|
|
Elite Veteran
Posts: 1118
 
Location: STL, MO | My 58 plymouth does not have a swaybar. Would a 57-58 Fury or a 60 Imp have one? I have access to these 2 cars for parts, but it's a draggin jacks thru the woods type boneyard that's 40 miles away so does anyone know and if so would the Imp bar be bigger/compatible? thanks Steve |
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 6203
Location: Big pimpin' | I don't believe I've EVER seen a Plymouth with a sway bar....There is a thread in the archives mentioning a Bronco rear sway bar, but No front....
Edited by dukeboy 2009-04-02 8:25 PM
|
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
 
Location: bishop, ca | Plymouths did not have sway bars available, except on maybe very-special order, on the "Export" suspensions.
The 1957-1958 performance model, Fury, had fairly HD torsion bars (952/953) which were shared with the Dodge Royals and
Coronets (which also did not have sway bars available, except as "Export" suspension options).
The 952/953 bars are relatively VERY strong, and the Fury got rave-reviews for its (non-sway bar) handling.
The 1957 Dodge Custom Royals and the Custom Suburban wagons had OEM sway bars as standard equipment, but, the CRL's also had the softer torsion bars, which were shared with the standard V/8 Plymouths (950/951).
I retrofitted my CRL with the optional 952/953 T/bars, which you could do, too, Steve.
The 126" wheelbase CHRY/DeS/IMP models have longer T/bars, so, they will not fit the PLY/DOD/Firesweep models, which have
shorter front-ends (and, the PLY has a shorter wheelbase, but, that's not important to this discussion).
Your car, Steve, almost certainly, has the 950/951 T/bars on it; you can dig-out the grunge, on the ass-ends of your bars, and
confirm the P/N's which appear in raised numbers on them.
There is one set of optional EXTRA-HD T/bars for 'our' cars, and that is/are the bad-boys which were put on Taxi cabs/Cop Cars,
and the 57 D501 race cars: 956/957 .
The 952/953 are shown as being optional on the CRL's; the 956/957's are optional on the Roys/Coros, and on your car, too.
Now, what you COULD do, and what I've mentioned several times to others, is : go find a nice dry-climate wrecking yard CRL
or Custom Sierra (they ARE out-there), and have them cut-out the sway bar mounting brackets, on the frame, and then
remove the entire sway bar system/brackets.
A Custom Sierra will also have the 952/953 torsion bars, which should be in fine-condition, as long as they are intact.
Just be sure to mount them on the same-side, that they came 'out' of, on the wagon.
Then, weld-on the frame-brackets to your car (the frame bracket mounting-slots may already be cut into the frame, anyway;
they ARE, on the various Dodge models, which shared a common frame assembly).
If those bracket-locating-slots are not already cut into your frame, a little bit of maneuvering of the assembly, around your frame,
will show precisely where they should be attached to the frame.
Gary Goers makes and sells the sway bar rubber mounting-bushings, so, all that you really need is/are the 'hardware' items.
You can take your time collecting all the necessary pieces, before you have to do any of the installation work.
In addition to the heavier T/bars and/or the sway bar, you can install 2-way gas shocks, and a complete front end overhaul
using the bushings and fittings and ball joints as supplied by Just Suspension.
J.S. also sells a nowhere-else-available HD front strut-rod bushing, which will help to stabilize the lower control arms' movements.
Don't forget to check-out/overhaul the suspension's idler arm bushing, too.
And, then, there's the power steering gearbox and pump O/H (if applicable), and new Diamondback WWW radials (which have a
TRAILER-weight support rating, so, their sidewalls are very stiff, for control purposes, and they are rated for something like
56PSI--I run mine at 45PSI, and they are NOT rough-riding, at that air pressure), and, finally, there's a nice 1.5 degree Positive-
Caster front end alignment that you should be able to dial-in, for self-centering steering wheel response.
There's a LOT of things that go into acquiring an amazing-handling action, on our cars; all of which is VERY-doable!
