Lowering a T

B

Bruce Compton Canada

Senior Member
I'd like to lower the rear end of my T coupe at least 2". Can anyone see a problem by removing a few of the top "short" leaves, as they appear to do very little except add some height and maybe a little stiffness to the rear of the car. I have two reasons for wanting to do this: one is that my wife cannot get in because of the huge 17" first step, and the second is that I'd like to decrease the angle between the rear of the ****** and the driveshaft ( at the U joint) . I've already lowered the front a little by using the '26-27 front spindles but the car still has a definite "rake". Thanks : Bruce
 
My T is bouncy enough with the full pack, I don't think you would like the ride with less springs in a coupe and yes they do more then add height. You could carry a small step stool like they use to have for boarding trains or add a rung under the running board. There was a photo just shown on the MTFCA site in the last couple of weeks of a touring with the extra rung. Maybe one of the slide out RV steps could be used under the running board. The "rake" between the rear end and transmission is how the car was designed and unless you have something way different then stock from the transmission back don't see why you would want to change it.
You could also get one of the reverse eye main leafs and see if that would do the job.
https://www.modeltford.com/item/3824RVA.aspx
 
The way it was often done in the era.
 

Attachments

  • t spring a.JPG
    t spring a.JPG
    206.3 KB · Views: 44
  • t spring b.JPG
    t spring b.JPG
    192.6 KB · Views: 29
Bending them cold or hot it should be re-tempered to hold the bend. Some people get by and have no problems. Same with re-arching springs some get by, while others, the springs just go flat again.
 
Thanks for the input guys. I'm almost done building a second step from a section of an old running board on parallel links and powered by a '54 Lincoln power seat drive. It works great and will ease the entry problem. I still would somehow like to minimize the drive angle ( I know all Ts have this situation), but it seems to me that the U-joint never sees a straight line and is always working to deal with this unnecessary angle to transmit power, and I can't raise the front of the motor. I know lots of builders that go to great lengths to set the drive angle to zero to make things more efficient and vibration free. Thanks again : Bruce
 
I don't see any advantage in making the model T single universal joint aim directly at the engine / differential. I think you are imagining something that is not a problem. Pack the U-joint with grease and forget about it.
 
I've found that a straight ujoint will vibrate more than one with at least 2 degrees of angle. They are designed to run at an angle.
 
Part of the fun of this hobby is the personal tweaks we give our cars. It never hurts to experiment. Maybe your car has had extra spring leaves added in the past (you know, an early moonshine runner!).
 
redmodelt said:
My T is bouncy enough with the full pack, I don't think you would like the ride with less springs in a coupe and yes they do more then add height. You could carry a small step stool like they use to have for boarding trains or add a rung under the running board. There was a photo just shown on the MTFCA site in the last couple of weeks of a touring with the extra rung. Maybe one of the slide out RV steps could be used under the running board. The "rake" between the rear end and transmission is how the car was designed and unless you have something way different then stock from the transmission back don't see why you would want to change it.
You could also get one of the reverse eye main leafs and see if that would do the job.
https://www.modeltford.com/item/3824RVA.aspx
Click to expand...

This is good advice ! Wayne
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top