Originally Posted by simplyconnected
Nice job on the drawing, Ken. I would really like to see a side-view of the pivot points. After re-thinking this system (in my long post), I totally agree with you.
5555 is a pillow block fixed to the lower arm (that the top portion pivots on). That's the key. In your drawing, it is noted that all the U-bolt and cradle parts are part of, and fixed to, the axle assembly.
Three mounting points on the lower arm will stop all pivoting. If the back rubbers are torqued tight and the wheel hits a bump or hole, the upper arm (C-D) will tend to snap off.
But, if we allow space between the rubbers, they will 'slap' and cause noise (in both directions). I'm still not comfortable with the center sleeve sliding in the lower arm hole steel. That's just plain wrong, and that is what messed me up.
But you're right, Ken... if the rubber assembly is designed to limit motion, they just transfer torque to the adjacent sides. That's wrong, too.
If this were my car and I HAD to live with this setup, I would omit the rubber assembly altogether and run with nothing back there. I do not see what purpose the rubber serves, that the shocks don't already cover. - Dave
Weīre talking about what might happend at work today, and we guessed that it might make the tire to jump on heavy acceleration or sudden stop. The shocks and springs helps of course, but there is no way Ford put this on if they didnīt needed it. No matter how stupid it looks.
A little comment to you guess what happend if it is too tight and the car hits a bump or a hole, the control arm donīt snap, but all forces goes strait to the front position bolt and the chassie, and that is just what have happend in the past. Interesting is that the bolts seems to be bulletproof as they are still strait, and the threads works like new. And they ARE original. On booth sides of this holes, someone in the past have velded bigger square "washers" to the subframe as extra streingth and support. Original is smaller round ones. Upon that, on one side, the bolt of the inside of the subframe, got loose, and took a piece of the frame in the process. Strong forces, no doubt.
Now today I vent to the place who helped me with the vulcanisation of the upper control arms bushings and talked about making new isolators for the rear. The softest they can come up with is 35-40 Shore. I donīt know if these are to soft or hard, but I am thinking of let them make two set, so I can "take out parts" with waterjet in one set. That way, I would get a even softer pair to play with.
The big deal is that I now finally understand the whole system and know where to fine tune the whole "thang"
Rare Parts did come back today, but only with a picture of the parts, not with and information regarding the hardness of the rubber. But I sended that question back, so maybe tomorrow?
Love you guys! You are a great support!!! My fellow "US-old-car friends" at work, who owns Babybirds, Torinos, Rancheros and even Chryslers envy me alot because of this forum. I like that
Some "before pics" showing how it looked before when the bushings was all gone in the control arms. You see how the lack of bushings took up the play... Note one of these "nests" I have all over the car. Found one in the front suspension, and to in the rear suspension just 2 weeks ago. So far the total is up at 15 or so by now...
Further down, The control arms before, and after.