Edited by d500neil 2009-04-02 8:10 PM
|
|
| |
|
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 508
Location: Orlando | Question:
Should a '57 CRL w/ D500 option have the heavier 952/953 torsion bars? Tomorrow I think I will crawl under my car and see what I got  |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 3967
Location: DFW, TX | My '57 Chrysler NYer has its stock sway bar on it and it is the tiniest, puniest little thing I've ever seen. In my opinion, it's not worth the effort of retrofitting it to another car. It's hard to imagine that a sway bar of less than an inch diameter is doing much to restrain the movement of a 4000+lb automobile with an 850lb engine (392)
If your goal is to actually improve the road-holding ability of your car, I think I would devise a way to put an appropriately sized anti-sway bar from another car or the aftermarket to your Dodge. |
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
Location: bishop, ca | Tom, the 952/953 bars were stock OEM items on all the Royals and Coronets, and the Suburban/Sierra wagons,
regardless whether they were D500 models, or not.
Same with the CRL's; they got the 950/951 bars regardless of them possibly having the D500 engine(-only) option.
You go part out a 1957 Coro/Roy/wagon, and you should be getting the 952/953 bars.
Danny; sorry to hear about your car's wimpy sway bar, and how it contributes nothing toward your car's handling.
Mine does just fine, with-all that I've done to my car, above, and I highly recommend its installation, on a non hot-rodded (looking) application.
The Fury's seemed to handle just fine w/o a sway bar, too. Adding one can only help its handling.
Edited by d500neil 2009-04-03 8:23 PM
|
|
| |
|
Elite Veteran
Posts: 1118
Location: STL, MO | I measured my bars today they are 1.04 (58 suburban V-8), went to the mopar boneyard and a 57 fury is 1.12, a poly 59 dodge sedan was also 1.04 so I'll be back to rob the Fury bars, and KYB's are on the list also. I haven't made up my mind on tires but I have a pr of 275/60/15's on mopar 15x8 steel rims that fit the rear ok which when I put them on I noticed the "dimpled" drums and tapered axle nut which I had somewhat forgot about, to say there will be some changes is a foregone conclusion....Thank you guys for the quick and detailed replys
|
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
Location: bishop, ca | Steve; you've got a very good micrometer, or excellent quality bars, as paint and corrosion can alter the apparent thickness of
the torsion bars.
The 950/951 are 1"; the 952/953 are 1.04" (as you have recorded) and the 956/957 are 1.09"--if I recall correctly.
The Hot Rod issues which test the 1957 and the 1958 Fury's mention the bar diameters for the various models.
You should now go get under your car, and dig out the grease/grunge which is deposited around the (rear-) ends of your
T/bars, so that you can see the raised-letter part numbers on them.
AND, over on the "Craigslist" message board, right now, there is a thread entitled "1958 NY'er Parts Car"
which features a view of the ass-end of a torsion bar (pic is #381jpg) which shows where someone should
excavate-the-grunge, if he wants to confirm the P/N's of his car's torsion bars.
Edited by d500neil 2009-04-04 4:06 PM
|
|
| |
|
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 508
Location: Orlando | FYI
the 1.04 bars should be %17 stiffer than the 1.00
and the 1.09 should be %41 stiffer than the 1.00 (that's a big difference.)
All other things being equal (material, length, leverage arm)
I just measured mine and came up with 1.05, BUT Neil is right about all the paint. It is globbed on there very thick. I can feel the runs and drips. So I wouldn't rely on my 1.05 measurement. Sometime this weekend I WILL crawl under there and look for the part#. |
|
| |
|
Elite Veteran
Posts: 1118
Location: STL, MO | A 15yr old mititouyo digital, The caliper kept getting hung up when measuring the Fury, I took several readings and 1.12 was an average. I will probably go next weekend and liberate the bars after I confirm p/n's. I tried doing the math using 41" b-body bars as a guide but it seems such small incremental changes (length&dia) make such a big difference it was beyond my math skills. I remember reading 300's were 40% stiffer than a base Chrysler so this seems to fall in place. |
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
Location: bishop, ca | The 300's, which had a longer T/bar, had a bar-diameter of 1.11"
The spring rate is dependent upon something-to-do with the length of the lower control arm.
I'd REALLY like to have someone calculate the front spring rates, if 'we' can get a reliable measurement-formula for them.
The factory, and magazines, published only very vague references to how 'one' bar might be stronger than another, but, I don't ever recall seeing any specific front spring rates being published, even in the A.M.A, Specifification sheets.
I have seen spring rates, for the rear leafs, but not-ever, for the fronts.
