Late '80s when the rules were pretty basic and hard work & innovation could (occasionally) overcome the bucks I had a stock stub front clipped rule LM that we put a K member torsion bar setup from a California Highway Patrol Dodge on the front of an all fabricated chassis. Used rack & pinion steering from Ford Fairmont/Mercury Zephyrs that were $15 a pop at the local Pick 'n Pull. Rear was less exotic with stacked leafs and a pull bar.
Took about 2 years to figure out what we were doing as there was no one to bounce ideas off but eventually we got it to work pretty well and went to coilover mono leafs on the rear. Car was reaching it's potential and it got banned so I parked it for a couple years then reclipped it with a '76 Cutlass front end. It was never as good again and today, over 20 years from it's heyday, it still sits behind the barn. Maybe someday....
As previously mentioned, here are some images of my set up. Thoughts?
Looks cool.. why the open rearend? And what was the thought process period? Coil springs do a pretty good job of what they are designed to do. Definitely outside the box
i like the looks of that , is it one torsion bar running all the way through or are they split and work independently of each other?
Split. Basically using torsion bars for springs.. I would like to hear the creator's thoughts on advantages he was trying to explore. Can appreciate the design/fab work regardless
I have read that Torsion bars offer a lot better spring rate, and progressive-ness? I guess increasing and or decreasing thicknesses of the bar in various places can give the bar some vary cool effects in the realized spring rate.
i like the looks of that , is it one torsion bar running all the way through or are they split and work independently of each other?
They're split. You can see the stops on the opposite ends of each bar.
If they were linked, it would be an anti-roll bar design. I've seen that in combination with the independent left and right bars on the front of some sprint cars.
I have read that Torsion bars offer a lot better spring rate, and progressive-ness? I guess increasing and or decreasing thicknesses of the bar in various places can give the bar some vary cool effects in the realized spring rate.
Not true unfortunately. Torsion bars are very linear. Making the bar different diameters in different spots would not make progressive or digressive. It would be like a stack spring with no lockout. You could make it act progressively at the wheel by doing some motion ration stuff with the torsion arm i guess.. or just use springs. lol
I will post some pics of the car. No the transmission is not mid mounted. Most cars here do that because we have to run a steel block with the #1 plug in line with the centre of the balljoints. We have the block, heads, intake etc machined to get the weight down. 54-56% rear is achievable by doing this. My chassis builder does do nice work, the car is tig welded which always looks nicer.
petty made them work on dirt in the 60s and 70s, pavement too! worked pretty good on road coarse as well! and is some what lighter and weight has a lower cg!
Obviously sprints use them and there is some debate in that world between torsion bars and coil-overs and I don't necessarily want to get into that debate. But I am curious if anyone has tried something like this on a late model or what people's thoughts are on why it would or would not work.
We had a Custom chassis built by Frank McClendon back in 86' that was a torsion bar car. Worked pretty good, but the owner liked canti-levers better so we went back to that. After 2015 and the Ruling DLM overlords decided to illegalize everything, they threw out torsion bars as an option because they don't know what the he!! they are doing.
“Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.” — The Dude
Bookmarks