PDA

View Full Version : Suspension parts interchange??



starliner62
06-02-2010, 10:37 AM
Are the control arms off of a Hawk the same as on a Lark? How about springs and spindles? Inquiring minds want to know!!

Thanks

N8N
06-02-2010, 10:55 AM
Are the control arms off of a Hawk the same as on a Lark? How about springs and spindles? Inquiring minds want to know!!

Thanks

all suspension stuff is the same 53-up, with minor changes.

- the lower control arms changed in 1957 when the lower shock mount changed.
- the kingpins and lower "knuckles" changed in '61 or '62, and I think at different times for Hawks and Larks, for increased caster in later cars.
- The spindles for disc brake cars are slightly different, but can be used on drum brake cars. (I believe extra machining so that the caliper brackets fit properly.)
- The springs are the one piece of the suspension that was specific to the exact model car that you have. You'd have to check the parts book and compare part numbers.
- if I didn't specifically mention anything above, everything else from the frame out is the same 53-64. You didn't ask about brakes, but obviously there were three different front brakes used 1955-64; 10" drum, 11" drum, and disc. Also self adjusters were added to the drum brakes sometime toward the end of production (1963? I think?) I don't know what peculiarities there may be about '53 or '54 brakes, but I'm assuming you don't want to use those anyway.

hope this helps,

nate

starliner62
06-02-2010, 12:16 PM
Thanks Nate. I have some control arms already off of what I think was a Hawk. I am getting ready to rebuild the front end on a 65 Cruiser and wanted to powder coat and install the new bushings I already had off. This way I could swap parts and not keep the Cruiser in the air for a couple of extra days whlel I prepped the existing parts.
I will compare the lower arms before starting this part of the project.

PackardV8
06-02-2010, 12:32 PM
Just check the part numbers or have someone who knows make sure the parts from that Hawk had the later control arms and kingpins. You definitely do not want the earlier versions.

The real problem is, Stude parts have been so swapped around over the past fifty years, just because the parts came off a '62-64 GT doesn't mean the factory put them on there. Can't tell you how many times I've been sold the wrong part, and then the seller makes the excuse, "Well, all I know is it came out of that year/model." The worst was a local Avanti owner who bought R2 and the engine turned out to be a junk 259" with a blower in the trunk.

thnx, jack vines

N8N
06-02-2010, 12:38 PM
Thanks Nate. I have some control arms already off of what I think was a Hawk. I am getting ready to rebuild the front end on a 65 Cruiser and wanted to powder coat and install the new bushings I already had off. This way I could swap parts and not keep the Cruiser in the air for a couple of extra days whlel I prepped the existing parts.
I will compare the lower arms before starting this part of the project.

Upper control arms are all the same, so you're good there (unless you have some very early ones with solid inner bushings.) Lower control arms, check the shock mount to make sure that your shocks will fit. The earlier ones have the two carriage bolts farther apart and use a separate lower mount for the front shock (early front shock uses a stud mount at both ends.)

I believe the early kingpins and lower knuckles have a six-digit casting number while the later ones have a seven-digit casting number (15xxxxx) you definitely want the later ones there.

nate

Jerry Forrester
06-02-2010, 03:54 PM
- the kingpins and lower "knuckles" changed in '61 or '62, and I think at different times for Hawks and Larks, for increased caster in later cars.

nate

I want someone to explain to me (in very short words and very short sentences) (a drawing would probably help also) how changing the design of the kingpin and lower knuckle, and not relocating the position of either the upper or lower outer pivot points will change the caster.

N8N
06-02-2010, 06:52 PM
I think the position of the lower outer pivot point *did* change (that is, the lower end of the axis of the kingpin is in a different location relative to the lower trunnion,) and so did the angle of the kingpin to the upper trunnion. But it's been a while since I have looked closely at these parts so I may be mistaken (can't imagine why else they would have changed both parts, however.)

nate

skyway
06-03-2010, 07:50 AM
Still don't know about the lower trunions, but if you eyeball the 2 styles side-by-side, you can see a difference at the top.
Compare the space between the dimple where the pin was chucked up for machining, and the upper pivot/pinch.
Essentially the upper and lower mounting points remain the same, but the angle of the body of the pin was changed.

N8N
06-03-2010, 10:09 AM
Still don't know about the lower trunions, but if you eyeball the 2 styles side-by-side, you can see a difference at the top.
Compare the space between the dimple where the pin was chucked up for machining, and the upper pivot/pinch.
Essentially the upper and lower mounting points remain the same, but the angle of the body of the pin was changed.

OK then maybe they just changed the angle of the hole for the bottom of the kingpin in the knuckle, that would make sense too. Actually what they should have done is rotated the kingpin around the centerline of the spindle and then changed both parts to match but I don't know if that is actually what happened or not. That would be noticeable both in the knuckle and the kingpin, I would think.

nate

Alan
06-03-2010, 11:16 AM
1/2 a degree or 1 degree over 12" is not going to be easy to tell just by looking at it.