One of the things I have noticed about T speedsters is that they have issues with excessive rear wheel hop on any kind of rough road. This is agrevated if it does not have rear shock absorbers. The friction style certainly help. The real problem of course is the relatively high "unsprung" weight of the torque tube rear axle design. A solution I have tried is a "swing axle IRS". The differential part is bracketed solidly to the crossmember. The axle tubes are then cut and T driveshaft u-joints installed close to the centre section on each side. Conceptually it resembles the early VW and Corvair. It retains the usual T rear spring. Which should reduce the likelyhood of the safety issues associated with the Corvair. It seems to solve the handling issues of a light rear weight car and utilizes only "era correct" parts so hopefully will not offend. It could very well have been built before 1928!!!
I'm having a hard time picturing this. Do you have any pics?
Besides, one can then "set" some cool looking and functional negative camber.
My similar thoughts included new "T looking" cast steel center section that takes readily available Winters quick change gearing.
A cast iron or aluminum centre would work. I considered a Model A Hallibrand quick change. This of course would no longer be quite era correct and would offend some
Are you using floating hubs to retain the axle shafts? Would it be simpler and accomplish the same thing to install a 1 or 1-1/4 steel plate bolted to the frame under the gas tank. Painted it would look like wood and who would know the difference.
Yes, with today's ductile/nodular iron one could have a nice smooth casting with some real "toughness" - A356 or 356 heat treated to T6 for a little more $ for the more serious go-fast and be-light party. Probably could make the same pattern tooling work for both.
And Ford did invent the twin I beam front suspension didn't they? Can we see a picture?
One problem with a IRS car is they tend to have a lot of front overhang and when you loop or spin-out it is really hard to correct and you almost always end up facing traffic coming towards you. At least that's what happened to me with the 365 Ferrari and the Spitfire.
Hey you have a nice shot of a Speedy with a quick change rear?
Yes it uses "floating" hub bearings. Adding weight kind of negates the advantage of a speedster.
I have no experience with Ferraris. I have always tried to achieve roughly a even weight balance on T speedster. Towards this end I find that moving the front axle ahead of the front spring and moving the rear axle also ahead of the rear spring (about 6") helps significantly and also accomplishes the lowering usually wanted.
I have no pictures as I am not at home
Food for thought.
Very Cool except for the rag joint. Ha ha
I have thought about various ways to do front wheel drive T speedster. It appears that the one in the picture has the transmission between the block and the differential. I have thought that this could be made to work with T parts. One thing we now have available are cheap CV joints. Use leather "boots" instead of "rags".
So many ideas, so little time!!!
Mike could you send me a high resolution copy of that picture? I have a strong short block in the "hopper" that needs a home!!!
Neat! - sort of a De Dion for front (including steering) set up.
I found that photo on the internet and that is the highest resolution I have of it. The Hamlin Special ran a backward facing, destroked and supercharged DO Fronty.
Replicating this would a worthy challenge!!!
Here you go Les . . .
More info here on the car and itís racing history . . .
Looks like Hamlinís great grandson has lots of photos,
but is looking for more info as well.
The thread is dated 06-12-2012.
The World's Fastest Model A that was built up in Sweden has IRS made from model A parts,,,,mostly.
I can no longer find pictures on the internet that show how it was done.
As I remember it looked like closed axle VW diff. housing plates on each side of the center of a model A rear end with the matching axle ball/bells...
You could probably use the front ball of a T driveshaft housing on the inner end of a T rear axle housing on each side of a T center section.
And use a T U-joint on each side........
Or just get a Jag rear end and.........no
The '26 Indy formula was 91 CID. Hard to believe it was sleeved and destroked to that small and would still get out of its own way. Talk about a mismatch on the DO Fronty combustion chambers.
3.5 X 2.5 bore and stroke would be a little too big
Very similar to what I have done. Problem is the "arbitrators" would have a problem with using A axle parts with a T.
So that makes it 1.5 liters displacement. I believe this was if you wanted to run supercharged. I believe they were running lap speeds at about 100 mph ( so faster on the straights). Tire technology was struggling to keep up with the HP race.
We are fortunate today that we can now buy both H (120 mph) and even V (140 mph) rated tires to fit a antigue race car. The target market is Buggati and others running in vintage race events in Europe
I have studied some high resolution copies of these pictures and I can not find the "rags" you refer to associated with the drive line. The pictures show the inboard U joints are "shim pack" style ( suitable for small angles). The outboard ones are obviously a true CV type.
Probably the one improvement that this design could truly benefit from is tilted kingpin angles so the kingpins would line up with the centre of the tire contact patch. This would have signicantly improved the handling and have turned this car into a winner. Easy for me to say now!!!