Well I made a few wrong turns in my 72 Grabber build. Hey it happens!!!!!!!! So I figured that I had a extra rear section so I would narrow it 6 inches while it was out then graft it back in the car. Thus keeping all the stock frame rails and mounts for the leaf springs. This will allow me to stuff the 28X12 Mickies under it on 10X15 Pro Stars with a 6 1/2 inch back spacing. This way I can set the car down over the tires and get the desired look I am after. As far as the suspension is concerned.................. I will probably go with a single main leaf, coil overs to get the ride height right, Cal-Tracks for traction and a Watts Link to keep it all centered under the car. I got half of it stitched together last night using a 1" X 3/16" flat bar as re-enforcement. Should be good to go after it is in and all hooked up to the roll cage.
Interesting concept! With the single main leafs, you shouldn't need the Watt's linkage, it'll just add weight and take up space...
Even though leaf springs do keep the rear end somewhat centered under the car they will still flex from side to side. There are a few advantages to using a Watts link. 1. Keeps the rear end centered under the car in hard turn situations. (yes the Watts link travel will start to veer off in an S shape at the end of the travel cycle, but it will be in a straight line on the vertical plane for most of it). 2. Gives you the ability to change the roll center of your car in the Horizontal plane. You can lower it for road racing applications and raise it for the drag strip. 3. As far as adding weight is concerned, it is adding sprung weight ( Watts link will be mounted to the body not the rear end) slightly behind the axle center so it is usable weight added so no problem there. The extra 10 pounds will not even be noticeable. I am building this car to not only go fast in a straight line but also in the curves. The watts link is a vast improvement over a pan hard bar or track locator, both of which create a vertical arch motion toward the mounting location on the body mount side.
I first used a Watts linkage in a Late Model stock car that I built to run on a 1/3rd mile paved oval track back in 2004. This car was a 4 coil spring car running a 3 link rear setup so I needed something to locate the rear in the car. Before 2004, I just used the longest pan hard bar I could get in the chassis to minimize rear steer. Once the Watts (bought from Coleman Racing Products) whet in, the driver said it was the most stable car he ever drove through the turns in his life (racing since 1985). I sold a brand new race car, that I was building for the 2005 racing season, when the track shut down the class, but I kept the Watts assembly for the Maverick which is now running 4 coil overs and a 4 link rear set up. I still need to build a frame for it to mount it behind the rear. The reason that the bars are so unequal in the photo is that this set up was built to be installed in front of the rear, on the stock car, off to one side of the carrier. I'll have equal bars when it gets installed in the Maverick
I'm one of those "show me" guys. It would be interesting to see back-to-back comparison (autocross? road course?) runs on a leaf sprung car with and without the Watt's linkage. I can't see it making enough difference to warrant the install...
Sorry, ya'll are gonna have to prove to me that a leaf spring will deflect enough to alter handling. Til then, I'm not gonna waste time thinking about it.
If you would like go to this web site http://www.fays2.net/index.html. Read some of the results down the left side of the page. You have the right to be skeptical. Change is always something to question. Although if you look under any Crown Vic Police car you will find a Watts link installed from the factory. Reason? For better control and handling.
Is a Crown Vic rear leaf springs or coils? If coil springs, what does it use to locate them, 3 link - 4 link etc?