Edited by d500neil 2009-04-04 10:08 PM
|
|
| |
|
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 508
Location: Orlando | I used this:
http://www.ac-parts.co.uk/utilities/torsionbars.html
So if you know the length, diameter and lever arm (the lever arm will be the distance from the center of the bar to the center of the wheel), then you can calculate that in ft/lbs with the above website. |
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
Location: bishop, ca | Hmmmmm....the "lever arm" would be the lower control arm, and its "length-measurent" would appear to be from the
wheel centerline(on the steering knuckle, outboard-beyond the end of the L.C.A), probably to the centerline of the L.C.A.'s
pivot point-connection.
I wonder where the wheel center would reside, on the steering knuckle?
It's 'funny' (as in too-bad) that the factory's didn't publish the 'front-spring' rates.
Knowing that/those numbers...... (similar to the brake linings' square-inches; ANOTHER number-
rate that I've never been able to confirm : like: 12x2.5" x2 = 25" per wheel x 4 wheels
doesn't equal 251 or 253, or whatever sq.in., the factory used to claim).....would allow us
to check their mathematics.
Edited by d500neil 2009-04-05 8:15 PM
|
|
| |
|
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 508
Location: Orlando | I just got back from underneath my car and here is what I found:
Passenger side: 1635 950 C
Driver side: 1635 9** E
The ** is the fact that I cannot read the numbers despite having totally cleaned the end of the bar. In fact, it doesn't even look like there is anything there at all.
As for measurements of bar diameter, I couldn't get a reliable reading. I got numbers all over the place. Probably due to varying thickness paint (paint is nice and shiny...no corrosion...once I cleaned off the grime.) There are splashes of red paint on the bars in various places.
The SMALLEST number I got was 1.01, and I got it a few times. So I am guessing that is the diameter of the bar plus some paint, where the paint is thinnest.
Of course, this confirms Neils info (not that it needed confirmation )
Edited by ThomasD500 2009-04-05 8:48 PM
|
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 253
Location: Tampere, Finland | I just measured 956/957 torsionbars from my Kingsway and got 1.11" - 1.12". I used metric system slide gauge so had to convert.
With these torsionbars there is no need for swaybar, if you are just cruising the streets. I installed one last year, but I took it away because I couldn´t feel any reasonable changes, cornering etc.
I also have one pair of torsionbars from 1959 Dodge Kingsway and got 1.06" - 1.08". These code is 608 (or 809, I don´t know is it upside down or not). |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 3967
Location: DFW, TX | Neil, I should have finished up my statement with "instead of adding an antisway bar, I recommend you just install firmer torsion bars."
This will get him to his desired result of flatter cornering. I worked for years to prepare cars for autocross competition and I may have a different idea of "flat cornering" than some others here. |
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 253
Location: Tampere, Finland | I believe the previous comment was for me. Kingsway - 2009-04-06 6:06 PM ...if you are just cruising the streets. 57burb - 2009-04-06 6:27 PM I worked for years to prepare cars for autocross competition Is there something that I don´t understand? Cruising vs. autocross? Believe me, if I use your tiniest, puniest little thing with my T/bars, I´d need really hard bushings to see any results. It can´t do it even with firmer S/B! And I´m not racing at the street.
Edited by Kingsway 2009-04-06 1:07 PM
|
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 3967
Location: DFW, TX | Kai-
I think we are both saying the same thing. I'm not saying that he is going autocrossing, just mentioning that I have some background in it. And that the factory anti sway bar doesn't do much at all. |
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 253
Location: Tampere, Finland | Ok. Sorry. I misunderstood you. |
|
| |
|
Elite Veteran
Posts: 1118
Location: STL, MO | Actually I was thinking of 'Drifting"...All BS aside I am looking at cruising @ 70-75 with 2-3 200lb passengers a couple of coolers, luggage,lawn chairs, tools, etc. 750lb engine hopefully w/ac,to most events within 300 miles in relative safety ie dodging deer, old ladies, urban youth,rain, without putting this thing on it's roof. So bigger wheels, stiffer susp., disc's, really anything to make this car cope w/todays traffic with out crinkling sheetmetal. |
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 265
Location: North Carolina | Ha.. 
|
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 3034
Location: N.W. Fla. | Sounds like it would be benificial to get the torsion bars off a '60 BB Fury where im putting a 331 in a /6 '60 Savoy. Would a '60 Fury have an anti sway bar also? |
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
Location: bishop, ca | The 956/957 bars, taking into consideration the considerably lesser overall weight that they have to support/control,
in regards to the entire car, are probably 'stronger/stiffer' than are the 1.11" bars that the 300's carried on them.
Kai has a real Export car, with the 956/957 bars, and the 6-leaf springs on it.
