69427
The Artist formerly known as Turbo84
Glad to hear about the progress. :thumbs:
Long Overdue Progress! My Retro Airbag
- Thread starter BBShark
- Start date
Glad to hear about the progress. :thumbs:
It shouldn't take too long to get the springs and shocks installed. If I can drive it, I can properly tune it. It will be the first time I have driven the car in ~15 years!
Hope I don't drive by any police on the tuning runs:bounce:
Hope I don't drive by any police on the tuning runs:bounce:
bobs77vet
Well-known member
that is exceptional news......15 yrs is along time to wait
SuperBuickGuy
Well-known member
fantastic
Got the front spring/shocks done. Had a really hard time finding the stuff I bought years ago.
Today, with some luck, I'll get the rear done. Then it's drivable!
Today, with some luck, I'll get the rear done. Then it's drivable!
69427
The Artist formerly known as Turbo84
:thumbs:
Well the rear was a little more of a challenge. I had to drop the exhaust to get the spring mounts in. I had the ride height set with threaded rod in place of the shocks when the body was off. Seems I put the upper shock bolts in backwards so now I have to cut them out.
I'll get there sooner or later.
I'll get there sooner or later.
Ran into another snag. Tried to install the rear shocks. With the suspension at full droop, the shock body interferes with the trailing arm. Really badly interferes. It is not even close. When the suspension is lifted to ride height it is better but still interferes.
What is really strange is, with the shock hanging from the upper mount, you would need to force the bottom into place. Basically "bending" the shock into position. That cant be good for the shock.
The suspension travels in 2 arcs, one front to back and the other arc is lateral (90 degrees to that). But the shock pivots are arranged so that it only has freedom of motion from front to back. The lateral arc causes a bind.
Seems like the front shocks would be a better setup for the rear
What is really strange is, with the shock hanging from the upper mount, you would need to force the bottom into place. Basically "bending" the shock into position. That cant be good for the shock.
The suspension travels in 2 arcs, one front to back and the other arc is lateral (90 degrees to that). But the shock pivots are arranged so that it only has freedom of motion from front to back. The lateral arc causes a bind.
Seems like the front shocks would be a better setup for the rear
mfain
Well-known member
Can you post a photo?
SuperBuickGuy
Well-known member
With the tubular front arms I'd guess that you have a shark-bite or similar rear?
those have to be perfectly assembled or there is all sorts of clearance issues.
Also
when the suspension is at full droop - even on a stock car, the shock will interference fit
but without pictures - those are just guesses
those have to be perfectly assembled or there is all sorts of clearance issues.
Also
when the suspension is at full droop - even on a stock car, the shock will interference fit
but without pictures - those are just guesses
phantomjock
Well-known member
That is going to need a new hood!
Excellent work. And gorgeous. I am having a shock/spring interference problem now with my new wheel/tire combo. I am once again, stuck in an engineering mode. Am seriously - very seriously considering a pushrod setup on the IRS. Not much stock left anyway.
Best of luck on your mod.
Cheers - Jim
Excellent work. And gorgeous. I am having a shock/spring interference problem now with my new wheel/tire combo. I am once again, stuck in an engineering mode. Am seriously - very seriously considering a pushrod setup on the IRS. Not much stock left anyway.
Best of luck on your mod.
Cheers - Jim
I am using a standard based suspension with an upper control arm added and slip halfshafts with a VPB Dual Mount spring.
So the positions of the upper shock mount and the lower shock mount are stock as is the position of the trailing arm (or within ¼ inch of stock).
PROBLEM #1 – With the shock mounted in the upper mount and allowed to "hang" in the position established by the top mount, I will need to force the bottom of the shock OVER 1 ¼ inches. This takes about 15ft/lbs of force on the body of the shock to do this. This offset only gets worse with the shock at ride height (shown at full droop).
