the stock '65-66 galaxie mounting points (same as '72-79 intermediate suspension).
We are (probably) trying to re-invent the wheel here. I just can't find anyone making parts for a rear steer "Banjo Clip" or any of the Holman-Moody suspension anymore.


-------------
"What we do in full frontal view, is more honest than your cleaned-up mind."
Randy
1979 T-Bird
2005 F-150 STX RCSB 4.6, 3.55 LSD
How the Heck does a REGULAR CAB SHORTBED weigh over 5200 pounds?


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 11-September-2015 at 12:32AM
Agreed...I'm not so worried about the strength of teh heim or the strength of the rod itself.   If you've seen an actually tensile strength pull test...on a rod that size that is close to the size of re-bar.   I dont think (under normal uses) that the rod will break unless it is fatigued like seen from poly bushings.   I would rather have a replacement chromoly rod just to be on the safe side.

I'm more worried about the geometry.  Where the front pivot point is located relative to the LCA mounting point.   I would think they should be on the same centerline; or as close as possible.   I just dont know enough about suspension geometry to make that judgement call.   However, as someone(s) said that the offset is neglible as compared to the slop created by the rubber bushings shifting the alignment when pressed hard.


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 12-November-2015 at 11:29PM
All,
I got word back from the Little Shop on the kit and pricing.   Its a spherical bearing design like the one posted from RRS for Mustangs.
Last count I think we had 5 people committed with 2-3 undecided.   The littleshopmfg guys were looking for answer in a week or 2 before buying materials and start the build process.  They plan on getting it on the website after they get feedback from us.
Committed       Maybe
John                Rockatansky
Allan (1or2)      Lynchster(Chuck)
Randy              Russosborne
Andy
JimW

=============================================
The factory strut rod and nut are retained. This will serve as a replacement for the factory rubber bushing to eliminate slop in the front end. We've been using these bearings for years in various applications. They are PTFE lined and replaceable for about $25 each. They rarely see their service life on most applications.  This joint would work great with both factory upper control arms, and our caster-added upper control arms.  The exact dimensions may change slightly after I make a first article.  But visually it will still mostly look/work like this. The solid models are enough to continue with getting our group-buy number figured out. 
Ingredients:
spherical bearing
machined bearing cup, powdercoated or zinced
lasered/machined frame washer, powdercoated or zinced
misalignment spacer 1
misalignment spacer 2
3 - 5/16-24 bolts
3 - 5/16 mil-spec washers
3 - distorted thread lock nuts
 
Pricing for a pair will be as follows, based on how many people buy: 
1            375
2            365
3            355
4            345
5            335
6            325
7            315
8            305
9            295
10          285
11-15      265
16-20      245
21+        225

Terms:
I can make an item on the website whenever people are ready. I'm thinking: 
- deposit of $100
- Flat rate shipping of $20 to lower 48. 
- Group-buy deadline Dec 14
- Payment requests for balance sent Dec 15  
- Estimated manufacture and ship by Jan 11, pending balance has been paid


http://s1142.photobucket.com/user/jj27606/media/rod1.png.html" rel="nofollow">


http://s1142.photobucket.com/user/jj27606/media/rod2.png.html" rel="nofollow">


http://s1142.photobucket.com/user/jj27606/media/rod3.png.html" rel="nofollow">


http://s1142.photobucket.com/user/jj27606/media/bearing_kit.jpg.html" rel="nofollow">


-John


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: madmaxtorino
Date Posted: 13-November-2015 at 2:59AM
I'm in for one or two sets.

-------------
Allan
Revelation 6:8
When there is no more room in Hell, the dead will walk the Earth.


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 13-November-2015 at 3:48AM
Excellent....I updated the post above with more details.   Please let me know ASAP either on this forum or PM me.  I got the A-arms from them also.  They look great.   Can't wait to get this front end fixed-up.   After this its the sway bar and panard bar for me :-)
-John


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 16-November-2015 at 12:19AM
Committed
Yes                 Maybe                        No
John                Rockatansky              Big Bird (Randy)
Allan (1or2)     72FordGTS(Vince)      Lynchster(Chuck)
Andy               Russosborne
JimW               mlachance112785

Please get the word out for those who might be interested to review this thread.   Let me know via PM or the thread if your committed to the group buy so I can get them started building this strut bushing replacement.

