From: Dave64 <lt7dave@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Super Stock Springs Update
To: 1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx
Date: Saturday, June 5, 2010, 10:44 PM
Maybe I'll just drill my own holes in
the 2" hangers. @ things I forgot to mention in my
last bit of info. Yes, my driveshaft is a ball and
trunion. And I also see that my pinion snubber lines
up to contact nothing but air under there - it won't hit the
underside of the car as it is. Another indication that
the whole thing is back too far.
Dave
--- On Sat, 6/5/10, Donald Gallimore <dongallimore@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
> From: Donald Gallimore <dongallimore@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Super Stock Springs Update
> To: 1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Saturday, June 5, 2010, 12:20 PM
> I did a lot of buy and try effort
> with my '65 Belvedere trying to get the correct
front
> spring hangers. The 2" was too much (no pun
intended), the
> factory unit was too short. I ended up using an
A-Body
> set I found at a swap meet. They moved the spring
perch
> back about 1". Note that from what I've read,
there is a
> difference in front spring eye location between the
'65
> Belvedere's and '65 Coronets. There is a 1"
> difference. The Belvedere is 116" wheelbase and the
> Coronet 117". Read that in the Darrell Davis book on
the
> '65 Hemi cars. Anyone got that book handy that could
> veryify that info and supply the details?
>
> Measured the the frame to spring eye on my cars in
the
> garage. For the dead stock '65 Satellite, it is 2
3/8".
> For the '65 Belvedere with the SS springs and the
A-Body
> front spring hanger, it is 3 1/2". So, by deduction,
it
> appears the difference is roughly 1" between the stock
and
> SS front spring segment length. Again, this is a
B-Body
> Plymouth, not a Dodge.
>
> Akron Don Gallimore
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Dave64 <lt7dave@xxxxxxxxx>
> > To: 1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Sat, June 5, 2010 11:42:54 AM
> > Subject: Re: Super Stock Springs Update
> >
> > I switched the driveshaft around - no change.
The
> brakes are ok - no
> > draging. I noticed the rear wheels are back
farther
> than before - which
> > got me thinking about the extended front
hangers.
> The driveshaft is back
> > about as far as it will go to connect now. So
this
> appears to be at least
> > part of the issue. The pinion angle looks like
it's
> about 0 degrees at the
> > moment - so this could be another part. The DC
book
> says 5-7 degrees nose
> > down - but I think that's more for racing.
About 3
> degrees or so may be
> > about right for the street? What's the best
way
> (tool) to accurately
> > measure it?
>
> When I noticed the wheels are back farther, I thought
about
>
> > taking the 2" front hangers off and putting the
stock
> ones back on. This
> > would move the rearend forward about 2". If I
push
> the driveshaft in all
> > the way, I have about that much, so that might
push it
> in to the max or close to
> > it. I don't know if that would be good or
not. If
> I go back to the
> > stock front hangers, it may also push the nose of
the
> pinion up more - going in
> > the opposite direction of where it needs to go.
But
> then shims could
> > correct that. I think part of the issue is the
2"
> extended front
> > hangers. I think about 1" would be a happy
medium -
> seems that 2" is too
> > much, but stock is too little. I could put the
front
> spring eyes up in the
> > upper mounting hole (they're in the lowers now),
but I
> don't think that would
> > change much. Maybe it would?
>
> At this point, I'm out of time.
> > My daughter is graduating from HS tomorrow, and
I
> can't experiment any more
> > today and also help get a party ready. I'm
> disappointed that I won't get
> > to drive the car to her graduation, but the
weather
> may have eliminated that
> > anyway. Once we're past this weekend, I'll
> experiment some more. I
> > think my next move may be to put the stock front
> hangers back on and see what
> > that does.
>
> Thanks for the help, and keep the ideas
> > coming.
>
> Dave
>
> --- On Fri, 6/4/10, MO ( Steve Mick) <>
> ymailto="mailto:micher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";
>
> > href="mailto:micher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>micher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> > wrote:
>
> > From: MO ( Steve Mick) <>
ymailto="mailto:micher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";
>
> > href="mailto:micher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>micher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Subject: Re: Super Stock Springs Update
> > To: > ymailto="mailto:1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx";
>
> > href="mailto:1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx";>1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > Date: Friday, June 4, 2010, 5:37 PM
> >
> > On ball and trunions and
> > slip yokes. You must be sure that
> > with car weight on the axels, that
> > there is room for the
> > drive shaft to be able to "give" frontward and
> > backward.
> > without bottoming out. With slip yokes, if they
are
>
> > to
> > close to the spline ends that will make the yoke
loose
> and
> >
> > definatly make a viberation. Also if the yoke
splines
> are
> > worn and loose
> > fitting, that will make a vibration.
