Germanfolks.
You say trayle and yourself are the only ones running without shocks.
Is that because you are both in the states and possibly have differant road rules to us in Australia.
Do you have to get it approved before you can go on the road in the states?, if not, that goes to show that it is totally differant to us???
Trayle D. the real oggfk wrote:Cam wrote:Formula vees remove the lower springs altogether and run a swaybar through the gap. Hence bringing the things lower. You do need shocks to keep wheels in contact with the road and a light car with heavier springs will only worsen the springning effect. I'm no expert but I have dabbled with club racing, mechanics, etc... and read a libary worth of suspension books. But still I am awaiting the opinion of a qualified expert before I have a definate stance on how a slow minimal use cruiser would be affected by this sort of set-up.
This would answer your question of why formula Vs use shocks. Becuase if the bottom torsions are removed then it is way less spring tension. The wieght per spring tension is that of a heavier car. We are going in circles.
I have a question for you all. How many of you have ever lowered a car by removing leafs from either the top or bottom beam Or both?....... Please dont talk to me about "dangerous" if you have done this.
the statement about "tires leaving the road being dangerous" is the exact point. Once you narrow a beam more than 4 inches you make the hieght:spring ratio so great that the wheels cant leave the road due to an uneven road. Im glad you brought that up, you have illistrated the point exactly with your formula V analogy. Once we know that the leafs have been removed from the bottom beam we are talking about apples and oranges.
It's basically to lower it, because you can't add adjusters. Plus imagine a swaybar hanging under the front of a vee... OUCH!!!
What does less spring tension have to do with shocks? They use adjustable shocks as well, since they're so stringently restricted any adjustability they can get is a bonus.
All I'm saying is that with heavier spring rate you get more spring. Which shocks keep in check. So my obviously feeble logic and lack of experienced opinion tells me that you're going further in one direction and not evening out yur set-up?!?!?!
But then again I've had VW suspension defy logic before so am open minded about it. Just the shocks not being need because of extra spring tension does'nt make sense, since shocks react to even out springing, caused by the springs.
57kombi- once agian, we arent talking about the legality of the issue, we are talking about the practicality. And it is Illegal to drive without shocks in the states, but we do it anyways. Im not saying that its legal, its just how WE do it.
Cam- when narrowing a beam, adjusters are put in place, you adjust the tension of the top set of leafs to "fight" the bottom set, wich as you put it "evens out the springing"
Scott R.
PRAISE THE LOWERED
All I'm saying is that with heavier spring rate you get more spring
This statement is incorrect. With heavier spring rating on a lighter car you get less sping and more rigid. If you were to put spings from a 18 wheeler in your VW it would ride stiff as hell. Shocks would be absolutely useless. IE: heavier spring =less spring compression Per lbs.
[Edited on 14-10-2003 by Trayle D. the real oggfk]
[Edited on 14-10-2003 by Trayle D. the real oggfk]
"Picture me rollin"
Trayle, I'm sure you would agree that there are some major differences between 'VW leaf springs' and 'conventional leaf springs'. Such as the fact that Vw front springs are more specifically referred to as 'laminated torsion bars' and have very different properties to a 'conventional leaf spring'.
To start with, their friction surfaces experience very little movement in comparison to those on a conventional leaf spring, and the friction surfaces on the VW torsion bars are greased to reduce friction even further.
I doubt very much that VW springs have the same kind of dampening qualities as a conventional leaf spring. Sorry, I just can't see it. I don't believe there is a comparison between the two.
As for narrowing the front beams, and effectively increasing the spring rate, yes I agree it would. That would occasionally prevent the vehicle from hitting the bump stops, but it would do absolutely nothing towards dampening the post-impact oscillations. The amplitude of the oscillation may be less, but the frequency would be the same. Not only that, but less amplitude in the oscillation means less movement in the torsion bars, giving even less damping friction!
Scott, surely when the suspension is modified by opposing the tension in the torsion bars, the suspension would then be softened, right? ie. lower spring rate. We are now back to the problem where severely low vehicles tend to bottom out over relatively minor undulations, which is one of the reasons why the spring rate is increased on lowered vehicles in the first place.
I'm sorry guys, but I just don't see it. I still believe a Beetle with no shockers would bounce around all over the place. It may work very well on smooth roads surfaces, but not on anything I've seen here in Australia.
kkool, fortunately I won't be there to see your bare naked arse running down Bourke Street Mall dodging trams!!! :P😀
[Edited on 14-10-2003 by KruizinKombi]
Kruizin Kol
Actually having the springs fight eachother works as the dampening device. One arm hold the tension in the up motion, the other in the down motion. What you end up with is travel controlled by tension in both directions. VW built this into its beams stock (check the set screws for the leafs on a stock beam, they arent in the same place on both beams). We just exaggerate it to compensate for the lack of a dampening device. Come on man, why would I tell you it works if it doesnt. What would I gain? If you were to try it and It didnt work I would be proving myself wrong? That makes no sense. I understand your skepticism, but for me it would be negligence to tell you this worked if it didnt. I am a trained professional with a degree.
"Picture me rollin"
So when you all see my ride at a show near you,Feel free to come up to me and tell me Im a fuckwit and a danger on the road.And all pimps feel free to jump in for a cruise.its all about looks This subject should be titled narrow minds......
