Are you, the typical driver as Ford intended, do you operate the vehicle on the roads envisioned in mid 20th century, and yes, are you riding on radials? And also, keep in mind that some of the driving characteristics as experienced by the driver are those as intended within the period, and as expected by the purchaser, then, not now. So, in my previous post I mentioned one might observe the tire wear characteristics and thru such determine if the specifications match the environment. for Ford stated that this was done intentionally, because the F350 4X4 received as standard equipment, the Dana 60 front axle from the previous year(s) "Snow Plow Option" from the F250 4X4, and that the positive camber sum as set by Ford, was to aid in the steering effort with the additional weight of the installed snow plow, and with the additional loading on the front suspension when in use.Īs far as heavier vehicles such as trucks, particularly of old, I happen to own several military vehicles (2-1/2, 5, 10, & 22 ton 6X6's & others) ALL of which exhibit a positive camber value, for the reasons stated previously.Īgain, do I feel that the numbers supplied originally as being correct for any and all instances, NO! But remember, when one chooses to deviate from the O.E.M.'s specifications, that makes you the new engineer! As this is a straight axle front unit, the camber value is set in assembly and adjustments are not intended (although minor sums can be achieved with shims, yes). I would have to recommend, one to follow the O.E.M.'s alignment specifications, as the real engineers set forth these specifications with the considerations of the engineering at hand, and not just some sound-good values with comparisons to other non relevant engineering and of a different period.Īnd, since we brought up other engineering observations I purchased a new 1979 Ford F350 4X4, and realized that the front suspension exhibited significant positive camber, far in excess of that exhibited in my 1978 F250 4X4. Unless someone could give me a real good reason not to, I'd align to The only vehicle I know of that uses positive camber is a unimog (and only because I have those axles in my 79 bronco), and thats only for better traction on "sidehilling" from the tire that is uphill (inherently less traction). Maybe tracking was a bit better with non radial tires back in the day. 2 degrees would be for a manual steering setup.Īnd your going to have to give me a much better reason for positive camber than the one you did. If I could get 5 degrees caster, I'd take it in a heartbeat. You have low speed steering effort problems? I don't (exactly the opposite, steering could use some firming for effort), except the ratio is ridiculous by today's standards. It's not slop from bad parts, it's multiple part tolerance buildup (no rack and pinion), softer rubber bushings in suspension than you have in today's vehicles, taller sidewalls that squirm more, etc. Therefore, one may deviate from the "printed word" for ones' own applications as best suited values often established thru observations in the tire wear exhibited.Īdjusting the front suspension specifications to rectify "slop" would amount to the proverbial "two wrongs don't make a right"! Note that the suspension alignment values as printed are those deemed by Ford engineering at the time, to be the best compromise for the average intended operator, in the typical environment. This is particularly of concern in heavier vehicles and/or those equipped with wider tires (and woman drivers) this at the sacrifice the of higher speed handling characteristics available if a negative number were utilized. , since we have all that slop on the many pieces of the steering linkage, but why would you not run a hair of neg camber (or zero at least) and as much caster as you can crank in? Adjusting the front suspension specifications to rectify "slop" would amount to the proverbial "two wrongs don't make a right"!Īs far as the camber values, general it is revealed that in these types of suspension systems, the positive camber number coupled with a more conservative caster value will provide aid in reduced low speed turning effort.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |