[Amc-list] 'Flexible Flyers' con't

[Brien Tourville <hh7x@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

From: "John Elle" <johnelle@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Amc-list] Re; 'Flexible Flyers'






 

SNIP - So boxing in / strengthening or recreating my Eagle control arms 
in tubular steel - looking to get out all the flex - will lead to
binding and excessive damage ?


SNIP
 

Read completely and understand. ARM not ARMS and specifically; 
 


Snip - Gotcha' .  The 'pressed metal' Upper Control Arms where
the bushings press in isn't that much more 'Awe Inspiring' than
the lower control arms.  

Making the bushing insert 'tube' out of
something thicker walled would make me feel better.



Snip



The lower control arm is a scary poor design as is the geometry it works
with. 

But it does work the way it was designed to work. 

It must flex to be functional and flex it does.



Snip - So if I have the upper and lower control arms crafted out
of Hi-Strength Tubular Steel - it will accelerate the Failure Rate
of the Bushings / attachment points ?



Snip


 
And according to my TSM the Eagle front suspension in terms of the 
lower control arm is the same as the two wheel drive AMC cars so 
yes, I believe so otherwise I would not have stated it as such. 


 
The design for the most part is a compromise of function vs cost and
if a piece can be designed that will function according to the
objectives and meet what ever safety standards apply and be the cheapest possible
way to make the part, compromise enters the picture. 


The first compromise for the lower control arm is they are
interchangeable side to side thus needing to make only one part. 



Snip - Inferring that the Geometry is compromised ?

For the Pontiac GTO - the Geometry is less than stellar -
after market Tubular Steel units correct this shortcoming -
worth pursuing for our AMC s?


Snip 



Another compromise is that they are used on all model AMC cars. 



Snip - Inferring that different AMC models require differing
geometries ?




Snip 



There is no discernible difference that I have found in any 1970 plus lower 
control arm application from 1970 to end of production. 

The same part  works for a Gremlin as it does for a fully loaded AMBO. 

This is also true of the upper control arm. 



Snip - which could work in our favor as to ordering Tubular Steel
after market control arms - but - if each model in reality requires
differing geometries - costs may go up ?




How does it function? 



It pivots on a bolt located on the engine support cross member. This
same cross member locates the inner end of the lower control arm. 

The bolt also operates as a cam to control front wheel camber.

 
The rubber bushing not only insulates the chassis from road shock
transmitted to it from the front wheel but also allows some resistance 
to movement due to the fact that the center sleeve and the outer shell 
of the bushing is vulcanized to the metal, so nothing rotates there, but
the rubber flexes allowing the lower control arm to pivot at that point
as it moves up and down. 



The outer edge of the lower control arm
describes and arc as it moves. 


The dimensions of the arc are determined by the
radius length of the lower control arm to the pivot point. 


Solidly attached to the lower control arm is the strut rod. 


It triangulates the outer end of the lower control arm to the chassis and it's pivot
point is the strut rod mounting bracket located on the chassis about 2 feet
back of the lower control arm, thus as the lower control arm moves up and
down the strut rod does too, along with a little bit of pivot action.

 
However the end of the strut rod also goes through an arc as determined
of the strut rod describing a radius of a circle. 


The pivot action of the strut rod is taken care of by the strut rod
rubber bushing design however in order for the end of the strut rod to ride up 
and down with the lower control arm there has to be some give some where
and that give is in the rubber of the strut rod bushing. 


Also if the end must prescribe and arc, and in part the properties of
the arc are determined by the adjustment of the Caster of the front wheel 
which is determined by the length of the strut rod and also by the arc
moment of the lower control arm moving up and down. 


The bottom line is that the lower control arm and the strut rod go through a compound arcing
movements the tire moves up and down and the flex in the system is a
combination of the following:


The strut rod is mounted in rubber allowing a pivot point for one arc. 
The lower control arm bushing is only pressed into one side with the 
other side a clearance hole around the bushing to allow some flex of 
the lower control arm at the bushing. 


The bushing is rubber which gives some flex to the bushing lower control
arm combination. 

In addition the strut rod bushing and mounting is used to position the 
strut rod to maintain caster adjustment of the front wheels and to
absorb impact pressures from road hazards.

 
There are a whole lot of weird monkey motions and strange pressure
profiles going on in this front suspension design which in an of itself is a 
compromise to cost and function and application in the first place. 


Why was it done this way I dunno other than it probably worked over the 
design objective criteria as analyzed, if it stems from a previous
design tooling was probably in place and could be re-used with out a capital
expense and it probably met usage criteria assuming factory recommended
maintenance took place. 


Plus past warranty for the most part hands could be washed of it. 


What problems could have entered to alter assumptions over the years?


The change in Caster from - numbers to + numbers for one. - number Caster
made it easier to steer the car with out power steering as front end weight 
increased. 


Plus numbers favors self centering which could eliminate
wander at speed. 



If the original design was optimized for - caster, simply
adjusting + caster in would put it towards one end of it's design parameter
causing  possible reliability problems. 



What I see when I go after cores, the lower control arm is bent, twisted
and broken at the bushing point along with the hole wore out so a new
bushing will fall out of the control arm. 


This is probably caused by improper maintenance for the most part as the
older and more neglected these cars got the worse the wear out issues became. 


As far as polyurethane goes! 


Installing polyurethane bushings in the
lower control arm and strut rod locations eliminate the flex that is required
for proper operation of these parts in that location. 


There will be incredible resistance to any of these parts moving the
arcing motion they should do. 


What will happen to them:


The lower control arm will bend and flex and 
fatigue and break at the lower control arm bushing location. 

Why?


Everything there is designed to flex, anything you do to eliminate flex of the
lower  control arm over the normal operating range will force parts to bend and
flex and possibly break some where else. 


Not good. 




If you want to limit the movement of these parts and then re-enforce them you might be able to
get away with it but the next question for me is how long. 



Snip - Moving your focus to the attachment points / bushings:
Say we get High Strength Tubular Control Arms with thicker bushing
insert tubes crafted - taking all the 'Flex' out of those two components -
is it that the lower control arm 'bolt' / cross member bolt holes / bushings
will break / split ?

Would increasing the lateral resistance # for the strut rod bushings aid
in keeping those attachment points 'crack free' ?

Would a 'half Poly' strut rod bushing set allow the 'Arc' movement while
limiting the fore/aft movement of the lower control arm be deleterious ?



Snip



You asked, this is my answer from looking at damaged parts, damaged
parts don't lie. 


I will not install polyurethane bushings in either the lower control arm
or the strut rod for the above reasons. 


What you do with it is your decisions. 


You asked, this is my answer. 

And as the refrain goes I'm sticking to
it.

 
John. 
 
 
 

===.===




Maybe AMC owners should think about installing an 8 to 12 point Roll Cage -




-- 

                  Brien
            NEW YORK
     eagle registry #501 
eagle kammback registry

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.amc-list.com/pipermail/amc-list/attachments/20070704/70d8a749/attachment.htm 
_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list