1956 F100 (Project Fat Max) Build Thread

[Dr G]

After getting ready to build a new frame for my 56, I decided to scale back a bit and just build new control arms first. As an experiment. Once I got into the project I decided to upgrade the brakes as well.

The chassis I have now was built by someone else. I am not very happy with it. High on my list of dislikes was the front suspension. The biggest problem was that there is less than 4 degrees of caster, which makes the truck a little darty on the freeway. Basically impossible to drive with one hand in a relaxed manner. I also have Wilwood Pro Spindles which run 11 deg KPI. Anyone who's read Ron Sutton's suspension threads realizes the problem, a large loss of negative camber on the outside wheel when cornering. Not great for a truck that was built to corner. Also the steering is extremely light. I run a KFI power steering pump and had to back down to their most restrictive port on the pump outlet to get some semblance of steering feel. I run manual brakes so the juxtaposition of heavy brake pedal and light steering is disconcerting.

The guy who built the suspension must have realized the error with caster, as the rod ends on the upper control arms (which are meant for adjusting camber) had been tweaked as far as possible to move the upper balljoints back, to get more caster. As a consequence though, the jam nut on the rear rod end on each control arm was rubbing the mounting tab on the frame. Not good. Add to that the upper control arms were mounted upside down, or mixed up left to right, since the ball joint cup, which should angle upwards to match the KPI angle of the spindle, were instead angled down. This limits the range of motion of the balljoints.

The lower control arms use some type of poly-urethane bushings, which is horrible for friction. Also the front leg of each control arm was rubbing on the subframe. Add it all up and the front suspension had a ton of friction.

The answer is new control arms, designed to move the upper and lower ball joints to better positions, and with reduced friction via better design.

Step one in building control arms is building a fixture, use the old control arms as a template. That's how far I am at this point.

This pic shows the old control are mocked up in the fixture:



I built the fixture out of some machined aluminum plates that I used for mass loading audio equipment about 10 years ago. You need a good flat surface to start with.
Here is the fixture with the ball joint and cup positioned 1 inch further forward and 1/2 inch further out (to increase track). The rod ends are positioned so that they will fit the frame, and I have the threaded adapters screwed onto them. All that is left is to connect the dots with 1 inch OD DOM tubing and weld.



The same fixture is partially ready to do the lower control arms, you just flip it 180 degrees. Also the brass bar that has a tapered hole for the balljoint can be flipped to build the left and right control arms.

I'll keep updating the thread as I bumble along. I'm having to do a lot of work with the brakes most of which is my own fault (I prefer black anodized calipers over black power coat for the look I'm after).

Here is a pic of the 15" rotor inside my 19" x 10" wheel. I've painted them dark bronze which looks much better.



Here is also a picture showing how I measured the distance between the center of the upper and lower balljoints on the spindle, which you need to know to calculate how to change the caster. In this case the distance is 11.25 inches:

[Jetfixr320]

What paint are you using on the wheels?

[Dr G]

What paint are you using on the wheels?

I think it's just Rustoleum or Krylon Dark Bronze. I bought it off Amazon.

[Sickcustoms a]

definetly gonna watch this progress
being based in South Africa importing part etc is basically out off the question due to costs
will pm you a little later

[chevelletiger]

You need tall ball joints or tall spindles to change the height of where the ball joint center lines are now ive from what i have been told.
How many degrees are you going to get moving the uca bj forward?i maybe wrong,but i thought you need to move the uca bj cl back,lca forward to get more positive caster,and shorten the uca,or lengthen the lower,which you probably have done to get more neg camber?not sure what you have in your picture.hit ron sutton up hes the master on this stuff.

[Dr G]

You need tall ball joints or tall spindles to change the height of where the ball joint center lines are now ive from what i have been told.
How many degrees are you going to get moving the uca bj forward?i maybe wrong,but i thought you need to move the uca bj cl back,lca forward to get more positive caster,and shorten the uca,or lengthen the lower,which you probably have done to get more neg camber?not sure what you have in your picture.hit ron sutton up hes the master on this stuff.

Hey Tiger. Good catch on the forward direction of the upper ball joints! Yes, that is the wrong direction in terms of adding caster. But...I will move the lower ball joints forward 2.4 inches. So 1.00" for the upper balljoints and 2.40" for the lower ball joints. This will move both ball joints (and the front wheels) forward 1" (which I want) and then, since the spindle is roughly centered half way vertically between the lower and upper ball joints, another 1.4/2 = 0.7 inches forward for the front wheels. So a total forward movement of the wheels of 1.7 inches, which is planned.

The current caster is less than 4 deg and I want 11 deg to match the KPI for camber considerations when turning. The distance between the ball joints is 11.25". To get an additional 7 deg of caster the lower balljoint has to move forward 11.25*tan(7°) = 1.38". Hence the 1.4 inches mentioned above.

Now I realize that 11° is a ton of caster. That's what I consider this an experiment. I will have to change out the restricter on the power steering pump to change the assist level. I'll play around with it and see how it feels. Then decided whether to us a new spindle with less KPI when I go to build my new frame (with new suspension all around). The assumption being that less KPI will allow less caster and still maintain good camber when turning.

Since the wheels I am running now are 19" x 10" with ET45 (45mm of offset), the 11° KPI helps keep the scrub radius reasonable. Adding 1.5° static negative camber yields 1.36" of scrub radius. Not great but not horrible. Hope all this makes sense...

[chevelletiger]

Btw,im really digging you making your own parts,in a hobby now known for just picking up the phone or clicking a mouse to get a better performace part,its really cool to see this!
I too try to make as much of my own stuff as possible.machinist by trade,welder.painted my car etc. We need more giys like you.
Phil

[Twentyover]

So are you deciding to live with the 11 degree KPIA? I was thinking of using the Wilwood spindle in my European Capri (Currently Mac Strut), didn't like the KPIA, but short of fabbing a one off spindle or going with a Coleman custom (still on the table for me), i'm kind of at a loss.

I need to sit doen and layout the wheel/tire/hub-brake vs KPIA to figure out what scrub radius will be, that's what will drive my KPIA




Editted for spelling, mostly

[Dr G]

So are you deciding to live with the 11 degree KPIA? I was thinking of using the Wilwood spindle in my European Capri (Currently Mac Strut), didn't like the KPIA, but short of fabbing a one off spindle or going with a Coleman custom (still on the table for me), i'm kind of at a loss.

For now I do plan to keep the Wilwood Pro Spindles. Mostly because that's what I have already. But also because it helps with scrub radius in light of the offset of my current wheels. If I get new spindles down the road I'd be eyeing the Ron Sutton versions. But that would require new wheels with more offset to keep scrub radius reasonable. I've thought about making my own spindles, the tough part is getting pins, bearings and hubs. The ideal would be a bolt-on pin, that way you can machine the spindles out of aluminum and do whatever you want. I've not yet found the right pin though. Offroad guys make nice ones, but I'm not sure they'd work with my style of wheel. If anyone has any info, I'm all ears.

[Dr G]

Just finished up the first leg of one upper control arm. I actually started on this a couple of years ago, so the tubes were part way bent, but not enough. It's always a bit finicky to stick a bent tube in the tube bender, so there are two bends separated by a short distance. Perfectly workable but if I did it over I'd should be able to achieve the same goal with a single bend.



The bender is from JD-Squared and works great, though I always have to read the directions to figure out how it works! Once you get it sorted it is real easy.

[Dr G]

First control arm done, three to go. Just waiting on the ball joint cups. I assumed the bottom ball joints for the Wilwood Pro Spindle would be the Chrysler large 727 size, but those did not fit. So I am using the smaller 772 size top and bottom. Using QA1 low friction ball joints.

[Dr G]

So as I mentioned earlier, at the same time that I am redoing the front suspension, I am also redoing the brakes.

Up until now I've been running Wilwood Superlight calipers up front, 6-piston, with 14" x 1.1" rotors. The rear brakes are Dynalite calipers with 12.19" x 0.81" rotors. I have dual Tilton master cylinders and a Wilwood pedal assembly with balance bar. This is a manual setup, which I love for the feel you get when braking.