However because of the shock mounts, it is relatively free to rotate front to back. That is what I don't get. The front shock has a upper mount that does not restrict the body of the shock at all. It's basically a 360 degree swivel. BUT the front suspension only pivots in 1 plane and the rear suspension rotates in a plane defined by the trailing arm pivot and also rotates in another plane (90 degrees to it) defined by the control rods. BUT the rear shock only has freedom to operate in one plane.
PROBLEM #2 – If the shock were to be moved over 1 ¼ inches so that you could attach it to the lower mount, the trailing arm would interfere with the shock body by about ¾ inch.
SOLUTION? – I am thinking that I will machine an adapter to re-locate the lower mount position (inward to the center of the car) 1 ¼ inches. This will offset the shock absorber loads on the lower mount and could be an issue based on the dynamic load on the shock. I am going to work though that in the next few days.
But the question remains, why is my car different (shock mounting) than others? Or is it?
So the positions of the upper shock mount and the lower shock mount are stock as is the position of the trailing arm (or within ¼ inch of stock).
PROBLEM #1 – With the shock mounted in the upper mount and allowed to "hang" in the position established by the top mount, I will need to force the bottom of the shock OVER 1 ¼ inches. This takes about 15ft/lbs of force on the body of the shock to do this. This offset only gets worse with the shock at ride height (shown at full droop).
However because of the shock mounts, it is relatively free to rotate front to back. That is what I don't get. The front shock has a upper mount that does not restrict the body of the shock at all. It's basically a 360 degree swivel. BUT the front suspension only pivots in 1 plane and the rear suspension rotates in a plane defined by the trailing arm pivot and also rotates in another plane (90 degrees to it) defined by the control rods. BUT the rear shock only has freedom to operate in one plane.
PROBLEM #2 – If the shock were to be moved over 1 ¼ inches so that you could attach it to the lower mount, the trailing arm would interfere with the shock body by about ¾ inch.
SOLUTION? – I am thinking that I will machine an adapter to re-locate the lower mount position (inward to the center of the car) 1 ¼ inches. This will offset the shock absorber loads on the lower mount and could be an issue based on the dynamic load on the shock. I am going to work though that in the next few days.
But the question remains, why is my car different (shock mounting) than others? Or is it?
SuperBuickGuy
Well-known member
my first question is 'have you aligned the toe yet?'
that said, with the aftermarket parts there, I can imagine some fitting might be required. When I helped someone with their ridetech kit, it relocated the shock mounts to below the trailing arm - however, it also put the upper mount at the pinion.
It will take some looking to find a sharkbite kit - but it's similar concept.
I'm afraid that if you move the leverage point out on the shock mount, that it will cause twisting problems...
that said, with the aftermarket parts there, I can imagine some fitting might be required. When I helped someone with their ridetech kit, it relocated the shock mounts to below the trailing arm - however, it also put the upper mount at the pinion.
It will take some looking to find a sharkbite kit - but it's similar concept.
I'm afraid that if you move the leverage point out on the shock mount, that it will cause twisting problems...
mfain
Well-known member
I am using a standard based suspension with an upper control arm added and slip halfshafts with a VPB Dual Mount spring.
So the positions of the upper shock mount and the lower shock mount are stock as is the position of the trailing arm (or within ¼ inch of stock).
PROBLEM #1 – With the shock mounted in the upper mount and allowed to "hang" in the position established by the top mount, I will need to force the bottom of the shock OVER 1 ¼ inches. This takes about 15ft/lbs of force on the body of the shock to do this. This offset only gets worse with the shock at ride height (shown at full droop).
However because of the shock mounts, it is relatively free to rotate front to back. That is what I don't get. The front shock has a upper mount that does not restrict the body of the shock at all. It's basically a 360 degree swivel. BUT the front suspension only pivots in 1 plane and the rear suspension rotates in a plane defined by the trailing arm pivot and also rotates in another plane (90 degrees to it) defined by the control rods. BUT the rear shock only has freedom to operate in one plane.
PROBLEM #2 – If the shock were to be moved over 1 ¼ inches so that you could attach it to the lower mount, the trailing arm would interfere with the shock body by about ¾ inch.
