TheAMCForum.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > The Garage > Transmission & Drivetrain
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 1959 super cross country
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Click for TheAMCForum Rules / Click for PDF version of Forum Rules
Your donations help keep this valuable resource free and growing. Thank you.

1959 super cross country

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
Message
Ccole23 View Drop Down
AMC Fan
AMC Fan


Joined: May/14/2016
Location: Wa
Status: Offline
Points: 16
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ccole23 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun/27/2016 at 3:03pm
That is an awesome post thank you for sharing is there an advantage to the single mounting point forward
Back to Top
farna View Drop Down
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Avatar
Moderator Lost Dealership Project

Joined: Jul/08/2007
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 19610
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote farna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun/27/2016 at 8:29pm
For a torque arm you use two lower links like a four link, but use a single long arm parallel with the driveshaft. It can be hard to fab a bracket for the torque arm to the rear axle, unless you weld it to the tube or center housing. Some people have made a plate from 3/16" or 1/4" steel that bolts between the rear cover and axle housing, or uses some other mounting point on the axle in question. I have considered such an arm bolted to a Ford 8.8" housing, but the housing has to have the flange along the pinion shaft on the right side where a big vibration damper was bolted on some Ranger and Explorer models. I don't think the Ranger had the damper, but uses the same casting that has the flange with two ~3/8" bolt holes on the right (passenger) side -- side is with the axle mounted in the vehicle. Not sure if the 7.5" axle has a flange like that or not. Front mount is really simple -- a slide mount. It's just a piece of 1.25" OD tubing on the front of the arm (there is very little pressure on the front of a long arm!) that slips into a poly sway bar mount that is bolted to the floor sideways (to how it would be on a sway bar). The tubing is long enough to slip a couple inches in and out of the poly bushing as the suspension moves. Unless you have a lot of HP (like over 400 or so) you really don't need a crossmember or anything more than a reinforcement plate on the floor. The mount should be close to the driveshaft tunnel, where the floor is strongest. A piece of 3"x6" 1/8" plate is all the reinforcement needed. I'd sandwich the floor between two plates, and that is a bit of over kill.

Very little vibration transmitted through the poly bushing in this case, but you could use a rubber bushing instead. A heim joint works, but will transmit noise/vibration. In an open car like Tom's its not really noticeable over everything else. In a closed car it will be. You could also use something like a strut rod mount, but there is no reason to have the front torque arm mount hold the axle form fore an aft movement. The lower arms do that, the torque arm just keeps the rear axle from spinning over.
Frank Swygert
Back to Top
farna View Drop Down
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Avatar
Moderator Lost Dealership Project

Joined: Jul/08/2007
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 19610
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote farna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun/27/2016 at 8:34pm
Needle bearings were used in ALL trunnions prior to the 1963 six cylinder big cars. 63 Americans have needle bearings too, 64 Americans don't. The needle bearings were used to reduce steering effort. Not sure they reduce it enough to be worth the expense, but the V-8 cars kept the needle bearings in upper trunnions through the end (last used in 1969) AFAIK. Six cylinder cars dropped the needles starting in 1963 big cars, plain bronze bearings used. I guess the AMC engineers figured the heavier V-8 still warranted the cost of needle bearings. Of course the entire upper trunnion was redesigned in 64 for the American (same as Javelin/AMX through 69). It used a rubber bushing that turned inside the trunnion body to reduce vibration. Thankfully the big cars never adopted that design. Most with trunnion issues have dealt with small cars, not the big ones, which have far fewer issues.
Frank Swygert
Back to Top
tomj View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted
Avatar

Joined: Jan/27/2010
Location: earth
Status: Offline
Points: 7522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tomj Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun/29/2016 at 12:42am
Originally posted by Ccole23 Ccole23 wrote:

is there an advantage to the single mounting point forward

mainly it eliminates the possibility of binding. it locates the axle rotationally (needs panhard or watts though).  allows putting axle thrust onto the crossmember. easy to fabricate.
1960 Rambler Super two-door wagon, OHV auto
1961 Roadster American, 195.6 OHV, T5
http://www.ramblerLore.com

Back to Top
tomj View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted
Avatar

Joined: Jan/27/2010
Location: earth
Status: Offline
Points: 7522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tomj Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun/29/2016 at 12:53am
Originally posted by farna farna wrote:

For a torque arm you use two lower links like a four link, but use a single long arm parallel with the driveshaft.

actually a torque arm could be located anywhere, longitudinally. for practical reasons you'd want the back end on the ring and pinion housing, but it could be offset to one side, asymmetrically, in any shape needed to get it stiff enough, as long as the front pivot was centered.

the way at least AMCs are constructed, there's LOTS of clearance around the axle in back and less in front, under the front seats. which i exploited in the wishbone, the bracing in back where all the torque is has plenty of vertical room for the triangulation. torque arm would be the same deal. a wishbone IS a torque arm, only with two far ends. which solves the rotational location issue.

