Ron Pope Motorsports                California Custom Roadsters               

Rods n' Rhodies in Florence Oregon

OK, so let's say you have hairpins, radious rods, or whatever you wish to call them. Now let's say you remove the front axle (or rear if you have them there), leave the hairpins attached to the axle. Lay it all out there so you can pick up the end of one hairpin (the end that was attached to the frame), with the axle still flat on the ground. What's going to happen is the other hairpin is going to go up exactly the same amount. Now have a buddy go over there and stomp on that hairpin and see what happens to the one you are holding onto. Whap, and it's also on the floor, pulled out of your hands.

Now raise your end just 1", and put your hand under the end you are holding. Have your buddy stomp on the other one again, and see what words come out of your mouth. The only option to it not hurting like hell is that something bends.

Drive over little bitty bumps day after day, time after time, and it's bend after bend to those suspension parts. This is not a good thing! Yes, you will be able to get away with it (and the accompanying poor ride it contributes to) for quite a long while, 'cause steel is pretty forgiving. Eventually something will break. (EXCEPTION: If the other end of the car has real independent suspension, then the frame will just rotate for each bump, instead of parts bending. This will only cause a jerky ride, with less stress on the parts, and is not nearly so unsafe.)

Ask yourself why no auto manufacturer has EVER built a car like that. Ask yourself how many times you can bend and stress those parts before they fail. If you are comfortable with the answers, then go for it. It's simply put, not a safe design. Every single little tiny bump you go over stresses them, the big ones stress them the most, of course, but make no mistake, even a 1/4" difference in height stresses those parts! There is really no mystery here at all, it's simply the laws of physics. Gosh, throw in a tubular axle, and things get even worse, because now since the axle resists twisting motion much more effectively when it's a tube than when it's an I beam, the hair pins must take all the stress. If nothing else, you should at least use rubber bushes instead of heim joints or clevis' for that application and let it have a tiny bit of give. And please, never ever bend those threaded suspension parts for alignment, do it some other way.

If you don't believe me on this, go get some 2x4s, and make a big U, the shape of your front axle with hairpins installed. Now do the stomp test on the end that would attach to the frame and see what happens... Sorry to go on for so long, but it seems like some people may not understand the physics of this. If you really do understand it and still want to run hairpins, then good luck and go for it. We are working with all different levels of mechanical experience and knowledge here, so we need to encourage sound design.

PS I drove at an angle into 5 different driveways at random just to test the height difference using the family SUV, and measured the wheel arch openings. They ranged from 3" to 9". It really doesn't matter how fast or slow you go, you still will see the same amount of flex / stress.
 
PS I know I can't change all of your minds on this, but at least I've got you thinking about it, and that is a good thing. Thanks for being tolerant and the good descusion.
 
Going back the invitational car show in Florence for a minute . . . how do you get on the invite list. I took a drive down the coast in my T-Bucket and was in Florence on Saturday but knew nothing about the show.
 
OK, so let's say you have hairpins, radious rods, or whatever you wish to call them. Now let's say you remove the front axle (or rear if you have them there), leave the hairpins attached to the axle. Lay it all out there so you can pick up the end of one hairpin (the end that was attached to the frame), with the axle still flat on the ground. What's going to happen is the other hairpin is going to go up exactly the same amount. Now have a buddy go over there and stomp on that hairpin and see what happens to the one you are holding onto. Whap, and it's also on the floor, pulled out of your hands.

Now raise your end just 1", and put your hand under the end you are holding. Have your buddy stomp on the other one again, and see what words come out of your mouth. The only option to it not hurting like hell is that something bends.

Drive over little bitty bumps day after day, time after time, and it's bend after bend to those suspension parts. This is not a good thing! Yes, you will be able to get away with it (and the accompanying poor ride it contributes to) for quite a long while, 'cause steel is pretty forgiving. Eventually something will break. (EXCEPTION: If the other end of the car has real independent suspension, then the frame will just rotate for each bump, instead of parts bending. This will only cause a jerky ride, with less stress on the parts, and is not nearly so unsafe.)