The problem with manual brakes, on the street at least, is brake effort. In an effort to improve this, I lengthened the brake pedal arm about an inch, added some Hawk Blue pads up front, and played around with master cylinder sizes until I got an acceptable balance between brake effort and pedal travel. But I knew it could be better.

Then, while perusing around the internet, I noticed that Wilwood came out with a new caliper design, the Aero6. The Aero4 appears to be the same caliper body, with the center pistons omitted. I further noticed that the Aero6 would work with 15" rotors. Hmm, that got me thinking. The beauty of bigger rotor diameter is that you get more brake torque with no change to pedal travel. The downside is extra weight, unsprung and rotational. Of course the extra mass is beneficial at the track in terms of absorbing heat, but otherwise it is no helpful. I rationalized that the 5-6 lbs saved with my new wheel and tire combo (per corner) would even out the extra 4-5 lbs of rotor mass. I was sold.

Now the extra brake torque will translate directly to less pedal effort. Or if I increase the front master cylinder size I can get the same brake effort as I have now but with a stiffer pedal. Both are attractive options. Anyone who states (and many do) that all you need from your brakes is to be able to lock up the tires, the rest is unneeded, is missing the point. The point of good braking is to be able to decelerate as rapidly as possible without locking the tires. And to do that repeatedly requires good modulation. A stiff brake pedal translates directly to improved modulation. This has been borne out by decades of F1, Rally, and Endurance racing. Top end drivers want a rock hard pedal, with zero system flex. That is the goal. And to combine that with acceptable pedal effort.

Ok, having established why I wanted 15" rotors, the next trick was to make it work with my Wilwood Pro spindles. Wilwood does not make a kit for this spindle with 15" rotors, only for 14" rotors. So I did a little R&D (rip-off and duplicate). The brake kit I had on the truck is made for two rotor diameters, 13" or 14". To accommodate the 14" rotors, Wilwood simply adds spacers on the caliper bracket to move the caliper out further. So I figured I would try to do the same in going from 14" to 15" rotors with the new caliper bracket that comes with the Aero6 kit. And after playing with some spacer sizing, this worked out perfectly.

Here's a few pictures of the mockup stage:





Even though my wheels are 19", the calipers are a snug fit. That's because the wheels are cast, and therefore pretty thick where the barrel meets the spokes. But it fits.

[chevelletiger]

Dr.G,question.
How do you keep your work bench from moving while using your bender?
It looks like you have casters on there.
Keep up the good work,im loving the fab!
Phil

[Dr G]

Dr.G,question.
How do you keep your work bench from moving while using your bender?
It looks like you have casters on there.
Phil

Good question. I used what they call "self-leveling casters". For mine you have to turn a little dial on the caster and it lowers a big rubber foot down onto the floor, taking weight off of the caster. That keeps the work bench from moving around. I have to have the thing on wheels since my garage is not big and I have to move stuff around depending on the project at hand. Gustave

[Dr G]

I finished modifying the cab floor to accommodate the new brake pedal and provide a bit more forward leg room:



I will have to modify the tranny cover to match this new floor. And I will build a bottom hinged throttle pedal to go on the right once I get the seats back in so I can test fit everything. The C-shaped patch along the top of the new metal was a repair. I had a perfect fit for a butt joint along the top, but a previous builder had sanded the old sheet metal so thin (during a firewall reshape) that when I went to tack in the new metal, the old metal just vaporized. So I was left with a 1/4" gap to contend with. After trying to fill it with MIG I finally realized it better to just put a patch over it. When I get the cab off during my new frame construction (first half of next year hopefully) then I can get proper access to try and fix this area properly. Right now with the engine in the way it is just too difficult.


Here is the completed pedestal I built to mount the brake pedal cluster to the frame:



This should be plenty stiff and the new floor will wrap around the brake pedal, with the master cylinders outside in the engine bay. That part turned out just how I'd hoped.

Here is the start of the new seat mounting base I made:



I showed pics of me bending this tubing earlier. It's 1.5" 0.095 round with 0.065 rectangular. I have a habit of overbuilding stuff. If I did this again I'd make the whole thing out of 0.065
The seat platform bolts to aluminum adapter brackets, which pick up the original 8 threaded holes in the cab floor. The seat sliders will bolt to this platform. I welded little cylindrical tubes through the rectangular sections so that they would not crush when tightening the bolts for mounting to the cab and the seats.