SOLUTION? – I am thinking that I will machine an adapter to re-locate the lower mount position (inward to the center of the car) 1 ¼ inches. This will offset the shock absorber loads on the lower mount and could be an issue based on the dynamic load on the shock. I am going to work though that in the next few days.
But the question remains, why is my car different (shock mounting) than others? Or is it?
There are a lot of shocks with spherical bearings on each end to allow compliance in multiple directions. If you are committed to the shocks you have, you might be able to press the rubber bushings out and press in spherical bearings.
my first question is 'have you aligned the toe yet?'
that said, with the aftermarket parts there, I can imagine some fitting might be required. When I helped someone with their ridetech kit, it relocated the shock mounts to below the trailing arm - however, it also put the upper mount at the pinion.
It will take some looking to find a sharkbite kit - but it's similar concept.
I'm afraid that if you move the leverage point out on the shock mount, that it will cause twisting problems...
Yes, the car is aligned at ride height.
The twist on the lower mount is concerning but I'm not convinced that the moment is that great. If you assume that the dynamic load on the shock is limited by the spring (rate) and you make an assumption that the dynamic load on the shock absorber is some fraction of the spring rate, the force is probably pretty low. So, if the spring provides 500lbs/in and the damping rate is 50% of that, it's manageable. I think the actual damping rate is less than that.
I am using a standard based suspension with an upper control arm added and slip halfshafts with a VPB Dual Mount spring.
So the positions of the upper shock mount and the lower shock mount are stock as is the position of the trailing arm (or within ¼ inch of stock).
PROBLEM #1 – With the shock mounted in the upper mount and allowed to "hang" in the position established by the top mount, I will need to force the bottom of the shock OVER 1 ¼ inches. This takes about 15ft/lbs of force on the body of the shock to do this. This offset only gets worse with the shock at ride height (shown at full droop).
However because of the shock mounts, it is relatively free to rotate front to back. That is what I don't get. The front shock has a upper mount that does not restrict the body of the shock at all. It's basically a 360 degree swivel. BUT the front suspension only pivots in 1 plane and the rear suspension rotates in a plane defined by the trailing arm pivot and also rotates in another plane (90 degrees to it) defined by the control rods. BUT the rear shock only has freedom to operate in one plane.
PROBLEM #2 – If the shock were to be moved over 1 ¼ inches so that you could attach it to the lower mount, the trailing arm would interfere with the shock body by about ¾ inch.
SOLUTION? – I am thinking that I will machine an adapter to re-locate the lower mount position (inward to the center of the car) 1 ¼ inches. This will offset the shock absorber loads on the lower mount and could be an issue based on the dynamic load on the shock. I am going to work though that in the next few days.
But the question remains, why is my car different (shock mounting) than others? Or is it?
There are a lot of shocks with spherical bearings on each end to allow compliance in multiple directions. If you are committed to the shocks you have, you might be able to press the rubber bushings out and press in spherical bearings.
I have looked at some spherical bushings but haven't found one that will fit, that doesn't mean they aren't made. Maybe some kind of mini Johnny Joint?
mfain
Well-known member
That's who I was going to suggest. Also, take a look at the Ridetech 90002773 weld-on R-joint. That one is for a 5/8" shaft, but they make other sizes.
Pappy
69427
The Artist formerly known as Turbo84
I've been looking for a similar bushing setup for the past couple years and have struck out. Keep us updated if the parts on that Pegasus list ends up doing the trick.
mfain
Well-known member
I've got an old set of AFCO steel body shocks, and I noticed they have bearings that can be removed, so I looked them up. Here is a link to one of the available bearings with an outside diameter of about 1". You might be able to remove the rubber bushings, hone or sleeve the inside diameter to the right size, and machine for retainer clips or just tack weld a retainer ring to hold it in.
https://www.afcoracing.com/store.aspx?itemid=3336&prodid=20169&pagetitle=Shock-Bearing-And-Clip-
https://www.afcoracing.com/store.aspx?itemid=3336&prodid=20169&pagetitle=Shock-Bearing-And-Clip-