I installed the stronger/optional 952/953 bars (956/957 are Unobtanium) along with my car's sway bar system. Those guys,
along with 2-way gas shocks, and a proper front end alignment, and good-stiff-walled Diamondback radials, give a car
about as much front end control-response as can be reasonably ever desired.
|
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 7401
Location: northern germany | Mopar1 - 2009-04-07 8:33 PM
Would a '60 Fury have an anti sway bar also?
optional, but the stock bar does not make a big difference. |
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 253
Location: Tampere, Finland | d500neil - 2009-04-08 3:37 AM Kai has a real Export car, with the 956/957 bars, and the 6-leaf springs on it. 7-leaf springs. |
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
Location: bishop, ca | Of course, it's got 7-leafs, or 6 1/2, to be precise, right? the last-little leaf only extends to the middle of the rear axle,
but not equally-on-both-sides of the axle, like the other 6 leafs?
Last nite, I got out my two reference-issues of Hot Rod (and the 55-58 Mopar parts book) , the 5/57 "Fury VS Stock" and the 1/58 "1000 mile Test-58 Fury" (it turned-out to be 2,600 miles, by the end of the cross-country road test!) issues.
They have a great amount of technical information in them.
The 5/57 states that the 44.6" long T/bars are 1" for 6-bangers ( P/N: 946/947, in the parts book) ; 1.04" for the standard
V/8's (950/951) ; and 1.09" for Fury (952/953 , AND, the standard bars on 57 Coro's/Roy's; all three of these models do
not have sway bars available OEM).
It says that the 1.04's are 7.5% stronger than the 1"ers, and that the 1.09's are 9% stiffer than the 1.04's , and 16% [9+7.5 ] stronger than the 1"ers.
So, I would NOT doubt that the big-dog 956/957 bars are 1.11" diameter (same diameter, but shorter, than the 300-bars).
The Fury 6-leaf (5 1/2, actually) rear springs are rated at 125 lbs/sq." , compared to the : " 95 lbs/sq. of the "FOUR leafs"
(shouldn't 'that' be 4 1/2 leafs???) standard PLY rear springs : ".... which 'calculates' to a 24% strength increase..." (so, is H.R. referencing the 6-banger 4-total-leafs[????] , or, the Belvie V/8's 4 1/2 leafs???).
Another factoid, that you NEVER hear the factory confirm, is the ACTUAL weight (not the "shipping weight" ) of a "fully-
loaded/1/2-tank-full" car; the Belvie 2-dr weighed 3820, and the Fury weighed in at 3790 (which is NOT very heavy!)
According to 'this' article, both(?) cars had brake shoes of 11.5 x 2" size (184 sq.") , which are nothing like the 57 CRL's and
wagon's 12" x 2.5" linings.
The article goes on to discuss various trannie and rear end gear ratios, and engine/cam specs,but, we're talking T/bars, and
leaf springs, here.
BTW, the 55-58 Parts Book states that, after the 1957 Fury VIN : 14357344, the 956/957 T/bars WERE installed on Furys.
In the 1/58 issue, nothing is said about the ' 1.11" ' bars being installed on the test car, BUT, it states that, although T/bars
should, technically, be referred to as being VARIABLE-rate springs, that the 1.09" bars were rated at 145 lbs/sq." , and that
125sq." was the rating for the 1.04" bars.
I don't know what the lower control arm's length may be, as measured from the center-line of the T/bar's "pivoting-axis" insertion,
to the center-line of the wheel, as it sits on the wheel spindle, but, using the spring rates, etc, can someone go back into that
website and try to correlate/confirm these load-rate-numbers?????
Finally, and this only stands to reason, the articles confirm that better handling is obtained from RAISING slightly the front end
suspensions, rather than from 'slamming' them to the ground--altho H.R liked the OEM T/bar settings.
In the 1/58 article, however, the Fury/Belvie rear springs are rated at 165 lbs/sq,"/130 lbs/sq." , compared to the 145/125
ratings that were listed, for their 1957 counterparts---dunno why, but, for the 1958 Dodges, the rear leafs were slightly
longer than the 57 leaf springs, so, maybe the 'longer(?)' 58 PLY leaf springs made them be stronger, too.
The 1/58 article says that the brake shoes were, again, 184 sq." ; same as for 1957 .
The 1958 Fury reportedly weighed "3800 lbs, with a half tank of gas in it" ("...which would
not [???--yeah, it sure WOULD...] make it a light-weight [car] )."
