TheAMCForum.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > The Garage > Suspension, Steering, Brakes & Wheels
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Strut Rod FIX
  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.

Strut Rod FIX

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 11>
Author
Message
White70JavelinSST View Drop Down
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Avatar

Joined: Aug/08/2012
Location: Minnesota
Status: Offline
Points: 4867
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote White70JavelinSST Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/22/2016 at 9:02am
Western Red,

The guys here are saying that the pivot point does not work as good when it's in front of the strut rod bracket, but needs to be centered in the bracket as the factory did it. It has something to do with suspension geometry. I wonder if it might also affect bump steer.

Anyway the Jim Richards fix looks great, Jim does well with the car so it must work ?
70 Javelin SST, second owner, purchased 1972
Back to Top
Red Devil View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted


Joined: Jul/10/2007
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1743
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Red Devil Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/22/2016 at 9:16am
Western Red,

That looks like this one, also a Mustang part:

If you take the lower arm, bolt the strut rod to it, put an alignment rod through the arm pivot (to simulate the arm pivot axis), if the strut rod has the correct bend angle and bearing located in best spot, the centre of rotation of the bushing or bearing of the strut rod should intersect the arm pivot axis to minimize fore-aft movement of the arm and minimize bending stresses (bending is what tends to break a strut rod - especially if you run stiff bushings without enough compliance to suit required suspension travel).   

Not sure how close the stock design is or even if it's possible with stock chassis and exhaust clearance?  If anything, expect the pivot wants to be a bit behind the stock bracket ... not in front (welding lugs to the back side of the stock bracket to make a clevis to fit a heim and slot the hole for clearance may be a better option ...but need proper design and stress analysis).   An EMF or similar rebuildable heim may suit street use. 

If you have a stiff suspension with limited travel, lots of options can be made to work.  

Thanks,RD
Edit:fixed link


Edited by Red Devil - May/22/2016 at 11:25am
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: 19611
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote farna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/23/2016 at 6:35am
I was thinking along the same lines -- change the strut rod body mount to center the pivot point. The RRS strut rod bushing replacement uses a bolt on mount to replace the stock mount. I don't think that mount will work on an AMC, but the stock mount could be modified to work. Lots of pounding on the welds required, so they need to be really good welds.
Frank Swygert
Back to Top
Ollie View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted
Avatar

Joined: Sep/17/2012
Location: Brandon, MS
Status: Offline
Points: 2801
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ollie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/23/2016 at 7:53am
I would love a set for my American.....
If someone is designing and marketing some, put my name on the top of the list. Be glad to test the proto type.

Have AMC Fun,
Ollie
Back to Top
Greyhounds_AMX View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted
Avatar

Joined: Nov/14/2009
Location: Kansas City
Status: Offline
Points: 1268
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Greyhounds_AMX Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct/28/2017 at 11:24am
Food for thought guys....

The 1967 Cougar "articulating strut". 



1968 AMX 390 w/T5
Back to Top
304-dude View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted
Avatar

Joined: Sep/29/2008
Location: Central Illinoi
Status: Offline
Points: 9081
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 304-dude Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct/28/2017 at 11:42am
Nice post, but the articulation really won't do much good with the frame part while still using the OE rubber bushing method.

I don't know if you kept up on my ball jointed bushing mod in my huge thread, but I did complete my mod. Though it is probably something only a few shop guys will attempt. Mainly because it has poly bushings. Though in testing the poly bushing before my mod was very stiff in articulation, thus magnifying rough feel over bumps. By removing the counter action of the bushing against the strut rod pivot, the movement is free to rotate without the stiffness of feeling stationary solid. Rubber compromises by allowing a less solid base to pivot on. Thus it's ability to allow slop when worn or set in after time.
71 Javelin SST body
390 69 crank, 70 block & heads
NASCAR SB2 rods & pistons
78 Jeep TH400 w/ 2.76 Low
50/50 Ford-AMC Suspension
79 F150 rear & 8.8 axles
Ford Racing 3.25 gears & 9" /w Detroit locker
Back to Top
Greyhounds_AMX View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted
Avatar

Joined: Nov/14/2009
Location: Kansas City
Status: Offline
Points: 1268
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Greyhounds_AMX Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct/28/2017 at 12:25pm
I agree that it won't do much, but it will do something. 

