Twin tube front end
- Thread starter fordsbyjay
- Start date
fordsbyjay
Active Member
There was actually a 32(??) there with a twin I beam in the front. They took the front clip from an F150 and narrowed then tied into a smaller frame under the cowl. It sat high and looked kinda funny so I didn't take any pictures of it. Kinda wish I would have now.....
Ted Brown
Member
Like you say, a good conversion piece, but it does need safety washers, just why people forget these I don't know, probably have been lucky and never had a joint come apart... If they had, they would for sure run safety washers... Very clean workmanship... and I would be using 1 inch Heims at the axle at the least, but probably big rubber type spring bushings rather than Heims... 
Thanks for posting this link GT63. I have three rods with Ford Twin I-Beam front suspensions and I included two of them in my book. I prefer the Ford axles over the "center split" axles shown on the nice looking rod above primarily because the longer the axle...the less camber problems created.
This first photo shows the twin beams on my scratch built sedan/delivery which is featured in the book GT63 linked. Note that the axles extend all the way to the opposite frame rail rather than meeting in the center of the frame. The third photo shows who the finished car gives the appearance of a traditional straight axle (until you take a second closer look) while still providing the comforts of an independent front suspension.
This second set of photos is from my scratch built pickup truck and shows 1979 twin beams with air bags. I've put nearly 30,000 miles on this rod without any front end problems other than having to upgrade my shocks to Carrera A! adjustable units.
benT
Active Member
cboy-- great job on the web book. I've followed your build on Hotrodders and glad to see you here. I love the out of the box thinking with the front end. I've thought that it would make a unique and perhaps smoother ride. One question, the first car you show in the pic below ( and the one you chronicle in the book) has the axles above the frame and the other one has the axles below in a more traditional fashion. Have you had any issues with the one with the axles above hitting the frame? I tend to like the axle below set-up, but just curious on whether there is much of a difference...
I've seen the smaller twin-I beams on the rangers...might these be more appropriate for a 23-27 T?
Good question. The underslung frame (the one shown in the book) was clearly something new and different...and something of an experiment. I have not yet encountered any problem hitting the frame but it is VERY tight quarters. And if you are not very careful with our design and planning, you could encounter some difficulties. If I do another chassis this way, I will definitely "C" the frame about 1 - 1 1/2" below each axle to allow for more breathing room.
Here are some pictures of another one of my scratch builds, this one with the frame Z'd over the axles AND using the shorter 1981 Twin I-Beams. I also used coil over shocks instead of air bags or leaf springs. I don't like the look of these later, shorter, axles nearly as much as the earlier (1976-1979) axles which are full length and come with disk brakes. I also like the look of the underslung frame better than the Z'd frame but the Z'd frame avoids the space complications.
This is my front end:
I've been running this for 15 years. There is bump steer, but it is not a problem on decent roads. I am going to split the axle this winter and that should reduce the bump steer by moving the axle pivots closer to the R&P pivots. Fat Man no longer sells the kit, so I'll have to make the stubs, etc. I'm going to post the project somewhere and will let you know.
I've been running this for 15 years. There is bump steer, but it is not a problem on decent roads. I am going to split the axle this winter and that should reduce the bump steer by moving the axle pivots closer to the R&P pivots. Fat Man no longer sells the kit, so I'll have to make the stubs, etc. I'm going to post the project somewhere and will let you know.
Ma_n_Pa T
Member
PotvinGuy, I never noticed that before when you were talking about having bump-steer, if you would go longer with the steering arms and line the rack arms up both horizontal and vertical I would bet it would get rid of the bump-steer. Mine is strait with loaded weight and I have no bump-steer. Longer arms should also help with the quickness of the steering as well.
Jerry
Jerry
You read my mind. Part of the front end makeover includes correct Ackermann (my present setup would require a wheelbase of 47 ft!), new spindles and steering arms, adding shocks and making the rack arms parallel to the axle and the ground. Thanks for the reply, it's good to know I'm on the right track. :kiltdance:
Ma_n_Pa T
Member
Your on the right track, that will fix the problem, send me your email, we will send a few pic's of the new build, we have the longer arms on it but we have not put it on the road yet, Jerry cookjg23@gmail.com
Similar threads