Ask yourself why no auto manufacturer has EVER built a car like that. Ask yourself how many times you can bend and stress those parts before they fail. If you are comfortable with the answers, then go for it. It's simply put, not a safe design. Every single little tiny bump you go over stresses them, the big ones stress them the most, of course, but make no mistake, even a 1/4" difference in height stresses those parts! There is really no mystery here at all, it's simply the laws of physics. Gosh, throw in a tubular axle, and things get even worse, because now since the axle resists twisting motion much more effectively when it's a tube than when it's an I beam, the hair pins must take all the stress. If nothing else, you should at least use rubber bushes instead of heim joints or clevis' for that application and let it have a tiny bit of give. And please, never ever bend those threaded suspension parts for alignment, do it some other way.

If you don't believe me on this, go get some 2x4s, and make a big U, the shape of your front axle with hairpins installed. Now do the stomp test on the end that would attach to the frame and see what happens... Sorry to go on for so long, but it seems like some people may not understand the physics of this. If you really do understand it and still want to run hairpins, then good luck and go for it. We are working with all different levels of mechanical experience and knowledge here, so we need to encourage sound design.

PS I drove at an angle into 5 different driveways at random just to test the height difference using the family SUV, and measured the wheel arch openings. They ranged from 3" to 9". It really doesn't matter how fast or slow you go, you still will see the same amount of flex / stress.
Have you ever looked at a '37 to '41 Ford suspension, the rear especially. In the old days we used to split the front and rear wishbones to get our mounting points and also bent the bones to mount on the frame{homemade or A-Model} instead of underneath in the middle. JMHO,T-Test
 
Have you ever looked at a '37 to '41 Ford suspension, the rear especially. In the old days we used to split the front and rear wishbones to get our mounting points and also bent the bones to mount on the frame{homemade or A-Model} instead of underneath in the middle. JMHO,T-Test
Also forgot to add, read your quote at the end of your posts. Some people just don't like the "new" ways of building, just stick with the "tried & true" original ways of safety first,looks second,comfort last. :laugh: :laugh: I agree with your quote more every day I get older. :laugh: :laugh:
 
It goes just like the bumble bee. Experts say it won't work but it does and works very well.

How often have you heard it said either as part of a point being made in a sermon, or in conversation, that science cannot explain how a bumblebee can fly. I've lost count of all the times I've heard this. Usually it goes something like this:

And then there's the case of the bumblebee. According to the greatest minds of science, it cannot fly. Its wings aren't big enough. Aerodynamics says it is impossible. The biggest computers in the world all come to the same conclusion, it can't fly. But what does the bumblebee do? It ignores the great minds, the skeptics, the computers... and it just goes ahead and flies.​
 
Mine does that with the long CCR type radius rods. My frame connector point is about 12" further back than your rear 4 bar mount. That is the reason Bill Keifer came up with the idea.






I'll have to join the 4 bar advocacy group. I doubt that there are too many hairpin configurations that will do this.:unsure:

Challenge.jpg

[/quote]
 
Ted,
I don't think I can agree on that point, think about just driving into your typical driveway in a city, one wheel goes up quite a way, the other is still on the street, so it's down. Very often, that can be in excess of 6" of difference. I'm just saying that it takes so little more to go 4 bar, and that completely elimnates the problem. I've seen several pictures of broken axles, broken radious rods, etc. I don't know if people don't understand the mechanics of it or why they would ever opt for a split wishbone or radious rods. I suspect a lot of guys just never really thought about it that much when they built the machine, and the book says use radious rods, or they saw them on another car so they do that.

It just seems prudent to encourage good design,
Corley
If you like the looks of a 4 bar so much, build it on your own car, not mine!!! I have had my axle at extremes no one would believe, off road down in Mex. climbing some big hills... and in and out of so many driveways you could not follow me around in most any other T with hair pin rods for long.. and Bill Keifer did not design any of that T Bucket CCR sold for years, it was all my design and I tested it for many years... 4 bar is a late model idea, and does not fit my idea of a real old style T Bucket, not sorry to say... In all reality a single tapered old Ford radius was the real look of the time, but an I beam was made to twist without stressing the axle, better than a tube, so go big bushings, not clevises or Heim joints.
 