What you dont realize is that when I say Ive been doing this for 10 years is that I havent just been building them for people and saying "here you go". I been tinkering, testing, modifying, and just basicly trying to make it work as well as it looks. So you may not believe it, but I can take your stock beam, cut off the shocktowers, narrow it, fit some adjusters and have it back to you riding like a stock cars. You say it cant be done..... I say, Ive been doing it for 10 years now, and I dont call it theory anymore, I have it down to a science. Even down to lengthening the pitman arm to make up fo the change in steering geometery. Something Im sure you never thought about, but in 10 yeas of doing this and trying to perfect it. I have. Ill put it to the test, come to VW classic and Ill take you for a ride in any of these cars, you can judge for yourself
And toooooo many more satisfied customers to list..........
"Picture me rollin"
Thanks for the reply, Trayle. I have to admit that I still have some reservations, but you have replied sensibly to my objections everytime. I will (reluctantly) accept your word for it. As you've said, you've been doing it for 10 years. 😎
As for some of the other comments, people are going to have to accept that I'm not going to sit here and agree with everything somebody says. I want to understand the theory, especially when it conflicts with my current beliefs. I will also not sit here and blow smoke up someone's arse just because they have had their vehicle in a magazine, or because they have more money to spend on a car than me, or because they've owned more cars than me, etc. They have to put their mouth where their money is. ie. I am interested in talking to people and exchanging ideas, especially good ones. If people don't like that, that's their problem. 🙂
Kruizin Kol
i aint reading anymore, just looking at the snap-shots and the shiney bits 🙂
These bugs all look like they are running positive camber on the front ends I think the would look a bit more Sporty with more negative camber ..
I lowered my first bug in 79'.First i removed the small leaves (that was a disaster then I replaced the first big leaves either side in both beams with more small ones that was little difference so I ended up putting all the leaves back in as standard and heated two big leaves in each beam till they were white hot and lost their temper, this takes the spring out of them and reduces them to just steel it lowered the ride about 3" and drove like crap because i still had the standard travel shocks...
Nowdays the bits are out there to do it with adjusters and or spindles and shorter shocks are available as well, so I personally would only go this way.......Safe is Best....
[Edited on 14-10-2003 by silver]
Keeping it real !
Actually all those bugs are set to factory specs for camber. Only used the factory 10 shims and the arms are within the 9mm(1960 and earlier) and 8.5 (1961 and later) stock spec. for shimming. Must be an optical illusion you are getting from the angle of the fender to the wheel. Thas all I can figure.
[Edited on 14-10-2003 by Trayle D. the real oggfk]
"Picture me rollin"
Positive camber?!?!?!? It looks like a stock front only shit loads narrower. And They do use Adjusters, and Spindles.
Final Word, To all the Haters, its a pleasure for you to Hate us, TO all the lovers of the look, Well what can I say, you have taste. Lets all agree to disagree, Bottom line is, if anyone was asking a simple question, and you had your post slammed the way this one has been, would you like it? I think the answer would be NO, So GROW UP! Driving a car with torsion leaves taken out of the beam, is a lot more dangerous than driving without shocks, Cause you are actually taking out some of the suspension it self, not just a dampener.
N!
[Edited on 14-10-2003 by Unity-28]
"Picture me rollin"
DAmn Trayle, NOw you just getting your post numbers up! 😀
N!
damn trayle, chill with your big ass pictures.
Scott R.
PRAISE THE LOWERED
Scott, While your sending my splitters, can you also send me a pre 64 vert? PLEASE!!!!!😀
That first picture of the 1955 oval ragtop was taken in 1992. That was one of the first street cars to be fitted with a narrowed beam. Scott Smiths black 1967 on OG BRMs was th first, built in 1989.
"Picture me rollin"
no problemo. its on the way. lol
Scott R.
PRAISE THE LOWERED
u r hooked on the early Vert N
do this project and then u gotta b saving those pennies, so u can take me cruizing in the vert...
F#@k! I will sell everything I own to get a early vert (except for the fuchs😀, Cause them gots to go on it!) Picture it, Candy Brandy Wine, Tan leather Int and top, a nice 1776, with skirts. What else could a Greek want!
N!
hahahaaa
crack me up
some pumpin cruzen musik !
and a souvalaki maybe?
Scott R.
PRAISE THE LOWERED
those plates rock my dome like a baja !
N wont be doing any work today !
Hey Skew, when do I do any work? HEHE
No Souvs though, Might get Tzagiki on the leather, and we wouldnt want that now would we? Maybe the Zout Suit, and the picnic basket, and Ice box full of snacks and drinks, down the coast! (as Nectar wipes the drool from his mouth!)
N!
Sounds good N !
maybe we'll pack some Kefte burgers to whack on the barbie 🙂
Guys u got to GET TZATZIKI WITH IT!
WTF is "TZATZIKI"????
"Picture me rollin"
Unity-28 wrote:What else could a Greek want!
N!
Concrete lion statues/ hood ornaments?
:P
GARLIC SAUSE TRAYLE. THAT YUMMY WHITE SHIT IN ALL GREEK FOOD!
Adam, I might put a mini Acropolis on the hood instead of the VW badge......UMMM NO IM NOT!
N!