1960 Rambler Super two-door wagon, OHV auto
1961 Roadster American, 195.6 OHV, T5
http://www.ramblerLore.com

Back to Top
tomj View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted
Avatar

Joined: Jan/27/2010
Location: earth
Status: Offline
Points: 7522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tomj Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun/29/2016 at 12:57am
Originally posted by farna farna wrote:

...A heim joint works, but will transmit noise/vibration. In an open car like Tom's its not really noticeable over everything else. In a closed car it will be. You could also use something like a strut rod mount, but there is no reason to have the front torque arm mount hold the axle form fore an aft movement.

your idea for the strut bushing is a good one, for vibration and redundancy both. it's cheap easy safe and reliable and adjustable. poly or rubber as needed. you may not need it to do fore/aft location, but there's no downside i can see to that and it allows for pinion angle adjustment if you have axle-rotation motion at the axle end of the three (torque arm and two links).

1960 Rambler Super two-door wagon, OHV auto
1961 Roadster American, 195.6 OHV, T5
http://www.ramblerLore.com

Back to Top
Ccole23 View Drop Down
AMC Fan
AMC Fan


Joined: May/14/2016
Location: Wa
Status: Offline
Points: 16
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ccole23 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun/29/2016 at 2:00am
I'm really liking all of the ideas and suggestions thank you everyone im thinking about incorporating the following from all of your suggestions which seems very similar to the original amc only greatly improved. the top 2 links attached to the triangulated bottom links like in Tomj's post to set pinion angle and stop tourque rotation of the axle under Acceleration and braking. Then the bottom 2 links running clear up to the transmission crossmemember for mounting the axle to the car with a fore/aft strut like the ones in a semi dump pup pintel trailer mount for strength and ultimate axle suspension movement. Also re using the original panhard bar and shocks as well as the springs with inner airbags inside the coils. Please let me know your thoughts on this setup pros and cons
Back to Top
farna View Drop Down
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Avatar
Moderator Lost Dealership Project

Joined: Jul/08/2007
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 19610
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote farna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun/29/2016 at 5:49am
Sounds good! The 59 tran crossmember isn't rubber mounted like the 63-66 models. The only ting is you need the front pivots to be near the u-joint, so you will need to make a rear mount crossmember or some type of brace/mount like TomJ did for his wishbone. 
Frank Swygert
Back to Top
tomj View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted
Avatar

Joined: Jan/27/2010
Location: earth
Status: Offline
Points: 7522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tomj Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun/29/2016 at 2:44pm
well of course i think it's a good idea, so discount me :-) the oddest part is the front mount. ideally it would run all the way to the crossmember, but it lacks ground clearance. i took advantage of the tailshaft housing shape of the transmission; all AMC trannies are a blob with a separate tail where the yoke enters, and it's much smaller, providing the necessary clearance. it's tight, but comfortable since clearances don't change with suspension motion.

i built that "spider" that has two feet onto the crossmember (fore/aft forces), and two upward braces (axle wrap). the fore/aft part is easy and straightforward, they run on either side of the trans. the upward brace on my low-power car is easy -- it lifts/pulls the transmission tunnel, being 16ga or so and a half tube is quite stiff.  axle torque (brake/engine) is reduced by the 67" arm to what i'm guessing is 200 lbs of up/down force max. the forces applied to the spider are very straightforward, fore/aft and up/down. given the pivot and triangle that's all of the forces even in a crash.

jacking on it would break it ASAP. "don't do that" :-)

funny, you could get a torque tube transmission and put the fore/aft force on that adapter! it's a big square box surrounding the yoke, easy to bracket to. usually people are trying to get rid of those things, here it might be handy...



Edited by tomj - Jun/29/2016 at 2:47pm
1960 Rambler Super two-door wagon, OHV auto
1961 Roadster American, 195.6 OHV, T5
http://www.ramblerLore.com

Back to Top
nickleone View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted
Avatar

Joined: Oct/04/2008
Location: westminster co
Status: Offline
Points: 1429
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nickleone Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun/29/2016 at 4:34pm
Tom,
There was a 59 American? wagon at Bonneville one year that had a complete Toyota drive train.
I did not see the engine compartment at that time.
Just a FYI

Nick
nick
401 71 Gremlin pro rally car sold
390 V8 SX/4 pro rally car sold
1962 Classic SW T5 4 wheel disc brakes
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.
All content of this site Copyright © 2018 TheAMCForum unless otherwise noted, all rights reserved.
PROBLEMS LOGGING IN or REGISTERING:
If you have problems logging in or registering, then please contact a Moderator or