As you can tell I am still a total beginner TIG welder. But when I finish a weld, I look at it and ask myself it I will bet my life on it. If the answer is yes, then I move on. It's more the aesthetics and consistency of the welds I have trouble with. But I could sit there and weld practice coupons all day and not get the kind of practice I'm getting on all the various welding involved with these projects. So much variety. Different thicknesses, round to square, round to round etc...

I've also mostly finished the first lower control arm. Here is a pic of it compared to the old control arm, which was made by a previous builder.



Surprisingly the new control arm weighs 6 lbs and the old one weighs 7 lbs. Though the new one still needs tabs for mounting the shock and sway bar.

The principle with this control arm design is to have a very direct path from the outer ball joint to the inner pivot point. To take up cornering loads with minimal deflection. Then the rear pivot point will be a rubber bushing. This allows the front wheels to move backwards a tad when hitting bumps, which is important for ride quality. I basically copied the principle from BMW, who used the same concept on the E30, E36 and E46 chassis 3-series cars. The only caveat is that the BMW's used McPherson struts, so as the lower out balljoint moved back, there was only a small change in caster, as in under braking. For my implementation there will be more caster wind-off during braking. We'll see how it goes, it is king of an experiment, and having to adapt it to my existing frame entailed certain compromises.



The front pivot is a regular spherical bearing to help deal with camber change when cornering.

Gustave

[Dr G]

Some progress pics...

Since I am increasing caster, it seemed reasonable that the load on the power steering would be increased. So I've added a power steering fluid cooler. Here is a pic of the steel shroud I fab'd up to direct air to the Earl's cooler:



The cooler is situated behind what Ford calls the "gravel pan". I am busy now plumbing it into the pump and rack.



Air is directed to the cooler via holes in the gravel pan:





In terms of maximizing air flow to the cooler, this is not optimum, but not bad. The bumper will get in the way to some extent, and I'm not ready yet to punch holes in that like Rob did.

Because my new control arms push the front wheels forward both to increase the wheelbase 1" and some more to increase caster, I had to move the rack forward and up. This was a bitch to figure out. I think I got it close, but ultimately I will need to measure the bump steer to know for sure.

The original rack was mounted on these pylons:



The easiest way I could think of to make new mounts was to enclose these pylons with new bigger pylons. Here they are welded up on the bench:



And here they are welded onto the (wimpy) subframe:



I've also finished the lower control arms and had the rubber bushings pressed in. I did a mock install today:



More to come... Gustave

[Dr G]

Well, a lot of work without much visible progress.

I did get the power steering hoses finalized:



I take a lot of care when running hoses to make sure they do not (a) rub against another hose, especially a rubber hose, and that they do not (b) rub against any wiring, and (c) that they run as straight as possible to reduce pressure losses, and lastly (d) that they look somewhat visually appealing. It takes time to get the lengths and routing correct.



On this truck I use almost exclusively Earl's Ultra-Flex hose and connectors. This is a crimp-on style, but has a super tight bend radius (more so for the stainless than the Kevlar). It also just looks clean without the bulky reusable hose ends. I live close to Earl's Store #1 in Hawthorne so I just go down there and they make them on the spot. The guy Tom who owns the place is pretty tight with Holley (who owns Earls) so he is a good source for advice.




I also made some brackets to for the new upper front shock mounts. The old shocks were way too long (7" stroke) so the new ones are shorter. I also wanted the shock to mount to poly bushings to help absorb road noise and shock. We'll see how much that helps.



I try to TIG weld whatever I can. Once it comes to welding it to the frame I resort to MIG.




