Ok,
So, the stock 40-inch bar on the 300K ram is 125 pounds and 1.01 inch. If one wanted to get 125 pounds on a 44-inch bar, what would the diameter need to be?
James
From: chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Ray Melton
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2024 16:33
To: John Grady <jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: '300 Club' <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: {Chrysler 300} Re: Can someone do me a favor over the next few days... 1963-1964 Torsion Bars
My understanding from setting up my Porsche 911's for track use is that for a given torsion bar length, a larger diameter bar gives a higher spring rate, better for track use but too stiff for comfortable street application. I also recall that for a given
length and material, the "stiffness" (spring rate ) goes up at the 4th power of the diameter, so a 2-inch diameter torsion bar will be 16 times stiffer (lbf/inch) than a 1-inch diameter bar - whether it's a straight piece or wound into a coil. (A coil spring
is just a torsion bar that is wound into a spiral shape.) For a given diameter of the spring, the longer length will result in a reduced spring rate (pounds force per inch of deflection). Conversely, shorter length equals stiffer spring. We always saw
that when we cut the coil springs on our cars to get a lower ride height and the ride became very stiff.
Also interesting: since the outer part of the torsion bar deforms (twists) the most upon deflection (the very center of the bar doesn't move at all), racers often go to hollow bars to save weight while the diameter of the "tube" - the part that twists the
most - only increases a little.
Ray Melton
************************************
On 1/25/2024 2:55 PM, John Grady wrote:
go Carl !! right on!
ps - J/Kram “short “ thicker bars are the answer ? with normal rear anchors , if this parameter is to be maximized . But stock not bad either , as Tom says .
Compromise up to the individual .. !
I don't have 1964 AMA specs, but I have 1963, and we have 1962 on the club site. FACT: 62-63 New Yorker used 44" length torsion bars, other models used 40". Sounds like that is true for 1964 as well. Diameters vary by model. FACT:
62-63 Newport (exc. wagon) and 300 Sport used SAME diameter bar = .0.99". Newport wagon used 0.97" bar. 300J used 1.01" bar. New Yorker used 0.98" bar. What DID change between 62 and 63 (maybe 64 too?) was the spring rate of the torsion bars. 1962 was
130 lbs/in at the wheel for all models. 1963 was MUCH less. 1963 = 115 for Newport (exc. wagons) and 300 Sport. 110 for Newport wagons. 125 for 300J. 110 for New Yorker.
So, for New Yorker from 1962 to 1963, both years used 44" bars, spring rate went from 130 lbs/in to 110 lbs/in. (Rear springs got softer too). The New Yorker WAS designed for a softer ride. AI is correct! And I agree with John - simply
amazing what AI deduced.
Anecdotally, Tom McCahill's review of the 63 New Yorker noted a growing trend toward mushier suspension: "The boys at Chrysler have allowed a bit of softness to creep into the great torsion-bar suspension and it doesn't corner quite as
crisply as it once did. But don't get the impression that the cornering and roadability are bad, because there's nothing to out-corner it in the other camps. It just isn't quite as sharp as it was." He goes on to say, "some lunatics in sales research still
feel that what Americans really want is a softer, mushier ride even if it kills them."
------ Original Message ------
Date 1/25/2024 9:24:11 AM
Subject Re: {Chrysler 300} Re: Can someone do me a favor over the next few days... 1963-1964 Torsion Bars
excellent info , key is in the definition of rate as you say but those two apps are also different lengths - just by wb .
So from that alone the ny er bar in 64 would be longer ,(!) and apparently stiffer (???) if rate means pounds per inch . at fender(?) as installed ? pre Loaded in car or on bench at rest ? that set of deflection numbers would be inverse
it seems , to AI thing . But a longer spring would not rise up in resistance force as fast ( hard to explain all that) so more excursion occurs at a more constant force even if higher force to turn it . ? target for ny ‘er ? “ smoother ride over big bump
? Other suspension parts might change too ?