-John



-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: Eliteman76
Date Posted: 16-November-2015 at 1:31AM
The issue at had for me is it does not resolve the fact the rod itself is old, rusted or damaged.
What I want is not just the end on the frame, I'm looking at the complete arm itself.

I'm undetermined right now on my end.

-------------
Andrew


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 16-November-2015 at 1:40AM
I'm feeding back the group's responses as they come in.   I forwarded the concerns and asked if there is any analysis or additional info that can be provided regarding the safety of the design with respect of the additional load on the old strut arm with a fixed bearing vs the rubber bushing it will replace.  

Also, a comparison of pro/con between this design and a globalwest type of replacement kit which includes a new strut arm.

-John


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: Eliteman76
Date Posted: 16-November-2015 at 5:54AM
What I'd honestly prefer to see is the original strut rod reproduced and then sleeved with Dom tubing, with a fish mouth grind and weld job to slightly increase the od of the rod while having a brand new strut Rod out of a good grade of material.
I drive my car hard at times and this is a thing I've debated for some time.

Regarding the rod, my thoughts are is with the right strut Rod it essentially turns the lower arm into a large A arm.
What I don't know is how the movement of travel would be like.

I'd kill to put our chassis on a surface plate and measure with a cmm to put the movement in cad to see what the arc looks like during movement to see deflection.

-------------
Andrew


Posted By: Eliteman76
Date Posted: 16-November-2015 at 5:55AM
John, I am however in for the buy on this.
Meant to message but if we can get enough people I'm game.


-------------
Andrew


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 16-November-2015 at 6:33AM
Basically, thelittleshop isn't going to perform any OEM level testing on this design.  Its not worth their time.  From my perspective this is a reasonable  design and a simple approach.  This type of bearing is used in 4WD applications.  It can take a punishing load.   So I don't believe this is a weak point. 
 
"The bearing in my design is a COM16T, which is 1", with misalignment spacers to fit a .77 size on the strut rod. The radial load on these, at the 1" size, is simply insane. They get used in all sorts of upper and lower control arm situations in off-road vehicles that see way more stress than anything these cars can generate. 
 
Another concerned raised was the strength of an aging strut rod.  I just purchased spare NOS parts myself.  Worst cast is you can simply have your strut rod cut/turned and rethreaded and use a threaded rod.  Either way you have options whether you use the OEM rods or create your own strut arm.  This design would work for either approach.
 
Another reference for this setup used on Mustangs
http://www.mustangandfords.com/how-to/chassis-suspension/mufp-0603-classic-ford-suspension/" rel="nofollow - http://www.mustangandfords.com/how-to/chassis-suspension/mufp-0603-classic-ford-suspension/
 
Thanks Andy...here is the status.   Is there anyone else we can touch base with to get the word out?   The more homies we have the better the pricing.   I haven't been able to reach JimW; can anyone reach out to him or call him to confirm?   Can anyone call Rockatansky, Russ, MLachance?   Is there anyone I'm missing here?   What about Ron Earp?
 
Committed
Yes                         Maybe                        No
John                      Rockatansky              Big Bird (Randy)
Allan (1or2)                                           Lynchster(Chuck)
Andy                     Russosborne
JimW                     mlachance112785
72FordGTS(Vince)
 
-John


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: Big Bird
Date Posted: 16-November-2015 at 9:13AM
This is more what I'm looking for:
This one also has spring jacks at all 4 corners, (and that's a slotted 12" rotor). My existing strut rods... not gonna push my luck with them. Already rusty/pitted and passenger side is visibly bent. (looks like someone put a jack or jackstand under it at some time in it's life.


-------------
"What we do in full frontal view, is more honest than your cleaned-up mind."
Randy
1979 T-Bird
2005 F-150 STX RCSB 4.6, 3.55 LSD
How the Heck does a REGULAR CAB SHORTBED weigh over 5200 pounds?


Posted By: Eliteman76
Date Posted: 16-November-2015 at 10:18AM
Without getting off topic who's chassis is that?

-------------
Andrew


Posted By: mlachance112785
Date Posted: 16-November-2015 at 9:07PM
I'm out. 

