4bar radius rods

[Az33]

Haven’t seen many of em up front. Any issues with it?
Planning on a tube axle with air bags and disc brakes. Heard buzz about not using wishbone style rods with tube axles. Was thinking some bat wings, 4bars and a panhard would be good?
Any input, advise appreciated.

 

[05snopro440]

Haven’t seen many of em up front. Any issues with it?
Planning on a tube axle with air bags and disc brakes. Heard buzz about not using wishbone style rods with tube axles. Was thinking some bat wings, 4bars and a panhard would be good?
Any input, advise appreciated.

Can you clarify what you're asking about? 4-bars, radius rods, and split wishbones are the 3 common styles of front axle link. Split wishbones shouldn't be used with a tube axle (unless modified in certain ways), they just don't have enough flex and will impart too much stress on the axle.

Hairpin-style radius rods and 4-bars are used a lot with both tube and I-beam axles and either is acceptable. In both cases, you'll probably want a front panhard bar to keep your axle in the right spot and reduce bump steer. With bags, that might have to be via a watt's link.

 

[Az33]

Sorry, the terminology screws me up sometimes ����*

Was planning on doing similar setup (different frame mount) as the rear. Brackets on the tube axle for forward mount of 4 bar setup and mount to side of frame at Z.
Do the bars need to be equal length or can the tops be ‘a little’ shorter?
Thanks

 

[Dr Crankenstein]

Blue Eyed Devil to the white courtesy phone...

.

 

[Blue Eyed Devil]

Blue Eyed Devil to the white courtesy phone...

Four bar front? Disc brakes? Airbags?

You're calling the wrong guy. Let me know when it's a hot rod question.

 

[bob w]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe Pete Eastwood and Jake Jacobs "invented" the four bar front links, to improve on the wishbone and hair pin radius rod links that were used. That was in the late '60's or early '70's. That's long enough ago to be considered "neo"-traditional.

During that time period many of us were trying to improve the ride, handling and stopping power of our hot rods. BED, you are like my young friend "Titus", doing your part to preserve the way it was before these "improvements" were initiated.

 

[fuzz]

Sorry, the terminology screws me up sometimes ����*

Was planning on doing similar setup (different frame mount) as the rear. Brackets on the tube axle for forward mount of 4 bar setup and mount to side of frame at Z.
Do the bars need to be equal length or can the tops be ‘a little’ shorter?
Thanks

Why not do the same mount on front as u did on the rear?. One short bar will cause the axle to roll as it travels up and down. [not very much but it will, prolly won't matter that much anyway] If you're going to autocross or off road you'll want watts linkage on front, if u going to just cruise on weekends panhard bar is fine. You didn't mention cross steering or parallel drag link? Prolly cross steer cuz air bags may get in the way of parallel. Just my Humble opin.

 

[Dr Crankenstein]

Four bar front? Disc brakes? Airbags?

You're calling the wrong guy. Let me know when it's a hot rod question.

I was hoping to irritate you.

Haven’t seen many of em up front. Any issues with it?
Planning on a tube axle with air bags and disc brakes. Heard buzz about not using wishbone style rods with tube axles. Was thinking some bat wings, 4bars and a panhard would be good?
Any input, advise appreciated.

As bob w mentioned, Pete and Jake's figured the geometry many years ago with no accounting for air bags...

In my opinion, you'll have to science this project yourself. Find your ride height and follow the basic principles as P&J describe...

.

 

[Az33]

great, thanks

 

[Blue Eyed Devil]

That's long enough ago to be considered "neo"-traditional.

And still ugly.

During that time period many of us were trying to improve the ride, handling and stopping power of our hot rods. BED, you are like my young friend "Titus", doing your part to preserve the way it was before these "improvements" were initiated.

I can certainly appreciate improvements, but they have to be actual improvements - not novelty ideas that don't deliver. I have driven a bunch of 4 bar cars, and there was little to no improvement over a properly adjusted wishbone or radius rod setup (admittedly none with airbags, because that's just not in my field of interest). Not to mention how far it hangs down off the chassis, and the additional panhard bar needed. Just a clunky way to reinvent the wheel IMO.

That being said, I am definitely trying to preserve the way it was. Way too many people dismiss those ways as inefficient or ineffective simply because they don't understand them, or aren't willing to put in the work to learn. I've put many cars on the road that impressed people with the ride, handling and stopping power coming from "obsolete" parts and methods.

To each their own though, just my $.02 [ddd

I was hoping to irritate you.

I knew I could count on you.


.

 

[bob w]

I thought I'd get a rise out of you, BED. But just to back up what you are saying, In 1958 I had a clapped out $50 '48 Ford 2 door. It was totally worn out and rode, steered and stopped like crap. My friend Jerry stumbled onto a creampuff 1948 Merc sedan with very low miles. It was amazing how well it did everything. So yes, I agree the early Ford design worked just fine when all was in good repair.

 

[05snopro440]

And still ugly.



I can certainly appreciate improvements, but they have to be actual improvements - not novelty ideas that don't deliver. I have driven a bunch of 4 bar cars, and there was little to no improvement over a properly adjusted wishbone or radius rod setup (admittedly none with airbags, because that's just not in my field of interest). Not to mention how far it hangs down off the chassis, and the additional panhard bar needed. Just a clunky way to reinvent the wheel IMO.

That being said, I am definitely trying to preserve the way it was. Way too many people dismiss those ways as inefficient or ineffective simply because they don't understand them, or aren't willing to put in the work to learn. I've put many cars on the road that impressed people with the ride, handling and stopping power coming from "obsolete" parts and methods.

To each their own though, just my $.02 [ddd

.

The popularity of the 4-bar baffles me. I guess they're relatively easy to install and fairly compact, but the look of them fills my mouth with my last meal.

A friend found out all about out the need for a panhard bar with a 4-bar front suspension last year when his very shiny and fancy 32 Roadster starting having ridiculous bump steer.

I am going buggy spring and ladder bars on the back of my A, both for looks and I think it will do what I want it to better than a 4-bar and coilovers. It's a bit newer than the era you're talking about, though.

 

[Old Iron]

The only advantage I can see is, if the bars have a left and right threaded end it makes setting caster easier.
On the other hand, once caster is set it never has to be messed with again.