Question about original shocks

[DeBordEngineMan]

I just bought a A chassis and it's in pretty good condition it has been sitting for about 10 years. It has original style shocks I'm sure they have been rebuilt at sometime. Checking them the arms will move up and down freely with full range with a little bit of resistance about the same each way. I checked the fluid level and they seem to be empty but look wet looking and not dry or rusty but look dirty with old oil/grease. I'm thinking they are good since they move. My question is (1) what type of oil do I need to fill with also thought about trying to fill up with a cleaner to clean out any oil/grease before adding new. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks Robert

 

[400A]

You can try filling them with Model "A" shock fluid available from the "A" suppliers. I'd be surprised if the fluid doesn't leak out as you say the shocks are empty.

 

[JayJay]

I've been told that 85-140 gear lube is about the right viscosity. I think it's sort of like engine oil - enough is better than not enough, after that it's a matter of preference.


I would not use any type of cleaner, most cleaners will attack the rubber seals you're trying to preserve.

 

[P.S.]

I run hydraulic fluid in mine.

 

[DeBordEngineMan]

Thanks everyone for the information, concerning cleaning them out with some type of cleaner I didn't think about ruining the seals so thanks for reminding me not to do that. Also thanks for the different oil suggestions I'll just fill them up and see what happens I have nothing to loose hopefully they will not leak. Thanks everyone for the advice I really appreciate it. Thanks Robert DeBord

 

[Kurt in NJ]

I have be working on shocks along with the front suspension trying to get to original specifications on it.
I found a shock at Hershey that has zero wear with all the clearances between.001-.002
I made a copy of the testing tool in the service bulletins.
Starting with Kubota multi viscosity hydraulic oil— too thin
Bought some AW68 hydraulic oil— still too thin the test lever moved at twice the speed with the needle valve closed.
At my brothers we found a very old can of shock fluid (left side in picture)
Made a little cup out of pill bottle with hole in bottom to test viscosity .
The shock fluid drained out of test cup slightly slower than the 85W140 oil.
the test times were still a little fast with the 85W140 so I added a small amount of Shell Omala 680 (600Wmarked bottle)
Now I have times that the service bulletins say are proper with needle valve adjustment at 1/4 open—- shock in freezer and at 32degrees the winter times are within the specifications too.
Proper movement in both directions with much less resistance in compression movement.

The original fluid was glycerin— it’s viscosity is between 90weight and 140 weights oil

 

[Bob Bidonde]

Here are my experiences with restored Houdaille shocks:
> Do not use glycerin as a shock fluid because it is hydroscopic and causes rust. When the shocks were newly restored, I used automatic transmission fluid;
> As the shocks wear, I increase the viscosity of the fluid to 80W140 gear oil and eventually STP;
> Shock fluid needs periodic replenishment.

 

[Kurt in NJ]

I was using this to compare viscosity— I know it is not actually Ford fluid.
Its viscosity is comparable to glycerin and it smells similar to gear oil.
I had previously used hydraulic jack oil and eventually replenished with atf and noticed reduced shock action with that..(my original set is the best of at least 50 shocks taken apart)

Bob have you actually tested the action of your shocks to Ford specification in the service bulletins?

My test shock was a 2$ Hershey purchase that was very oily and upon disassembling it I was surprised to find zero wear only slight polishing of the shafts machined surfaces — no signs of contact of the wings to the outer housing and was never rusted inside or outside.
This prompted me to make a copy of the tool in the service bulletins because I would have a perfect test shock to use as a test standard.

 

[Steve Schmauch]

Hello Kurt--Many have tried duplicating the bench tester shown in the Ford Service Bulletins. Unless you know the exact dimensions and weights of the arm and related parts there is no way to duplicate resistance measurements. Also temperature plays a very important part in resistance settings. Ford eliminated numbered arms for setting the needle valve for obvious reasons...as the shock wears the settings have to change accordingly. Did you know that Ford changed the viscosity characteristics at least 9 times for Model A and V8 shocks?

Your pointer and the needle valve suggest two close but different time periods in 1929. When you removed the cover was there any evidence of a thin, white rubbery gasket? If not then this shock has had at least one rebuild.

Your photo of the chamber shows bottom grooves. Typically these shocks have a very smooth machined bottom surface. I would be surprised if some of the oil does not "leak" past the wing shaft.

These are my observations, and I hope you do not feel I am being critical, as my only intent is helping! I have worked with shocks for more than 40 years and have tested the resistance capacity of hundreds of professionally rebuilt shocks from most of the major rebuilders. I have a lot of experience with the original KR Wilson bench tester over the last 15 years or so. I can help you with specifics if you are interested!

 

[Hitman]

Hello Kurt--Many have tried duplicating the bench tester shown in the Ford Service Bulletins. Unless you know the exact dimensions and weights of the arm and related parts there is no way to duplicate resistance measurements.

He has the correct KR Wilson arm and weight that is part of the bench tester in the picture he posted.

 

[Joe K]

And - there are some repop shocks which came with instructions DO NOT ADD FLUID.


Just to confuse the issue.


Joe K

 

[Steve Schmauch]

Hittman--Respectfully, I disagree. That is not an original KRWilson bench tester arm and weight. The original arm and weight and piece that attaches to the wing shaft have identifying information on them, such as: "KRW-HOO-DYE SUSPENSION TESTER". The exact weight and shape specifications are needed to compare properly with the FSBulletins in order to have confidence in accurate shock absorber settings.

 

[Kurt in NJ]

My tool is not original it is made out of random junk.
The only information that I had to work with is the service bulletins picture and a measurement of 26.5” center to center of the weight and that the weight is 3 pounds 5.8 ounces.
I think my arm ( that I started on in high school 50 years + ago) weighs more than the original.
The connection at the shock is a piece of a rear shock arm and flattened angle iron with filler strips welded in— it was formed by the shock arm piece and welded then beat on with a hammer to separate it before it cooled and shrunk on .
I think that the arm is more robust than the original and has more weight than the original.
The last picture is the assembly with the weight and part of the arm weight on the scale having the square of the shock mounted end pivoting on a nail with the weight end on a round magic marker for a roller so the weight on the scale would be accurate— that weight is 6 pounds.
Steve if you could weigh your original unit the same way I could correct the tool . And more accurate tools could be made to help with getting proper shock testing done.
The mounting plate was something else I made in high school metal shop a long time ago.

 

[Hitman]

It looked similar from the picture. Here the correct weight tool and ring remover for reference.

 

[Steve Schmauch]

Hello Kurt--Hitman has the correct arm and weight assembly as pictured. The arm that attaches to the shock weighs 1 lb exactly, including the nut, bolt and washer. The square weight weighs exactly 3 lbs 5.4 ounces, including the square set screw. The arm weighs 1 lb 15.8 ounces. Measuring from the tip of the arm to the center of the weight is 24 inches exactly.

The bench tester should measure about 1/2 of the total arc of the shock.

Hope this helps Kurt.

 

[Bob Bidonde]

Hi Kurt! No, I did not bench test my Houdaille shocks. I adjusted them by driving iterations until my wife felt the ride wasn't bouncy in the back seat. Happy wife, happy life!

 

[Kurt in NJ]

Thanks Steve
I found that my arm weighed 4 pounds 12 oz and have been working at removing weight and still have 6 oz to remove.
The ring tool was a piece of a garage door opener and it really works nicely— much better than the hammer and punch that I abused the rings with many years ago.

Bob what I thought was ok from driving the car is not as tight as the original specifications.
The well lubed springs return the car to level from jumping off either runningboard.