Challenge.jpg

If you can get that much articulation out of the front axle with the coilover mounts that I see I'm thinkin Broken Parts.....Ron (ruggs)
 
Well the part that I see that should break would be the top shock/spring mount, wrong way for the bolt to sit... should be like the bottom mount at least... at a greater angle than sitting still, it would want to break/bend the bolt or mount... plus we are not building off road chassis here, just fun street T Buckets... Drive safe :)
 
Well the part that I see that should break would be the top shock/spring mount, wrong way for the bolt to sit... should be like the bottom mount at least... at a greater angle than sitting still, it would want to break/bend the bolt or mount... plus we are not building off road chassis here, just fun street T Buckets... Drive safe :)
Can't do that with the tierod behind the spindles either. Akerman is a good thing but not nessesary on these little cars. Set as close as possible and drive on,just tire wear a little sooner. T-Test
 
Akerman, now people think it is not a needed thing, well I like for all my tires to be in control with the road, and without Akerman in any corner your front tires are out of control, skidding or slipping sideways, more or less, but out of control none the less... Tire wear is not that big a deal breaker, but control is, as far as I think... Even the large amounts of caster that most Hot rodders want to use is crazy, tires now lean over and lift one side off of the weight off the tires as well, more out of complete contact... Fine on a light weight dragster with skinny tires which is going straight (most of the time) in all reality only a very small amount of caster is needed to drive 200 MPH... Look at a Grand Prix car, no tire lean when they corner, the tires stay flat and in full contact with the track...
NOW for another thing about that pic of the 4 bar set up with the axle all twisted, look at the twist that each of the tubes in the 4 bar needs to be twisted, either they are twisting or the adjustment nuts have broken loose, now they run on the threads alone, not a real good thing to do either, if you notice, I have no adjustment joints to break loose on my hairpin rods, neither the front or the rear... Just soft bushings take up the twisting action... My tie rod being mounted up top and where it should be, is out of harms way, and it works the way the front end id supposed to, Ackerman and all... When I wear out a set of tires it is from many hard miles, as it should be and even all the way across the tread... Plus my car is very easy to full turn and still hand push if needed, not so easy with a car without Ackerman, because the tires are so far out of control and always fighting each other in any turn... I don't know if any more needs to be said about this difference of opinion about 4bar or hairpin, it is what you like the looks of when you build your car... Just do it right either way... :)
 
Can't do that with the tierod behind the spindles either. Akerman is a good thing but not nessesary on these little cars. Set as close as possible and drive on,just tire wear a little sooner. T-Test

Akerman was one of the FIRST principles of the motor car. Two different radius dont work if you ignore them. It effects braking, steering and road holding. Ignore it if you want but as a first principal its like doing away with Newtons first law
Your choice, your car,.
Gerry
 
"If you can get that much articulation out of the front axle with the coilover mounts that I see I'm thinkin Broken Parts.....Ron (ruggs)"

I believe that you were wanting a pic with the coilovers in place. Here you go. Neither coilover is bottomed or topped out


CoiloversMountedonFront.jpg


My sincerest apologies to the hairpin gods for treading on such sacred ground. Don't get me wrong, I like hairpins. I should. I've bent nearly 10,000 of them over approximately the last 18 years. I just think that there are other ways that are better for keeping those wheels where they are supposed to be and free to independently react to roadway deviations.

DSCN1416-1.jpg
 
Like Ted Brown says and I repeat myself, either way is good and works......just do it the right way. Right material, proper hole edge distances, high strength end fittings whether heims or clevises [not the real cheap ones] and grade 5 or 8 fasteners [another arguement] of the right size. If you want an off-road capable car then build an off-road capable suspension - front and back. If your building a show car not meant to be driven much then use your imagination. If you're building a driver then either way can work well. Hairpins might give a stiffer ride than 4-bar depending on the spring rates. I'm doing 4-bar for ride considerations, period. Not because I read that it was better. As for ackerman, over 100 years of car makers using ackerman can't be wrong. In fact, it was first used on horse drawn wagons to correct the problem of wheel side slip while turning. Made it easier for the horses. Now it makes it easier on the driver and tires. You want your front wheels to be turning on the proper radius measured from the turn center. Can't do that without ackerman.
 
