TheAMCForum.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > The Garage > Suspension, Steering, Brakes & Wheels
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - torque tube conversion to torque arm
  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.

torque tube conversion to torque arm

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
typhoon View Drop Down
AMC Apprentice
AMC Apprentice


Joined: Oct/11/2009
Location: Ontario, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 50
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote typhoon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: torque tube conversion to torque arm
    Posted: May/05/2017 at 12:20pm
Yes I know there is a few posts about converting torque tube to open ,but I  would like some opinion on going to a torque Arm set up , I don't believe it has been mentioned.
64 classic going to Ford 9",keep coil spring suspension.
From what I have read ,the torque arm suspension is the best all around  suspension for solid axle.Meaning, straight line and cornering traction and no suspension binding. Trying to replicate a torque tube!
 Its the length of the torque arm I would like some input.
I have also found a torque arms from Chris Alston,used in Mustangs that are 33 and 36 ". Are these too short? F Bodies are around 48" . I don't think there is enough space in the tunnel for the bar to run beside the drive shaft. The torque arm if installed as they are in GM F bodies to the Trans,would required to be 60". Nothing I have found readily available for this length.
If I could use the short arm I could make a cross member to support it as well as lower control arms.
Thanks for any input .
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: 588
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 73Gremlin401 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/05/2017 at 2:52pm
Originally posted by typhoon typhoon wrote:

Yes I know there is a few posts about converting torque tube to open ,but I  would like some opinion on going to a torque Arm set up , I don't believe it has been mentioned.
64 classic going to Ford 9",keep coil spring suspension.
From what I have read ,the torque arm suspension is the best all around  suspension for solid axle.Meaning, straight line and cornering traction and no suspension binding. Trying to replicate a torque tube!
 Its the length of the torque arm I would like some input.
I have also found a torque arms from Chris Alston,used in Mustangs that are 33 and 36 ". Are these too short? F Bodies are around 48" . I don't think there is enough space in the tunnel for the bar to run beside the drive shaft. The torque arm if installed as they are in GM F bodies to the Trans,would required to be 60". Nothing I have found readily available for this length.
If I could use the short arm I could make a cross member to support it as well as lower control arms.
Thanks for any input .


This is a great question! Will be good to see if anyone has gone down this route, rather than just dumping the whole torque tube concept.  IIRC, the Torque arms that were used on the later F bodies (and I think some versions of the Chevy Monza?) were lightweight and absolutely solved axle windup tendencies under acceleration as well as braking.
73 Gremlin 401/5-spd.
77 Matador 360/727.
80 Concord Limited 4dr. 258/904


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

Joined: Jan/27/2010
Location: los angeles
Status: Online
Points: 3024
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tomj Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/05/2017 at 6:11pm
though not to solve a torque tube replacement, i built a rigid wishbone rear suspension. picture "truck arms" that are extra long, and meet in the middle at the front. all of a sudden no binding when the car rolls. the catch is you need to place the front joint (i used a big heim, but i think a threaded rod with strut bushings would be better) under the tail of the transmission. i made a "spider" that does so.

if you stuck with "truck arms", eg. torque arms, if you made the very long you could run them up to the transmission crossmember, to locate and absorb thrush both. you already have a panhard.

i did some crazy nonsense you are unlikely to do, but you can see the previous version of my wishbone setup here: http://www.sensitiveresearch.com/1961-Rambler-Roadster/axletransupgrade/index.html the current one got triangulated fore to aft. i had some flex, that's gone.

i used the 4-link lower ears, added a pair at the top, of a 98 mustang axle i had narrowed. the bonus is it's all adjustable, i dialed in 1 - 0.5 degree of pinion angle, and got the four wheels precisely square, like with 1/16", front to rear and diagonal.

whatever you end up doing, pay attention to body roll. i've seen a couple TT conversions where that was ignored, and one wheel up binds, and breaks links in short order (like a month). 4-link rears all have bind -- but if you are Ford you can design geometry and compliant joints that makes it work. that's harder to do at home on a one-off. that's why i stuck with the wishbone, the geometry is simple, zero bind in any direction, just that PITA of the front mount.

1961 roadster american
Back to Top
tyrodtom View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted


Joined: Sep/14/2007
Location: Virginia
Status: Offline
Points: 5802
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tyrodtom Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/05/2017 at 7:52pm
To this day Nascar Nextel Cup ( or whatever they're called now) use the 3 link,  modernized truck arm rear,  2 long bottom diagonal links, and a panhard bar.  Full travel, no bind.

Those single rear arms like the 82 and up Camaro/Firebird  had put the rear center sections through some stress it took a while to engineer out.

But any rearend is designed to take stress out near the wheel hubs.
66 American SW, 66 American 2dr, 82 J10, 70 Hornet, Pound, Va.
Back to Top
mixed up View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted
Avatar

Joined: Jun/16/2015
Location: Monroe mich
Status: Offline
Points: 1107
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mixed up Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/05/2017 at 10:19pm
i seen one one of he tech shows on valocity tv they put a torq arm set up from alston from a 9inch in a galixe that might be longer  than all others
69 amx 290 auto
65 220 290 4spd
80 ford fairmont
Back to Top
Red Devil View Drop Down
AMC Addicted
AMC Addicted


Joined: Jul/10/2007
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1575
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Red Devil Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/06/2017 at 2:48pm
An under-mount torque arm, like the Mustang ones from Maximum Motorsports, might work.   Likely need to make a custom front crossmember and modified clamps to bolt to an AMC axle, or use a Ford 8.8.
 
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: 16062
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote farna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/08/2017 at 9:20am
In a car with a near stock engine the torque arm is a good call. It doesn't have to be as stout as all the replacement Camaro arms and the Mustang arms you find on-line -- those are racing replacements. Unless of course you intend to drag race the car.Lookj at TomJ's site and read about his wishbone setup. You would want to use something a bit stouter, since he's running a modified 196 -- 170-175 hp or so tops. I designed an arm to fit a late model 8.8", fits on the right side. Has to be an 8.8" with a two bolt flange on the right (passenger) side though. Didn't work out all the details, but would be easy enough to figure out pinion angle in car. The longer the arm the better -- it should pivot in the front just behind or beside the front u-joint. If behind it has to be able to move front to back some. Most of the aftermarket designs use a smooth 1" or so piece of rod in the front and a sway bar mount. Rod sticks straight out front, swaybar mount is sideways. Rod has 2-3" on each side of swaybar mount. The lower arms keep the rear axle from moving forward or back too much, so the front of the arm is free to float. Not as lot of pressure on it...
Frank Swygert
Back to Top
typhoon View Drop Down
AMC Apprentice
AMC Apprentice


Joined: Oct/11/2009
Location: Ontario, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 50
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote typhoon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/18/2017 at 9:50am
Gentlemen, I don't know if this is required but ,thank you for your input .
I am a complete amateur at this,but from way too much reading on this subject . for a pavement driven car no road course hopefully the occasional drag run ,i don't think suspension bind is going to be an issue but I am probably wrong. I think I will go with a 4 bar parallel to start.this gives me the option of a torque arm or 3 link  at a later date. now to get my A$$! in gear and get it on the road so I can go to Kenosha and Cordova!
Again thanks for the input . 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.172 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