> > Even brake shoe drag will make a
> > vibration you would think
> > was coming from the
> >
> > driveline...............................MO
> >
> > {Steve Mick}
> >
> > http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/mick64.html
> >
> > -----
> > Original Message ----- From: "David Bailey"
<>
> ymailto="mailto:bb64d440@xxxxxxxxxxx";
>
> > href="mailto:bb64d440@xxxxxxxxxxx";>bb64d440@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To:
> > <>
> > href="mailto:1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx";>1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 6:40 AM
> > Subject: RE: Super Stock Springs
> > Update
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I’m no expert by
> > far, but I’d be inclined to agree with
> > your suspicions…that is 1. To
> > check drive shaft length /
> > straightness and what about the universal(s)
> > joints / Ball
> > Trunion, are these fresh? By a remote chance,
maybe
> > by
> > simply rotating the drive shaft connecting point
> could
> >
> > restore smooth operation. And 2. The pinion
> > angle, someone else will
> > know better but is the angle of 3
> > degrees still a commonly accepted
> > point?
> > Dave B.
> >
> >
> > > To: > ymailto="mailto:1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx";
>
> > href="mailto:1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx";>1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > > From: > href="mailto:lt7dave@xxxxxxxxx";>lt7dave@xxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject:
> > Super Stock Springs Update
> > > Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 20:42:04
> > -0700
> > >
> > >
> > > After chasing after the correct
> > brake setup, I have my
> > '64 Belvedere all buttoned up and back on 4
> > wheels. Here's a
> > rundown of what I did.
> > > I installed a later
> > model 8 3/4 rearend (I think it's
> > a '68 B body). I used my old 741 third
> > member, put new green
> > bearings on the "new" axles, and put new brakes
on
> > it
> > (11'x2"). I also installed 3400lb SS springs with
the
> 2"
> >
> > extended front hanger brackets along with new
(longer)
> Mopar
> > drag
> > shocks.
> > >
> > > The result: I really like how it looks now,
> > but it has
> > a bad vibration starting at around just 20 mph. A
few
> >
> > assessments I make are: the third member is my
old one
> - I
> > had no
> > problems before, so I'm figuring that is ok. The
> > axles look fine - don't
> > appear to be bent or anything, so
> > for now I think they're ok. No change
> > in tires or wheels, so
> > that shouldn't be it.
> > >
> > >
> > This leaves me with the theory that it's
driveshaft
> > related. Either the
> > length of the driveshaft could be an
> > issue (as suggested previously
> > here), or maybe the pinion
> > angle now isn't correct. Because I changed
> > several things
> > all at once, I've left myself in a position of
> > having
> > several possible areas that could be the problem.
And
> I
> > also
> > didn't have the forethought of measuring the
> driveshaft
> >
> > length or checking the pinion angle on my
previously
> > non-vibrating
> > setup, so determining if those things are at
> > issue will be more of a
> > challenge. I'm bummed out that I did
> > a lot of work and now have a car
> > that's essentially not
> > driveable until I get this figured out and fixed.
> > As always,
> > your help is much appreciated. What do you guys
> > think?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > >
> > Dave
> > > '64 Belvedere 2D HT, Auto
> > >
> > >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----
> > > Please address
> > private mail -- mail of interest to
> > only one person -- directly to that
> > person. I.e., send
> > parts/car transactions and negotiations as well
as
> > other
> > personal messages only to the intended recipient,
not
> to
> > the
> > Clubhouse public address. This practice will
protect
> your
> >
> > privacy, reduce the total volume of mail and fine
tune
> the
> > content
> > signal to Mopar topic. Thanks!
> > >
> > > 1962 to 1965 Mopar
> > Clubhouse Discussion Guidelines:
> > >
> > http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.org/mletiq.html and
> >
> > http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/general_disclaimer.html.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
_________________________________________________________________
> > The
> > New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine
> multiple
> > calendars with
> > Hotmail.
> >
> > http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multicalendar&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5
> >
> > --
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > ----
> > Please address private mail -- mail of interest
> > to only one
> > person -- directly to that person. I.e.,
send
> >
> > parts/car transactions and negotiations as well
as
> other
> > personal
> > messages only to the intended recipient, not to
the
> > Clubhouse public
> > address. This practice will protect your
> > privacy, reduce the total
> > volume of mail and fine tune the
> > content signal to Mopar topic.
> > Thanks!
> >
> > 1962 to 1965 Mopar Clubhouse Discussion
> > Guidelines:
> > > target=_blank >http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.org/mletiq.html
> > and
> > > href="http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/general_disclaimer.html";
>
> > target=_blank
> > >http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/general_disclaimer.html.
> >
> >
> >
> > ----
> > Please address private mail -- mail of interest
> > to only one
> > person -- directly to that person. I.e., send
> >
> > parts/car transactions and negotiations as well
as
> other
> > personal
> > messages only to the intended recipient, not to
the
> > Clubhouse public
> > address. This practice will protect your
> > privacy, reduce the total
> > volume of mail and fine tune the
> > content signal to Mopar topic.
> > Thanks!
> >
> > 1962 to 1965 Mopar Clubhouse Discussion
> > Guidelines:
> > > target=_blank >http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.org/mletiq.html
> > and
> > > href="http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/general_disclaimer.html";
>
> > target=_blank
> > >http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/general_disclaimer.html.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network