Short would get resistance increase faster , so although numbers look other way in Hollander —that fits both 300 handling and lighter car —- does not move as much before stiffening ?) .
Suspension tuning is complicated ..
Also a chance somehow Hollander etc swapped numbers , or I do not know how “ rate “ is defined . I don’t
really interesting stuff , lot of work in this to give NY a different ride ….
I vaguely remember criticism of T bar in press of the day as being “ too stiff “” rides like a truck” etc compared to Lincoln or Buick/ Cadillac . I LOVED it stiff around corners , remember thinking what babies in their smooth soft spring
strollers.
But marketing at mopar might have screamed do something to soften NY er?
Hollander's interchange manual says
62-64 Newport & 300 take bar #15
64 New Yorker takes bar #16.
Hollanders doesn't give lengths.
#15 has rates in the 604-611 range.
#16 has rates in the 702-709 range. Hollander does not say what they mean by rate.
#15 can be used on 60-61 Windsor, 61 Newport 62-64 Newport & 300 and some DeSotos and Dodges
#16 can be used on 59 Saratoga & Windsor exec convert, 59-61 300, 60-61 Saratoga & NYr, 62-64 NYr,
and some DeSotos and Dodges.
There is nothing in the 1964 factory service manual about the NYr torsion bars or any special
procedure. What we need is someone with a 63 or 64 NYr
or the AMA specs for 64 (I don't have it)
or get a hold of Chris Pinder <kmaniak@xxxxxxx> He is amazing with 64 stuff.
Bob
On 1/25/2024 9:04 AM, John Grady wrote:
I beg to differ ; i learned more from that AI about this than anything anyone has posted here .
I am amazed , not sure it is correct ( IS IT ?)about two length bars are in same wheelbase? .
For the same very complex Chrysler calculations of end loading , fatigue life manufacturing tooling etc , (dating to mid fifties ) easiest way to increase spring rate is shorten the bar , if within design parameters already known . More
likely the other way around , lengthen it? New Yorker on swb felt “ stiff” compared to Caddy , so make them longer in a now shorter wheelbsse car . easy to check that fact about two length bars .. same wheelbase ?? .
Imagine making a torsion bar , immense tooling . Use it over this way rather than skinny bar that fails much too soon in fatigue
Again learned more in that AI answer in a common sense engineering aspect , than 15 posts on here . I can accept it knows more detail than I do . Inherent to what it does . Then you can
Not sure how you ask it questions , but I am amazed the thoroughness of that answer . And unbiased by “ opinions “. Built in resistance to BS . I really
jg
A regurgitation of what we already knew. This is why AI is more hype than substance in many areas.
None of this explains why the Newport got the same length bars as the 300 just in smaller diameter.
None of the cush verses sport explanations fits for that.
What I was looking for is a technical reason they did it not a marketing one.
James
Here’s the artificial intelligence guess (ChatGPT 4):
You
why are the torsion bars on 1964 Chrysler New Yorkers longer than those on the Chrysler 300K?
ChatGPT
ChatGPT
The torsion bars on the 1964 Chrysler New Yorker are longer than those on the Chrysler 300K primarily due to differences
in design philosophy and intended vehicle usage. Here are a few reasons:
-
Ride Quality and Comfort
: The Chrysler New Yorker was designed with a focus on luxury and comfort. Longer torsion bars can provide a softer, more comfortable ride, which would be in line with the New Yorker's
luxury car status. The longer bars allow for greater flexibility, absorbing road imperfections more effectively.
-
Vehicle Weight and Distribution
: The New Yorker and 300K might have different weights or weight distributions. Longer torsion bars could be used to better support a heavier vehicle or a different weight distribution,
ensuring proper suspension performance and vehicle stability.
-
Handling Characteristics
: The Chrysler 300K, being a more performance-oriented model, would likely have a suspension tuned for better handling and responsiveness. Shorter torsion bars can provide a firmer
ride, which is typically desirable in performance cars for improved road feel and handling precision.
-
Design Evolution
: The torsion bar suspension system was a key feature in Chrysler vehicles during this era. The company experimented with different lengths and setups to optimize performance and comfort
for various models. The differences between the New Yorker and 300K reflect this ongoing development and specialization for different market segments.
-
Market Positioning and Brand Differentiation
: Chrysler might have intentionally differentiated the suspension setups of the New Yorker and 300K to cater to their respective target audiences. The New Yorker was aimed at buyers
seeking luxury and comfort, while the 300K appealed to those looking for performance and sportiness.
These factors together contribute to the decision to use longer torsion bars in the Chrysler New Yorker compared to the
Chrysler 300K. It's a reflection of the different priorities and design goals for each model within the Chrysler lineup.
To use up oversupply of long bars??
Rich B. in rainy CA.
That is why I find it interesting. 300 and New Yorker same wheel base in 1964 but different length torsion bars.
Length, clocking and diameter are the main variables in a torsion bar suspension. What I do not get is why on the New Yorker they went longer on the
bars. If they needed more load for a heavier car, they could just increase the diameter.
Anyone have any ideas?
James
'63 and later - all 122" wb
'62 - all Chryslers 122" wb EXCEPT NYer that remained 126" wb.
? did they still have two wheelbase in 63,64 ; most of what I am talking about is change from lwb 60,61 to swb 62 .. then up . 62 and 3,4 same ?
NY and 300 are the same all years ? i think so
jg
Bob,
I have not gone hunting for frame sheets for 1964 300 versus the New Yorker yet. But in the Master Parts Book for 1964 they show the same part number
for both sub frames.
The only two front suspension parts that I see are different in the MPB, and admittedly I did a quick look not an exhaustive one, was the torsion
bars and the anchors.
The bars are longer, and I think but have yet to confirm, that the anchors are as well.
James
There is a video comparing
long and short wheelbase stub frames at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAyFrL91JWE
It might answer some of these questions.
On 1/19/2024 2:18 PM, John Grady wrote:
i often wondered what was really changed factually between long and short frames 60-62 . James’ notation / discovery of possibly special rear bar sockets if confirmed answers a
lot of questions. Despite two lengths of bars too .
i was trying to figure out why TTI exhaust headers ( nice stuff) are listed for 62 but not anything before that ( i wanted for an F) . They did not know , saying we never put it
in an F . So went at it with tape crudely for 30 minutes . Most if not all the wheelbase change is between the front wheel centerline and the front door hinge seam ?
so to my mind even more room is in an F — but relationship of steering box to engine would be a lot different as steering box location still relates to fire wall / steering column
angle . That stays the same , as you move front wheels closer to fire wall on swb ,torsion bars will move back ( a lot if same length) . Engine in same place re firewall , so is more over front wheel centerline then?
So although relationship of exhaust to block starter and transmission stays the same , other stuff moves related to all of it ?
steering box , torsion bar mounts etc but body itself including firewall / door seam must be the same , as if frame and front fenders were “ sectioned “ between firewall and
rest of front of it — but then steering box would slide forward, closer to front cross member ?
crude description , I know . has anyone gotten into this ?
Related question , aftermarket “ smaller” performance steering boxes ( Borgeson) seem to have same fitment issue , confusion . No help at all there . ( by the way , F and G stock
box are slightly different , (!!!) longer casting at column connection ( that got me once).
But at some point the later swb steering box involves the K frame ? anybody know about that or when it happened ? F G and back , the box bolts sideways to frame rail as we know
. I call it like a Ford pickup . But later boxes seem to have a “foot” against the K frame . I assume —but do not know — J and K are like 62 ?
Admit to being out my comfort zone on this , just trying to understand header issue and steering box mounts/ changes . Thinking was ,—- if an issue , smaller box may help if
header pipes want the same space , and why is 62 ok 60 not ? 60 should have more room
Tony R has K ex manifold in F , so why the special 405 ones ? or maybe those two are close , or different swb/lwb 62 to 60 , 62 being tighter ? Or J/K more compact than 405?