It would allow the lower control arm to move up and down with less torsion being imparted into the LCA bushing by the strut rod, and as it's another level of isolation with rubber it would reduce NVH.

Ford spent time engineering and tooling the parts for production in order to provide this as a feature on the Cougar, so it had quantitative value. It looks like they had to shorten the arm some in order to use bending to fab the mounting bracket instead of welding.

I still wonder if a rotating joint is required at the frame end at all. I'd think the strut rod travels very little from the vertical plane during travel, and the longer the strut rod is made the better. Something like this might be a good solution, with a fabbed bracket at the frame for the poly bushing end:

 

The caster adjustment would be done at the front end of the rod then.
1968 AMX 390 w/T5
Back to Top
73Gremlin401 View Drop Down
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Avatar

Joined: Mar/02/2013
Location: Stmbt Sprgs CO
Status: Offline
Points: 941
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 73Gremlin401 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct/28/2017 at 1:18pm


I had to replace the front control arms on my 2003 Ford Focus recently, and I couldn't help but imagine adapting this basic design to an AMC - 1 piece, very rigid, yet with large rubber bushings for good road shock absorption.  Granted, modifying/replacing the strut rod anchor at the frame rail would be required, but surely that wouldn't be that big of a deal?  Caster adjustment could still be done at the rear pivot, Camber adj would remain as OE. Any comments, positive or negative?  Am i barking up the wrong tree?
73 Gremlin 401/5-spd.
77 Matador Wagon 360/727.
81 Jeep J10 LWB 360/4-spd
83 Concord DL 4-dr 258/auto

Back to Top
304-dude View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted
Avatar

Joined: Sep/29/2008
Location: Central Illinoi
Status: Offline
Points: 9081
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 304-dude Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct/28/2017 at 2:10pm
IMO there are many ways to go around the strut rod. Some require some work to make a perfect fit.

The only difference between the two piece lower arm / strut rod design and a wish bone, is a lack of secure pivot.

I guess I have been on my concept being long rod and lower arm to allow less negative effects for offset angles. A shorter strut rod (link or arm) can greatly affect how the lower arm travels along on its suspension path.

For that above, I steer away from trying to use a shortened rod, link, or arm to the body. So, the one piece wishbone will need a bit of modification to make proper angle of the arm and adjustment to its length. I am sure there are many other units like that on other cars, that may be more suitable, just haven't looked into such an option.

The only concern with what ever is used, is to keep suspension adjustment, linear travel (proper measurements and lengths), and function workable in doing the mod.
71 Javelin SST body
390 69 crank, 70 block & heads
NASCAR SB2 rods & pistons
78 Jeep TH400 w/ 2.76 Low
50/50 Ford-AMC Suspension
79 F150 rear & 8.8 axles
Ford Racing 3.25 gears & 9" /w Detroit locker
Back to Top
73Gremlin401 View Drop Down
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Avatar

Joined: Mar/02/2013
Location: Stmbt Sprgs CO
Status: Offline
Points: 941
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 73Gremlin401 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct/28/2017 at 2:20pm
Originally posted by 304-dude 304-dude wrote:

IMO there are many ways to go around the strut rod. Some require some work to make a perfect fit.

The only difference between the two piece lower arm / strut rod design and a wish bone, is a lack of secure pivot.

I guess I have been on my concept being long rod and lower arm to allow less negative effects for offset angles. A shorter strut rod (link or arm) can greatly affect how the lower arm travels along on its suspension path.

For that above, I steer away from trying to use a shortened rod, link, or arm to the body. So, the one piece wishbone will need a bit of modification to make proper angle of the arm and adjustment to its length. I am sure there are many other units like that on other cars, that may be more suitable, just haven't looked into such an option.

The only concern with what ever is used, is to keep suspension adjustment, linear travel (proper measurements and lengths), and function workable in doing the mod.


Ah yes, i agree on the length thing - i should have been more clear - wasn't really saying that I'd use the Focus control arm verbatim - but rather the concept of a single triangulated control arm, instead of the semi-kinda-sorta rigid assembly that AMC used.  Yes, the pick-up point dimensions would need to remain the same, or very close to it.
73 Gremlin 401/5-spd.
77 Matador Wagon 360/727.
81 Jeep J10 LWB 360/4-spd
83 Concord DL 4-dr 258/auto

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 11>
  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 0.250 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