Your donations help keep this valuable resource free and growing. Thank you.
|
hornet/american can the suspension be swapped? |
Post Reply | Page <12 |
Author | |
FSJunkie
AMC Addicted Joined: Jan/09/2011 Location: Flagstaff, AZ Status: Offline Points: 4742 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The old trunnion suspension works ok. The trick is to keep them greased, but I believe only the Classic-Marlin-Ambassadors had greasable trunions.
That being said, the later ball joint suspension is superior in ride, handling, and brake dive. |
|
1955 Packard
1966 Marlin 1972 Wagoneer 1973 Ambassador 1977 Hornet 1982 Concord D/L 1984 Eagle Limited |
|
tomj
AMC Addicted Joined: Jan/27/2010 Location: earth Status: Offline Points: 7544 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
a major reason why i won't own post-60's AMCs any longer is the terrible ball-joint suspension. it's not so much that the design is bad -- though that lower strut/single arm has terrible geometry -- is that you simply can't get repeatably quality parts.
super-modern susensions solved all the nonsense we now put up with. and the 60's trunnion systems, inherited from Nash, did not suffer from quality or unreliability -- the main liability is that they are very labor and skill intensive to get right, and a lot of that knowledge has been lost. the only "bad" trunnion system is that of the pre-64 Americans, and in spite of the dire warnings about the lower "type 1" trunnion, the only actual problem is that admittedly terrible upper trunnion, which in stock form simply cannot be greased (and they DO therefore fail). the lower type 1, if greased at *all* is utterly fine. and all of them, with full teardown and good rebuild, admittedly laborous, run great. (the early American upper needs an engineering fix to make right long term; i've done that, it's easy enough). the unequal-length double-A arm system is superior, hands down, handling-wise. it's classic sports car geometry, if you get the spring height right so that the lower arm is parallel with the ground -- whch they are NOT with stock springs. (they stand up on their tip-toes, stock). in stock form, with squishy springs, they go positive-camber in turns; with stiff springs, and setup right, it goes *negative* camber in turns. the front suspension design is one of the reason i have learned to appreciate the old Rambler Americans. it's quite nifty. and the car is so light that 9x2.5" Gremlin drum brakes are more than adequate, comparable to a Scarebird disk setup, and are 10 lbs or so lighter per-side. win, win, win. |
|
1960 Rambler Super two-door wagon, OHV auto
1961 Roadster American, 195.6 OHV, T5 http://www.ramblerLore.com |
|
Post Reply | Page <12 |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |