Ross Nicol
GT40s Supporter
Here is a new photo of my rear end or so to speak.Actually I'm testing my new found photo insertion skills.
Regards Ross
Regards Ross
Rear suspension with bearings& new rod ends
- Thread starter ross nicol
- Start date
Ross,
Are you sure that the rear brackets on your trailing arms (Attached to your uprights) are supposed to be horizontal, instead of vertical? That would seem to limit your rear suspension travel to the width of the bracket. There may be enough room there, but it is impossible to tell from the photo. I always thought that a rose joint was meant to flex on it's axis?
Bill
[ March 18, 2003: Message edited by: Bill Bayard ]
Are you sure that the rear brackets on your trailing arms (Attached to your uprights) are supposed to be horizontal, instead of vertical? That would seem to limit your rear suspension travel to the width of the bracket. There may be enough room there, but it is impossible to tell from the photo. I always thought that a rose joint was meant to flex on it's axis?
Bill
[ March 18, 2003: Message edited by: Bill Bayard ]
Vic,
I may be blind in one eye, but I can still see a little bit with the other!
Bill
I may be blind in one eye, but I can still see a little bit with the other!
Bill
Ross Nicol
GT40s Supporter
Bill
I doubt there is anything wrong with your eyes and I like your thinking but!!! there is no problem with travel as I have had the springs out and gone full droop to full bump with no problems.In fact the factory rose joints allow about 12 degrees
before necking out on the bolt and I have high misalignment units in there with 17 degrees before neckout.The brackets you refer to are almost identical to the rear suspension on the original car and they are horizontal too. In fact the only differences between my rear end and the original now is the rod end at the front of the lower control arm is a spherical bearing on the original and I don't have a rear anti roll bar.......yet!
I doubt there is anything wrong with your eyes and I like your thinking but!!! there is no problem with travel as I have had the springs out and gone full droop to full bump with no problems.In fact the factory rose joints allow about 12 degrees
before necking out on the bolt and I have high misalignment units in there with 17 degrees before neckout.The brackets you refer to are almost identical to the rear suspension on the original car and they are horizontal too. In fact the only differences between my rear end and the original now is the rod end at the front of the lower control arm is a spherical bearing on the original and I don't have a rear anti roll bar.......yet!
Ross Nicol
GT40s Supporter
Here's a side shot for you guys which may help clarify your observation
regards Ross
regards Ross
Ross,
Rose joints, Heim joints, spherical rod ends, etc., are designed to carry the load, tangent to the bolt, for greater strength.
Mounted the way yours are, the load is attempting to push the ball out of the socket, every time that the suspension is compressed. They will be much stronger, and last longer, if mounted vertically, as opposed to horizontally.
Bill
Rose joints, Heim joints, spherical rod ends, etc., are designed to carry the load, tangent to the bolt, for greater strength.
Mounted the way yours are, the load is attempting to push the ball out of the socket, every time that the suspension is compressed. They will be much stronger, and last longer, if mounted vertically, as opposed to horizontally.
Bill
Jim Rosenthal
Supporter
Hi Ross: what does the assembly manual show? I would assume it shows it as mounted although I agree with Bill, when you look at it, given the direction it is supposed to move, it doesn't look right...it looks counter-intuitive. (fancy English for old Virginia expression "thayat don't look raht")
What does Robert Logan advise in the manual?
What does Robert Logan advise in the manual?
They are installed as per the RF manual.
Ross & Mark,
You might want to reconsider the manual's
setup.
QA1 builds high quality bearings, rod ends, rose joints, etc. Their opinion, is that radial mounting, not axial mounting, is much stronger. They are quite experienced with many types of motorsport applications. There are formulas to calculate the strength of each method, based on the materials that you are using, available at the following www.qa1.net/industrial/ind_tech_data
Another thing to consider, is the dirt, and moisture that would collect between the race and the ball, in a horizontal situation. Not a good thing, if you want the rose joints to last.
QA1 is only a phone call away, if you still harbor any doubt.
Bill
[ March 18, 2003: Message edited by: Bill Bayard ]
You might want to reconsider the manual's
setup.
QA1 builds high quality bearings, rod ends, rose joints, etc. Their opinion, is that radial mounting, not axial mounting, is much stronger. They are quite experienced with many types of motorsport applications. There are formulas to calculate the strength of each method, based on the materials that you are using, available at the following www.qa1.net/industrial/ind_tech_data
Another thing to consider, is the dirt, and moisture that would collect between the race and the ball, in a horizontal situation. Not a good thing, if you want the rose joints to last.
