Torque Arm, Watts Link, and Factory Lower Control Arms

[mugzilla]

Piece #13 is alternatively known as a wishbone, and it can be attached to either the top of the pumpkin or underneath it. Either can be made to work in various circumstances, but the lack of intermediate attachment points works against it. You have a choice between about a 6" rear roll center height and an 18" one with nothing in between. Can't go much lower than 6, don't want to go higher than 18. So yes, it's do-able. Just not very "tuneable".

It's been done in cars before - IIRC, it was Alfa-Romeo that used the upper mounting, and Lotus and at least one Camaro(?) race car have used the lower.


Norm

I run a stock 442 that hooks up fine. I see this as a cheap replacement for a watts link.

I saw an off road unit that looked good ...

I be running in stock configuration. I wonder if I could run something to complement the stock control arms ...

[mugzilla]

That is what my 58 Chebbie has under the rear. Don't think it would handle really well tho, but I could be wrong.
I think that "Chicane" had a wishbone in it too IIRC.


The other stuff.......Well, I guess I should've studied more in school!! LOL!

It's like an Old Lady ...

She has a little wiggle in the trunk that I don't mind 'cause I know how to drive that stuff ...

I wouldn't mind if it was gone ...

[ProTouring442]

That is what my 58 Chebbie has under the rear. Don't think it would handle really well tho, but I could be wrong.
I think that "Chicane" had a wishbone in it too IIRC.


The other stuff.......Well, I guess I should've studied more in school!! LOL!

Actually, your '58 Chevy (car) would have had a 3 link, the upper being offset to the passenger side of the pumpkin, with a panhard bar.

Good grief, how do I remember this stuff??

Shiny Side Up!
Bill

[Norm Peterson]

I run a stock 442 that hooks up fine. I see this as a cheap replacement for a watts link.

Assuming that you can live with either of the roll center heights, it would be an alternative to a Watts link and either the upper or lower arms because you'd have to remove either of those as well.

A wishbone + mildly skewed lowers + 45° skewed uppers = a suspension that won't want to move at all.


Norm

[mugzilla]

Assuming that you can live with either of the roll center heights, it would be an alternative to a Watts link and either the upper or lower arms because you'd have to remove either of those as well.

A wishbone + mildly skewed lowers + 45° skewed uppers = a suspension that won't want to move at all.


Norm

I'm happy with moderate traction as I'd rather spin tires than shock the driveline . I could put in stiffer bushings but I thought the old stuff(100,000 mi.) would launch better.

I'll be happy to turn a 14 .

[shmoov69]

Actually, your '58 Chevy (car) would have had a 3 link, the upper being offset to the passenger side of the pumpkin, with a panhard bar.

Good grief, how do I remember this stuff??

Shiny Side Up!
Bill

Nope, that's a 59. My 58 has a stamped steel A arm thingy (wishbone) on top of the pumpkin that goes to two mounting points on the frame X.

[ProTouring442]

Nope, that's a 59. My 58 has a stamped steel A arm thingy (wishbone) on top of the pumpkin that goes to two mounting points on the frame X.

Damn.. I would have list a bet on that one... maybe I'm getting old?

Shiny Side Up!
Bill

[shmoov69]

Maybe the cars, but not the wagons