BTW, the 1/58 article (re-)confirms that Detroit-built cars WERE (at least: sometimes) delivered to
the West coast via "Truck" (and not, partially, by rail)---that's a long 'way' to haul a car.
Edited by d500neil 2009-04-08 9:26 PM
|
|
| |
|
Elite Veteran
Posts: 1118
Location: STL, MO | So this 57 fury I am taking the bars from would be the largest avalible t-bar and A-motor and B-motor Fury's have the same size bar? BTW where is the T bar adjuster bolt on these framed cars? |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 3967
Location: DFW, TX | Handygun - 2009-04-08 8:53 PM
So this 57 fury I am taking the bars from would be the largest avalible t-bar and A-motor and B-motor Fury's have the same size bar? BTW where is the T bar adjuster bolt on these framed cars?
The adjuster bolt is inside the frame rail at the torsion bar crossmember. It is at approximately the halfway point of the door.
Neil, I believe that they handle better when raised up! The spring rate increases in that direction, making the spring stiffer. Yes my cars handle lousy... but they look good doing it.  |
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 253
Location: Tampere, Finland | d500neil - 2009-04-09 3:58 AM Of course, it's got 7-leafs, or 6 1/2, to be precise, right? the last-little leaf only extends to the middle of the rear axle, but not equally-on-both-sides of the axle, like the other 6 leafs? 6 1/2, maybe so. Last leaf is about 2-2,5 feet long so it is clearly shorter than others.
 (7-leaf rear springs.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
 7-leaf rear springs.jpg (36KB - 151 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 7401
Location: northern germany | 57burb - 2009-04-09 10:49 AM
I believe that they handle better when raised up! The spring rate increases in that direction, making the spring stiffer.
you can't raise the spring rate by cranking it up, it remains always the same. when you lower the front ONLY there is more weight on the front wheels making the springs feel softer. |
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
Location: bishop, ca | Kai, does that last-bottom leaf only extend to right-under the rear axle, or does it extend BEYOND it, ( by the same
length as seen in your photo)?
If it does, and I now suspect that it might extend on both sides of the axle housing, then your car will have 7 FULL
leafs.
The reason that I now think that you may have 7-full leafs is that, usually, the last half-leaf is installed toward the FRONT of the
axle, providing a bit more of performance (braking/accelerating) capability, but not stiffening up the riding comfort
which is provided by the extra-long rear leaf spring length-sections.
Raising the front suspension gives it more response, or travel, and tends to un-weight the front geometry-suspension,
and to shift rearward the weight bearing loads on the entire car.
|
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 253
Location: Tampere, Finland | d500neil - 2009-04-09 11:54 PM Kai, does that last-bottom leaf only extend to right-under the rear axle, or does it extend BEYOND it, ( by the same length as seen in your photo)? If it does, and I now suspect that it might extend on both sides of the axle housing, then your car will have 7 FULL leafs. YES, it does! I don´t have a photo right now, but it extends the same lenght to both sides of the rear axle. EDIT: I think this makes cornering better (stiffer, flatter...) than the 956/957 T/bars and 4 or 5-leaf springs together. I have a rear swaybar to my car and I´ve been thinking to install it and see how it works. Well, it might be that it won´t do anything with my rear springs. Handygun: If you decide to use 956/957 T/bars and you have 4 or 5-leaf springs in your car, the rear swaybar could be a big help.
Edited by Kingsway 2009-04-10 1:49 PM
|
|
| |
|
Elite Veteran
Posts: 1118
Location: STL, MO | Went out to the Fury today, jacked it up, blocked it up, and sprayed everything with oil, I was able to get to the adjusters from inside the car thanks to rust, went ahead and took out the gold buttons and shifter quadrant while I was there and noticed all the chrome window trim my low line suburban doesn't have. A boneyard is a great place to be on such a beautiful saturday, I'll go back and pull the bars next week, Thanks to all for everything, Steve |
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
Location: bishop, ca | Good luck, Steve; you might discover that you've got the 956/957 bars, but at 'worst' you will have the 952/953 bars
which ARE desirable and valuable---just make sure to record (as in applying some written-on masking tape to one
end on each of them, and to record on the masking tape WHICH end, and which side [drivers/passenger's NOT 'left/right'] of the car that each bar came off-of, so that the bars can be properly re-installed at some (much later, possibly) date.