I also mocked up the front suspension to check the wheel travel from full droop to full bump (not including any bump stop which will limit bump travel a bit). The three pics show full droop, app. ride height, and full compression:








Lastly I got the new brake fluid reservoirs plumbed up. Now that the master cylinders are in the engine compartment instead of under the dash, this was necessary. I also wanted bigger volume. The previous reservoirs were mounted on the dash where the ash tray used to be. That was the only place I could find that was higher than the master cylinders in that configuration. But the reservoirs were only 1 oz each, which meant they had to be refilled frequently during bleeding. And like an idiot I had the reservoirs black anodized, which made it almost impossible to see the fluid level - resulting in a lot of brake fluid leaking down the dash onto the shifter. I did not repeat this mistake with the new Wilwood 4 oz reservoirs.







That is all for now, more to come. Gustave

[my79f]

Wow!! This looks great! Can you give us anymore details on the truck? motor, trans, etc... Perhaps there is another build thread somewhere?

[Dr G]

Wow!! This looks great! Can you give us anymore details on the truck? motor, trans, etc... Perhaps there is another build thread somewhere?

Glad you like it. I'm not sure a lot of people really 'get' the things I do to my 56. Which is ok, I march to the beat of my own drummer I guess.

I originally bought the truck in 2010 'by accident' on eBay. Ostensibly it was to haul my CBR1000RR to the track for lapping days. But I got the hot rod bug and started wanting to modify it. It had a 460 FE with a C6, solid axle up front and was horrible to drive. After some unsuccessful attempts to make it better I decided something more substantial was warranted, like IFS and truck arms. I did not have the skills to execute that at the time and was lured into shipping the truck to a shop outside my city, something I still regret to this day. It was not a good experience. But it convinced me to learn to weld so that I could take matters into my own hands.

I have a prior history of auto-crossing and tracking BMWs, and this is what I would like to do with the 56 also. But it has to still be a truck, since my wife and I use it in our business to haul stuff around. So a useable bed floor is non-negotiable, and preferably no full cage or things like that. I had my fill of driving a full cage stripped out race car as my daily driver about 20 years ago!

I have modified it in "phases". First was a complete re-wire using mil-spec parts (I just like doing that). Second phase was converting the new engine to fully programmable sequential fuel injection and ignition. Again so that I could take control of things. I'm much more comfortable tapping keys on a laptop than changing jets on a carburetor.

The engine btw is a Ford Racing 347JR. This is a sealed racing engine intended for low level oval racing. It makes 350HP and 400 ft lbs. The fact that it makes more torque than horsepower is a good indication of a mild cam, and this thing does have a real baby cam. Which makes it very drivable around town. Should be good for auto-x also, though not so much at the track. One of my planned future phases is to add dual turbos to full out the upper end of the power curve. Unless I get tempted by a V6 Ecoboost before then! If Ford comes out with a crate version of that engine that makes, say, 500 hp and 500 ft lbs, that would be pretty cool. The upcoming Raptor and GT will show the potential of the platform.

The transmission is a leaky old C4 with a bad shift kit.

My current phase is almost entirely dedicated to making the truck more livable. That is what you see in this thread. Moving the seats lower and tilting them back a bit. Changing the angle of the steering wheel so it is more upright like a car. Changing out the brake system for lower effort (manual). Increasing caster for more stability. New front suspension for better absorption of sharp impact loads. More sound and thermal proofing. Not very sexy stuff, but important to me and my wife.

The next phase will occur in about 1 year and will consist of building a new frame. Converting the rear suspension from truck arms to 3-link. Adding a real fuel cell. Solid mounting the cab and doing some rust repair on the lower front corners. Maybe add a simple roll bar. And mount the engine much further down and further back. The prior builder left a lot of meat on the table in that area. I will also install a new transmission at that time, either an AODE or a TCI 6X.

The next phase after that will be turbos. I am already planning where to mount them and the intercoolers and how to go about fabricating a new intake manifold.

Perhaps I should start a build thread so that all my activity is contained in a single place.

Gustave

[Alpina]

Glad you like it. I'm not sure a lot of people really 'get' the things I do to my 56. Which is ok, I march to the beat of my own drummer I guess.



I have modified it in "phases". First was a complete re-wire using mil-spec parts (I just like doing that). Second phase was converting the new engine to fully programmable sequential fuel injection and ignition. Again so that I could take control of things. I'm much more comfortable tapping keys on a laptop than changing jets on a carburetor.


Gustave

May I ask what EFI setup you used and how you like it?