QA1 is only a phone call away, if you still harbor any doubt.
Bill
[ March 18, 2003: Message edited by: Bill Bayard ]
Just some thoughts. I looked at pics of originals and they are the way they were done. Another thing to remember is that the arms control the rear from going front and back. When you hit a bump, forcing the suspension backwards, the heims are loading as Bill suggested they should. So maybe it's a question of which is the greater load, or 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.
Robert Logan
Defunct Manufactuer - Old RF Company
Thank you Mark, the reason I used the vertical method is because they were that way on the original. It was also the way my engineer designed them so both of these people (FAV and Ross Holder) are better qualified than I.
Best wishes,
Robert
Best wishes,
Robert
Ross Nicol
GT40s Supporter
Bill,Vic,Mark-W,Mark-C,Jim and Robert
I didn't realize my new ability to post pictures was going to cause so much discussion and this is healthy.I think that all you gentlemen would agree if horizontal rod ends didn't break at 200mph around le mans then it's good enough for me.The rod ends in question are made by National and are Max-T rated at 16,000lb.They replace a 6,000lb unit that is fitted to the RF as standard.All the other units are 23,000lb National U-Max. These are seriously strong rod ends and I am quite comfortable they will not fail.I'm hoping the car will be ready for it's first race meeting in June.Rest assured if I have a rear end failure you will all hear about it on this forum.
Regards Ross
I didn't realize my new ability to post pictures was going to cause so much discussion and this is healthy.I think that all you gentlemen would agree if horizontal rod ends didn't break at 200mph around le mans then it's good enough for me.The rod ends in question are made by National and are Max-T rated at 16,000lb.They replace a 6,000lb unit that is fitted to the RF as standard.All the other units are 23,000lb National U-Max. These are seriously strong rod ends and I am quite comfortable they will not fail.I'm hoping the car will be ready for it's first race meeting in June.Rest assured if I have a rear end failure you will all hear about it on this forum.
Regards Ross
Ross,
While there may never have been failures at LeMans, there have certainly been plenty of them since. Remember one thing, technology has come a long way since the sixties, and along with it more accurate testing methods than running something on the track, until it breaks.
If accuracy is what you seek, then by all means keep your suspension as is. If safety is a concern.....
I just don't want to hear about a catastrophic failure, that may cost you far more than a new rose joint.
Best of luck in June!
Bill
While there may never have been failures at LeMans, there have certainly been plenty of them since. Remember one thing, technology has come a long way since the sixties, and along with it more accurate testing methods than running something on the track, until it breaks.
If accuracy is what you seek, then by all means keep your suspension as is. If safety is a concern.....
I just don't want to hear about a catastrophic failure, that may cost you far more than a new rose joint.
Best of luck in June!
Bill
Just a small comment, the vertical loads on the uprights are not handled by the trailing arms, but through the upper and lower shock mountings and to a lesser extent through the lower pick-up points on the uprights. The only way that the rear trailing arm joints could experience any vertical load is if the bearings at the front of the trailing arm failed; ie started to stick. I don't see this as likely. So vertical or horizontal mounting of the rear trailing arm rose joints is equally valid. Just my .02 worth
Ross Nicol
GT40s Supporter
Bill
No I'm not seeking accuracy, in fact I am
very concerned with safety and have posted concerns on safety with fuel tanks previously.I do appreciate what your implying about a failure leading to a nasty accident but I can assure you I would not get in it and drive it on the track if there was any doubt about the cars safety.I am not an engineer but I do have a feel for things mechanical and I look after the engineering on my own race car.There was a time when I trusted someone else and the brake lines got chewed by the driveshafts.The brakes failed coming into a fast corner and I subsequently
rolled the car.Thanks for the concern though and the good wishes.I will post my results on the track for all you guys to peruse.
Regards Ross
No I'm not seeking accuracy, in fact I am
very concerned with safety and have posted concerns on safety with fuel tanks previously.I do appreciate what your implying about a failure leading to a nasty accident but I can assure you I would not get in it and drive it on the track if there was any doubt about the cars safety.I am not an engineer but I do have a feel for things mechanical and I look after the engineering on my own race car.There was a time when I trusted someone else and the brake lines got chewed by the driveshafts.The brakes failed coming into a fast corner and I subsequently
rolled the car.Thanks for the concern though and the good wishes.I will post my results on the track for all you guys to peruse.
Regards Ross