Kai, at the risk of inciting another discussion-riot on the merits of installing a REAR sway bar, just please believe me when
I say that virtually no one, having a FWDLK car, needs to install a rear sway bar, as it will tend to increase understeer,
whereas the front sway bar and stiffer T/bars, will tend to allow the rear end to move-over, and to neutralize the inherent
understeer that our cars have.
I doubt that anyone here has driven their car to the extent that I have, wherein I have ruined a wheel spindle, from the
deterioration of a wheel bearing (almost ruined the other spindle, too, but it was saveable) from cornering my car so
energetically, after I've dialed in the suspension, with the 952/953 bars, the front sway bar, and with 4 station wagon
leafs mounted onto the car's correct-length long-main leaf springs, and with gas shocks installed, and with stiff-walled
radial tires, too.
The car handles very neutrally and responsively; with your car's 956/957's and its SEVEN leaf springs, all that I would
suggest is that you install the 2-way gas shocks (sold on evilpay, regularly) and install Diamondback radials (which you can
inflate to 40+psi, for great handling).
The Diamondbacks are rated as being TRAILER tires (yeah, made in Taiwan, the shame!) good to 56psi inflation, and 85 mph
(but I've had mine up to 100-ish, with no problemos).
They ride smoothly and not harshly, even at about 45psi.
Edited by d500neil 2009-04-14 5:21 PM
|
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
Location: bishop, ca | ....the reason to record, accurately, the installation-and-orientation of any removed torsion bars is because a mis-re-installed
torsion bar can and probably WILL break.
Torsion bars take a definite 'set' after they're first installed, and you definitely want to re-install them in the same
orientation that they had had, in their 'original' home....
|
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 253
Location: Tampere, Finland | d500neil - 2009-04-15 12:19 AM Kai, at the risk of inciting another discussion-riot on the merits of installing a REAR sway bar, just please believe me when I say that virtually no one, having a FWDLK car, needs to install a rear sway bar, as it will tend to increase understeer, whereas the front sway bar and stiffer T/bars, will tend to allow the rear end to move-over, and to neutralize the inherent understeer that our cars have. d500neil - 2009-04-15 12:19 AM The car handles very neutrally and responsively; with your car's 956/957's and its SEVEN leaf springs, all that I would
suggest is that you install the 2-way gas shocks (sold on evilpay, regularly) and install Diamondback radials (which you can
inflate to 40+psi, for great handling). Neil, with 956/957 T/bars, 4 or 5-leaf springs and rear swaybar my idea was to decrease the twist of the body. You know, with firm front and loose rear it makes body twist. Has there been problems with that kind of property in our cars? I am pretty satisfied to my car´s handling. Shocks are good, but tires are like s**t! Old plys... EDIT: And I didn´t mean that 5-leaf springs themselves are poor or bad somehow!
Edited by Kingsway 2009-04-18 5:33 AM
|
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
Location: bishop, ca | Kai, our cars do not twist up, probably due to the body sitting on top of that frame.
Tires make a big difference.
Go contact Diamondback Tire company and find out their costs to ship to you their comparable 8x14" WWW tires----they
have a funny Euro-rating to them, and ask if they are the ones which are trailer-rated, and made in Taiwan----at least,
the letters/numbering are all on the back-side of the tires, so 'we' just get to see a beautiful, un-adorned WWW tire side !
|
|
| |
|
Elite Veteran
Posts: 1118
Location: STL, MO | Do the numbers, odd and even represent left and right like most parts? |
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
Location: bishop, ca | Yeah, and I can never keep their order memorized!
I've got a 50/50 chance, here, but I think that DRIVERS side is odd, and Passenger's side is even---refer to drivers/passenger
side, instead of left/right, because you can get confused by referring to the side of the car that you're looking-at, from
head-on, sometimes, ---like I do!
The odd/even protocol is, at least, a 'constant' , in observing parts numbers.
|
|
| |
|
Elite Veteran
Posts: 1118
Location: STL, MO | You got the money on that one. The bars are also marked R&L on the back end w/a corresponding arrow for those of us who think in port or stbd. or have to look at our hands to get our bearings about us. This Fury is going to cough up some more parts before it's over, the bars are the big ones. Neil thanks for your quick and p/n rich answers. Steve |
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 6500
Location: Newark, Texas (Fort Worth) | These things worth anything?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/161100001613?euid=34bd2a165c814b6992996c066... |
|
| |
Swaybar
