1934 cabriolet lowering
- Thread starter samsonized
- Start date
Bored&Stroked
Well-known member
Putting a dropped axle in the front is the easiest way to accomplish that end of the deal - with the assumption you're using the same tires/wheels and are running hydraulic brakes. Some folks will "rubber rake" it by running smaller tires/wheels in the front - which can bring the front down some more.
Note: With original mechanical brakes, about the only thing you can do is get a reversed eye spring . . . along with some "rubber rake". It is a real issue trying to drop an axle and run the stock mechanical brakes - due to how the cross-shafts come into the king pins.
Keep in mind, that if you're running a stock wishbone and a later flathead with the wider rear oil-pan, then you may not be able to run a reversed eye spring as it can cause the wishbone to hit the oil pan in the rear area of the pan.
The rear is a harder deal in that there are only two ways to lower it (without frame mods) - and they may not get you all the way there:
1) You can run longer shackles - the old cheap and easy way. The only issue is that you can get a lot more "shackle sway" in the suspension (due to them being longer). I don't like doing things that make my handling worse (around corners).
2) You can modify the spring: You can remove leaves and/or get a reversed eye main leaf. It will probably take a combination of BOTH to achieve 2.5" of lowering.
I would probably go for option #2 - it is the best overall approach, though it costs more money. Isn't that the way it always goes! LOL
Note: With original mechanical brakes, about the only thing you can do is get a reversed eye spring . . . along with some "rubber rake". It is a real issue trying to drop an axle and run the stock mechanical brakes - due to how the cross-shafts come into the king pins.
Keep in mind, that if you're running a stock wishbone and a later flathead with the wider rear oil-pan, then you may not be able to run a reversed eye spring as it can cause the wishbone to hit the oil pan in the rear area of the pan.
The rear is a harder deal in that there are only two ways to lower it (without frame mods) - and they may not get you all the way there:
1) You can run longer shackles - the old cheap and easy way. The only issue is that you can get a lot more "shackle sway" in the suspension (due to them being longer). I don't like doing things that make my handling worse (around corners).
2) You can modify the spring: You can remove leaves and/or get a reversed eye main leaf. It will probably take a combination of BOTH to achieve 2.5" of lowering.
I would probably go for option #2 - it is the best overall approach, though it costs more money. Isn't that the way it always goes! LOL
David J
Well-known member
Have not taken it out yet but Mikes 34 phaeton has a reversed eye rear main leaf . Pretty sure he did it to get the stock height back after adding 3 extra rear leafs . He used the car as a parts hauler to swap meets but it's days of being a part time pickup are over . I have plenty stock rear springs but was just going to take the three extras out and put a stock main lead back in as the spring looks real good . If you decide to go this way I will not be using the reversed eye main leaf . Dave.
samsonized
Well-known member
where do you get a reversed eye rear spring posies does not sell one
mercman from oz
Well-known member
Neat 1934 Ford Cabriolet just as it is now.
Looks beautiful and just perfect as it is. Why would you want to stuff it up. You must be a Hot Rodder. Regards, Kevin.
samsonized
Well-known member
no not really just think the car would look better a little lower.
David J
Well-known member
How about $20 and you pay shipping ?
Looks like the eye bushings are fine so a straight bolt in .
Well a ports power helps some .
Mike has the spindle bearings ABOVE the axle - not below where they belong. This lowers the front and obviously causes no issues . I am going to change them back also .
Looks like the eye bushings are fine so a straight bolt in .
Well a ports power helps some .
Mike has the spindle bearings ABOVE the axle - not below where they belong. This lowers the front and obviously causes no issues . I am going to change them back also .
51 MERC-CT
Well-known member
34PKUP
Well-known member
Shorter tires would just increase the distance between the tire and fender making the car look taller.
David J
Well-known member
Good point .
Bored&Stroked
Well-known member
On an original 34, the bearing rode on TOP of the spindle (between it and the round top of the king pin) - not below.
David J
Well-known member
Gotta love the taste of me foot !!! TWICE in the same thread !
Oh well and you are right . Good thing I had not switched it yet and I wonder why it is not on the bottom ? Sure would make more sense to me there .
Oh well and you are right . Good thing I had not switched it yet and I wonder why it is not on the bottom ? Sure would make more sense to me there .
deuce lover
Well-known member
sugarmaker
Well-known member
sam,
I am new to here, but that is sure a sweet 34! Personally I like the high and dry look and even the drooping door handle. But I am not too hard to please. and am not going on the show circuit either. I think I would get in and have fun with that 34! SWEET!
Good luck in your lowering work. Here is my 2 pennies.
When you change one thing, FIVE other things have to change also. Just a old engineer's rule of thumb!
Love your burgundy ride!
Almost makes me want to shine up the 32! But probably not!
Regards,
Chris
I am new to here, but that is sure a sweet 34! Personally I like the high and dry look and even the drooping door handle. But I am not too hard to please. and am not going on the show circuit either. I think I would get in and have fun with that 34! SWEET!
Good luck in your lowering work. Here is my 2 pennies.
When you change one thing, FIVE other things have to change also. Just a old engineer's rule of thumb!
Love your burgundy ride!
Almost makes me want to shine up the 32! But probably not!
Regards,
Chris
Bored&Stroked
Well-known member
You are correct - this is the way that Ford designed the kingpins to carry the load. This was changed in later years when mechanical brakes were no longer used.
On many HotRods and non-stock cars, we remove the old style king pins and the above spindle bearings and use a special thrust needle bearing between the axle and the bottom of the spindle - to move the load/weight handling to this location. This is how I did it on my 32 Cabriolet when I switched over to Lincoln/Bendix style brakes. The king pins in these applications are flat on top and flush with the top of the spindle.
Also, the "shims" you mention are not shims, but a special type of washer and fiber seal. I believe the main purpose was to keep dirt and crap away from the king pin and lubrication grease in that area.
whizzernick
Well-known member
look into single leaf front spring.