J
All Chrysler models in 1963 and 1964 had a 122" wheel base.
On 1/19/2024 9:22 AM, Cox Mail wrote:
Are New Yorkers long
They have a totally different sub frame then
The shorter 122" sub frames.
Well,
Learn something new every day.
Turns out that the New Yorkers uses a different length torsion bar. Which means they used a different sub frame.
I thought the different part number in the master parts book was due to a different diameter. But it is both different in diameter and length. All
the other front-end parts are the same according to the master Parts Book.
Seems odd. The New Yorker bars are 44 inches long while the Newport and 300 are 40.
I guess I will eBay them at some point as they are of little use to me.
Thanks all for the measurements.
James
Hi Jamie,
I am scratching my head. I will have to check the bars up at the house this weekend. I could have sworn that I measured them, and they were 44 inches
long. Those bars cam out of a 1964 Chrysler New Yorker.
Is it possible that the New Yorker and the 300 used different length bars? Or was there a change to the subframe in 1964 from 1963 and the bars are
longer?
I will also have to get under the 300K here in San Francisco on the cold wet concrete and see if I can get an in-car measurement.
Jamie, can you take a caliper and get me a very exacting OD on the 607 bar?
Thanks, James
James , the 607 bar out of my J is 40" long.
On Tuesday, January 16, 2024 at 11:32:49
AM UTC-5 James Douglas wrote:
If anyone has a set of torsion bars out and accessible for a 1963-1964 Chrysler, can you measure the length and note the bar number?
I have a paperwork conundrum. I have a set that came out of a 1964 New Yorker, and I thought I measured them, and they are 44 inches long. But my paperwork here in San Francisco
says that the bars for a1963 300J, and presumable the 1964 300K, are 40 inches long. Hence the conundrum.
Also, I am still hunting for a set of 606-607 bars and if anyone has a set, they will sell please let me know.
James
--
For archives go to
http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/a2708d8c-6a80-4840-afb8-42fd479ff0dcn%40googlegroups.com.
--
For archives go to
http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/CY5PR19MB61712BF52B697FECBD4CDB6693722%40CY5PR19MB6171.namprd19.prod.outlook.com.
--
For archives go to
http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/CY5PR19MB6171D021BADB7084AB2EF56593702%40CY5PR19MB6171.namprd19.prod.outlook.com.
--
For archives go to
http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/441BF38A-51EF-4E5D-9325-3FA2833B80E7%40cox.net.
--
For archives go to
http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/6bf2f025-0338-4a01-aff6-ec4444406325%40simplexco.com.
--
For archives go to
http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/a05abfae-7d5a-42cf-8d36-d8b46de5aef3%40simplexco.com.
--
For archives go to
http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/609E5619-E1E5-4C34-BA52-D2CB5873AA3C%40gradyresearch.com.
--
For archives go to
http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/CY5PR19MB6171CEB9C03E6A37DB193C1393752%40CY5PR19MB6171.namprd19.prod.outlook.com.
--
For archives go to
http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/00d601da4d77%2432ba5450%24982efcf0%24%40ez2.net.
--
For archives go to
http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/82954874-6689-4FE7-864F-BB05ED75BE92%40gradyresearch.com.
--
For archives go to
http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/5B673744-BFC5-49B0-A192-545F878AE23E%40gradyresearch.com.
--
For archives go to
http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/31325FCE-1D99-45E5-AEB5-8F7EB94352AA%40gradyresearch.com.
--
For archives go to
http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/SJ0PR20MB534148E3D306064572999C30C0792%40SJ0PR20MB5341.namprd20.prod.outlook.com.
--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/CY5PR19MB617102F2F057E158663ED67D93792%40CY5PR19MB6171.namprd19.prod.outlook.com.
|