-------------
77 Cougar XR7 460/C6


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 17-November-2015 at 12:07AM
Committed
Yes                         Maybe                        No
John                      Rockatansky              Big Bird (Randy)
Allan (1or2)                                           Lynchster(Chuck)
Andy                     Russosborne              mlachance112785
JimW                     Anyone Else??
72FordGTS(Vince)
 
-John


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 17-November-2015 at 6:26AM
For reference for those concerned with the strength of the spherical bearing; here are some applications where these spherical bearings are used:
Used in various locations such as control arms; replacing ball joints, trailing arms in trucks etc.
 
http://s1142.photobucket.com/user/jj27606/media/hnm_slider_6_hm_racing_design_ford_f150_race_ready_suspension_kit_2.jpg.html" rel="nofollow">
 
 
http://s1142.photobucket.com/user/jj27606/media/FullSizeRender_1.jpg.html" rel="nofollow">
 
http://s1142.photobucket.com/user/jj27606/media/hnm_slider_6_hm_racing_design_ford_f150_race_ready_suspension_kit_1.jpg.html" rel="nofollow -
 
http://s1142.photobucket.com/user/jj27606/media/rodhall_zpsef3128bf_3.jpg.html" rel="nofollow">
 
-John
 


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: mtburger
Date Posted: 17-November-2015 at 7:04AM
Originally posted by Eliteman76 Eliteman76 wrote:

Without getting off topic who's chassis is that?


Mine.

Those are OE Galaxie parts I believe...

Mike H.

http://www.forum.grantorinosport.org/73-montego-gt-project-chassis-work_topic6408_page2.html

http://s134.photobucket.com/user/mtburger/media/73MGT%20Frame%20Work/MontegoGTFrontClip005.jpg.html" rel="nofollow">



Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 17-November-2015 at 7:16AM
It looks like a OEM strut rod that is cut/threaded using a tie rod coupler.  It still has that big rubber deflection bushing.
 
Interesting.   Should we start another thread for NASCAR style suspension or more track oriented like those NASCAR rear trailing arm setup from another thread.
-John


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: madmaxtorino
Date Posted: 17-November-2015 at 11:51AM
Im in for two if we order.
                             Allan


-------------
Allan
Revelation 6:8
When there is no more room in Hell, the dead will walk the Earth.


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 17-November-2015 at 12:07PM
Great Allan, thanks.  I've tried to PM everyone I know on the forum.   I'm not sure how much more I can do to get the word out.  

I'm thinking we should pull the trigger on this in another week.  With your 2x order we have 6 total.  There is such a small demand for these cars; having any manufacturer that is willing to step up to build an aftermarket part is a huge help.  At least the littleshopmfg.com guys are willing to fill this niche.  Every other shop has basically said "no" and I've called a number of these shops over a few years to get them to fab some of these parts without any luck.

-John




-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: 72FordGTS
Date Posted: 18-November-2015 at 3:25AM
I am excited about putting these on my car.  I like the fact it'll be an easy swap and uses the OEM strut rod. Even though my front end is all new, I have noticed that I still get some slop in the front end under certain conditions and it feels like to me it's the strut rod movement causing the lower control arm to get all wonky.  I think this will really tighten up the front end and keep the geometry much more consistent.  The adjustability of the strut rod doesn't seem to be a huge plus in my books since you can get the similar movement with the upper arm.  I guess the only big advantage to an adjustable strut arm would be the ability to run lots of positive caster without pushing the front wheel too far back in the wheel well. 

-------------
Vince

1972 Ford GTS Sportsroof - Survivor, One Family car

GTS.org Admin


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 18-November-2015 at 8:50AM
Here it is!    Order time!   Details Below.   Canadian order may be shipped USPS with special shipping instructions per request to handle those duties/fees plus an additional $15 shipping (for Vince).   Go to the website and place the deposit for the order.   Those that are on the fence, you have a little time to decide whether or not to join on the group buy.   Regards John.
 
http://www.littleshopmfg.com/deposit-strut-rod-isolators-for-ford-cars/" rel="nofollow - spherical bearing
machined bearing cup, powdercoated or zinced
lasered/machined frame washer, powdercoated or zinced
misalignment spacer 1
misalignment spacer 2
3 - 5/16-24 bolts
3 - 5/16 mil-spec washers
3 - distorted thread lock nuts
 
