shock angle
- Thread starter NSDWS
- Start date
JSeery
Member Emeritus
There are tables that allow you to determine shock value for different angles, but that is too much angle! Most likely needs a shorter shock with the top mounted nearer the inside of the frame rail. Also need to use the a shock with the proper shock rate, you can get close by looking for a shock the length you want off of a similar weight car (weight for the rear wheels).
Talkwrench
Well-known member
JSeery
Member Emeritus
Might find this link interesting:
http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/...ck-absorber-mounts-what-have-you-done.675842/
http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/...ck-absorber-mounts-what-have-you-done.675842/
VeryTangled
Well-known member
Yes
Talkwrench
Well-known member
Looking at my photo now it might be a bit deceiving, as the pic could be a bit "fish eyed" making them look wider apart..Mmm well we did it as per instructions and I can tell you it works very well, I do have a C E anti swaybar up front and it goes round corners like its on rails.. No way I would ever worry about putting a anti sway bar on the rear.
Last edited:
V8COOPMAN
Well-known member
Well now, this picture answers the question I asked earlier about your open drive, yet STOCK banjo rear end. The original rear has been converted to open drive via that shiney bearing retainer and seal affair. There is an upper anti-torque rod visible with a Heim end mounted just above that shiney retainer, and running forward to another attach point. Depending on what the front of that rod is attached to, it's possible that COULD be part of your ride problem. Any way you could picture the front end mounting of that black rod?
One more note about your shocks.......you cannot angle them outward MUCH more at the top because your exhaust pipes limit that direction. You could make the mounting more vertical by choosing some somewhat shorter shocks, and utilizing a weld-on mount farther inboard, similar to the ones in TALKWRENCH's picture. DD
Drbrown
Well-known member
Considering some simple physics, once the shock's mounting exceeds a 45 degree angle from vertical, the shock becomes ineffective in controlling and cushioning the vertical movement of the car body. However, at 45 degrees or an even lower slope it MAY contribute to controlling car body "roll" but obviously only when the car is in a turn .... not really its intended function. Having transverse springs vs. longitudinal springs affects this.
Cushioning the car's vertical movement is best done between an ideal vertical position and 45 degree angle.
If traction during acceleration is important, then angling a shock forward would use the car's rearward shift in center of gravity to improve that.
Regardless, consult the manufacturer to determine a suitable shock based on the car's specific wheel load and a shock's optimum operating length.
Cushioning the car's vertical movement is best done between an ideal vertical position and 45 degree angle.
If traction during acceleration is important, then angling a shock forward would use the car's rearward shift in center of gravity to improve that.
Regardless, consult the manufacturer to determine a suitable shock based on the car's specific wheel load and a shock's optimum operating length.
flathead 53
Well-known member
just went through this on my 40 coupe . there is a company pure hot rods that make a lower bracket that kicks the bottom out some off the backing plate, also the upper mounting hole could be more toward the frame, mine work great I also have the chart on proper shock angle , let me know if you want any of this info.
NSDWS
Member
V8Coopman hope this one helps best I can do right now. Your right about the exhaust being in the way to so cant go outboard towards much. I sure hate to weld bracket to that rear end but might be only option. I have to get ready for a trip to KY so it will be next week before I can get anything done on it.
Attachments
38bill
Well-known member
Well now, this picture answers the question I asked earlier about your open drive, yet STOCK banjo rear end. The original rear has been converted to open drive via that shiney bearing retainer and seal affair. There is an upper anti-torque rod visible with a Heim end mounted just above that shiney retainer, and running forward to another attach point. Depending on what the front of that rod is attached to, it's possible that COULD be part of your ride problem. Any way you could picture the front end mounting of that black rod?
One more note about your shocks.......you cannot angle them outward MUCH more at the top because your exhaust pipes limit that direction. You could make the mounting more vertical by choosing some somewhat shorter shocks, and utilizing a weld-on mount farther inboard, similar to the ones in TALKWRENCH's picture. DD
Check out Hot Rod Works. They make the rear end conversion and the torque arm kit (it bolts to a tab welded to the front end of the rear wishbone). I have been running a setup like this with a T5 for 12 years or so.
http://www.hotrodworks.com/product/1935-1940-ford-torque-arm-kit/
PS: I welded lower shock mounts on to the axle tube to get the shock angle and clearance I wanted. The exhaust system makes it hard to work around.
V8COOPMAN
Well-known member
Yes, once I saw the front radius rod mount like in the picture, I was sure it was the Hot Rod Works set-up. Good folks with quality products. With that upper link attached directly to the forward end of the radius rod, it's allowed to articulate WITH the rear end assembly as a one-piece commodity, strictly moving about that ONE mount point, like the torque tube does. I see no real reason you should have a bad ride, other than perhaps a spring that is too stiff. Having the shocks angled such won't promote a bad ride.......just won't dampen axle movement maybe as well as a more vertically-mounted shock(s). DD