Ted, et. al,
Let me get this straight. You are not concerned that you have put a 2" high I beam, or a 2" round tube up front in an application that forces them to act as a really big sway bar? Since niether, and especially the round tube doesn't want to twist very well, they put a lot of stess on things, period. If you can't see that, then you don't understand the simple physics involved. As said before, if the back end is also setup that way, the front fights the back. If the back is independent, the the whole chasis will perform a twisting motion. (That's the main way it affects "ride".)

To talk about what happens when the coils are installed in the pictured car, is to totally miss the point of why the picture was posted. The point of the post was to show what happens to the axle vs the frame when one wheel goes up, and how this motion is taken up by the 4 link and not by some component having to bend, twist, or flex as happens with hairpins. Whatever springs you have or don't have are irrelevant to that point.

As long as you understand that your hairpin setup makes a big sway bar out of the front axle (or rear if installed there), then go for it... Since those are not spring steel components, I prefer to look at it as an unsafe usage of those parts. I DO agree on your point that rubber components help out here by absorbing the twist, and threaded links are not a good idea in this area.

Corley

PS And as far as '30s-'40s Fords mentioned, with stock suspension, Henry solved this problem with a single point for the rear/front of the fork, with the front under the bell housing and the rear at the front of the torque tube. No stress in his design at all, it's only when you split the fork that things start to get dicey... I imagine that the flexiblility of those riveted/channel frames allowed people to get away with splitting the wishbone longer than the stiff tubular frames we use.
 
Ted, et. al,
Let me get this straight. You are not concerned that you have put a 2" high I beam, or a 2" round tube up front in an application that forces them to act as a really big sway bar? Since niether, and especially the round tube doesn't want to twist very well, they put a lot of stess on things, period. If you can't see that, then you don't understand the simple physics involved. As said before, if the back end is also setup that way, the front fights the back. If the back is independent, the the whole chasis will perform a twisting motion. (That's the main way it affects "ride".)

To talk about what happens when the coils are installed in the pictured car, is to totally miss the point of why the picture was posted. The point of the post was to show what happens to the axle vs the frame when one wheel goes up, and how this motion is taken up by the 4 link and not by some component having to bend, twist, or flex as happens with hairpins. Whatever springs you have or don't have are irrelevant to that point.

As long as you understand that your hairpin setup makes a big sway bar out of the front axle (or rear if installed there), then go for it... Since those are not spring steel components, I prefer to look at it as an unsafe usage of those parts. I DO agree on your point that rubber components help out here by absorbing the twist, and threaded links are not a good idea in this area.

Corley

PS And as far as '30s-'40s Fords mentioned, with stock suspension, Henry solved this problem with a single point for the rear/front of the fork, with the front under the bell housing and the rear at the front of the torque tube. No stress in his design at all, it's only when you split the fork that things start to get dicey... I imagine that the flexiblility of those riveted/channel frames allowed people to get away with splitting the wishbone longer than the stiff tubular frames we use.

You will love this set up then!

all yella1.JPG
Gerry
 
Corley,

It would impress the -- HELL-- out of me for you to post some of the cars that you have built and I don't mean something you have bought.

Also, with you in the photo building the car. This forum is for -- T-buckets only!?-- Not for Model A's, '32's or 34's. You do have a right to talk,

but if you're just another talker, sit down, stop talking!, and write a book!! -- I drove my --T-BUCKET-- for more than --15 -- years and put -- 25,000

miles on it, -- HARD AND FAST! -- I -- cut -- 3 1/2 -in--. out of the oil pan and put a skid plate. It's -- 3 -- in. off the ground. Front- end and rear-ends are

both independent. -- It rides like a sports car-- A - Ferrari - or an Indy-car. Both on the front - end and the rear- end, -----YOU NEVER SEE MORE

THAN AN 1 1/2 in. of movement. And yes, it's very low, but who gives a SHI*! It's a -- HOT ROD and in the weeds. You don't want a lot of

movement, but rather as little as possible --- with any suspension on any T-BUCKET. FOR ME, THIS SUBJECT IS CLOSED. Bob Nunes
 

     Ron Pope Motorsports                Advertise with Us!     
Back
Top