Pricing for a pair will be as follows, based on how many people buy: 
1            375
2            365
3            355
4            345
5            335
6            325
7            315
8            305
9            295
10          285
11-15      265
16-20      245
21+        225

Terms:
I can make an item on the website whenever people are ready. I'm thinking: 
- deposit of $100
- Flat rate shipping of $20 to lower 48. 
- Group-buy deadline Dec 14
- Payment requests for balance sent Dec 15  
- Estimated manufacture and ship by Jan 11, pending balance has been paid


http://s1142.photobucket.com/user/jj27606/media/rod1.png.html" rel="nofollow">


http://s1142.photobucket.com/user/jj27606/media/rod2.png.html" rel="nofollow">


http://s1142.photobucket.com/user/jj27606/media/rod3.png.html" rel="nofollow">



-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: Rockatansky
Date Posted: 18-November-2015 at 12:53PM
I've been trying to feel it but I'm not really there. also some slight concern with the change in pivot location / geometry, and the 3 screws holding the bearing in place. I'd like to be more confident that the system is bind free, I hope it works as well as anticipated but I can't pull the trigger on this design with these unknowns
 
adjustable strut rod length is a big part of the concept for me, that first crossmember that holds the strut bushings is hit on my frame & I was hoping to use the adjustment to avoid having that pulled...
 
darn darn darn Beer


-------------
72 GT Ute
   


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 18-November-2015 at 1:46PM
I understand...just depends what your trying to do with the car.  If you plan on building a race car; more track than street then adjustability is required.   You could easily modify this setup to make it adjustable either with a new rod; it doesn't cost that much to get the OEM strut rod cut and threaded and use a threaded rod found at speedway and/or shim this setup with washers or the like.  

For me; I'm looking for mostly street with some autocross fun.  You really dont need that much adjustability for street.  You just need to fix a little of the geometry, the slop, and binding problems in the stock setup.  Here is an article for reference where they fixed the stock setup (springs, upper a-arm, sway bars, shock, tires, etc) and went from .73 on the skid pad to .91.  Typical off-the-shelf stuff.  Pretty damn good for a 70's car.  Its enough to put a smile on my face :-)  

http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/chassis-suspension/hrdp-9901-project-monte1go-suspension-upgrade/

I like the design.  It puts the pivot closest to the OEM location than any other option Ive seen.   I look at this where this part gives me more options where I had none before.  I dont have access to all the CNC mills,  etc. to make my own parts.  So now I have a part to help fix the problem where before I had nothing.  

As more parts become available hopefully more people will fix up these old fords thus increasing demand which makes these after market manufacturers wake up and take notice.

Just my 2.5 cents...    You still have some time to think it over.



-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: 72FordGTS
Date Posted: 18-November-2015 at 3:08PM
Originally posted by Rockatansky Rockatansky wrote:

I've been trying to feel it but I'm not really there. also some slight concern with the change in pivot location / geometry, and the 3 screws holding the bearing in place.
darn darn darn Beer
 
It's my understanding there will still be the factory nut on the rod.  So if worse case scenario that three bolts let go, wouldn't the nut still keep things loosely in place?  At least it looks like it would to me from the diagrams...


-------------
Vince

1972 Ford GTS Sportsroof - Survivor, One Family car

GTS.org Admin


Posted By: BackInBlack
Date Posted: 18-November-2015 at 3:56PM
Perhaps research the reliability and customer feedback of the RRS part for mustangs from which this is based.

http://rrs-online.com/us/strut-rod-adjuster.html

I looked and didn't find anything of consequence.

BTW...all the fasteners are better than grade 8 hardware.   170,000psi.   Thats pretty damn strong.  This is the same level of hard used in performance rod bolts.   I would expect other parts to fail before they fail.  


-------------
-John
1973 GTS


Posted By: 72FordGTS
Date Posted: 19-November-2015 at 2:22AM
Check out this video to see the deflection in stock rubber strut rod bushings.  This is on a Mustang, but it gives an idea how much they move.  I am pretty sure that clunking nose this car has is also what I am getting with new rubber Moog bushings.  It sure feels like it anyway.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPhRhZYLTpI&feature=youtu.be" rel="nofollow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPhRhZYLTpI&feature=youtu.be


-------------
Vince

1972 Ford GTS Sportsroof - Survivor, One Family car

GTS.org Admin



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net