Rear Axle 53 Champion

[GiTarMan2]

Yeah I checked the springs they are 130s. I had a time getting the right QA1's to replace the bent ones. They changed the product line since the time the originals were installed and their interchange lists sucks. The originals were DR5855B the replacements are DS501. Really the only difference is the originals had I think 8 settings and the new ones I think have 16.

Been digging into different rear axles checking for widths. You know how many internet web sites list different specs for the same axle? Seems hard to find two that agree even using the same reference point.

Anyway to keep the same 5x4.5 bolt pattern he has now ,you got to stay with a Ford or Mopar.
Go with GM the bolt pattern is all wrong, Unless you use adapters or change the axle shafts. The S10 axle is said to be 54.25 wide with a 5x4.75 bolt pattern, now you need spacers and bolt adapters.

The ranger axle in it now measures 58.50 wheel mounting to wheel mounting or 52.5 flange to flange. Thats very close to what I've read is the stock width of the original 53 Studebaker Champion rearend with the same wheel bolt pattern 5x4.5. Thats why someone chose the ranger rear axle - it fits physically width and bolt pattern.

The explorer rearend is 59.81 wide but by the time you narrow the drivers side to get a centered pumpkin you end up with 56.75, according the the Hot Rod /network article. Now the tires will set in about an inch but the wheels will bolt up. You get spacer plates and put in longer studs to get the wheels set back out. At least you only have to narrow one side.
With the Mustangs you gotta stay with 94 and up to get 5x4.5 bolt pattern but their 60 & 61 inches wide. Now you have to narrow both sides or the wheels tires are out an inch which might be ok.

On the Mopar side the F, J, or M body are 58.5 in an 8.25 flavor, thats Aspen, Volare, Diplomat or Mirada, yeah there are a lot of those around here.

I guest its just a matter of seeing how much wheel spacing room we got, picking from whats available around here in the bone yards, then picking the best of the bad and seeing what mods have to be done to get it to fit.

Cheers

[Mike Van Veghten]

I was going to refrain from commenting...but...

Ummm...those Panhard mounts are VERY dangerous..!
They need some heavy duty reinforcement to remove the major flexy..! Those are hardly good for driving in a straight line in my estimation. Either side is asking to be easily broken, then it's a major loss of control.

And assemble a stock front suspension back in place, (this is my original...don't comment..!) of the Slick Street goodies..!

Mike

[bensherb]

I agree with Mike, the panard mounts.... well, you know. An 8" from a Ford Maverick works very well in a C/K. Our '53 Coupe has one and we use 6 1/2" x 15" Crown Vic wheels with 215-70-15 tires and a 3" one piece drive shaft. No fender interference, no need to fuss with it, just center it up and mount it.

[Corley]

Changing wheel bolt pattern is a pretty trivial problem to overcome, either with redrilling or wheel adaptors.

[junior]

okay, the car's situation is worse than I first thought...

a few other considerations are the driveshaft is going to need to be balanced or tested at an rpm a lot higher than 2000 if the trans is overdriven, and being single shaft and 3" dia. it's critical speed may be an issue.

looking back at the photos, I agree the panhard bar mounts are sketchy and have a lot of leverage on them...and if the car lifts one tire in the twisties I would suspect there are some geometry issues at hand with the whole arrangement. looking at your sketches, are the top and bottom bars parallel...I thought the bars were supposed form an imaginary triangle to control axle rotation on acceleration. I don't know nearly enough on the theory of suspension design, but something seems wrong somewhere other than just over-stiff coilovers.

with so many issues to solve you may be better to go with the tried and true parallel leaf springs...yes they are simple but they have been proven to work in the long haul. kiss theory at work here. like others have suggested, go with an 8 or 9 inch ford...once again, simple and proven over time, with awesome aftermarket support...no c clips, easily narrowed or if going aftermarket you can order any width. if going this route, consider mounting the diff so pinion angle is broke-back configuration so you can keep a single driveshaft without having to enlarge the driveshaft tunnel, especially if you have to go to a larger diameter shaft.

lastly, considering the front suspension swap from what I've read there many be some geometry issues with this design...there is lots of conflicting info on this forum about that frontend conversion, one being bumpsteer. If the car is unpleasant to drive on bumpy twisty roads, this front suspension may be a contributor to the spooky handling. happy this is not my headache to deal with, wish you and the owner luck...it just going to take some time and $ to sort out...simple right? cheers, junior

[Corley]

Was just re-reading your original post. If your driveshaft angles are only 3 degrees as shown in your drawings, that is not your vibration issue. Have your run the engine up in neutral to be sure the vibration is not a mismatch of parts in the flexplate/converter area? 3 degrees is really not much angle at all, and many 4X4s run way more than that without vibration issues, and they are running taller rear axle ratios, so the driveshafts are turning faster to boot.

Phasing of the joints is critical. If they are out of phase, they will no longer cancel each other out, and you get bad vibrations. I've seen a driveshaft fresh out of a shop that was true, but out of phase. Plus, if you are using an offset joint to accommodate the angle better, you need to use two of them, and they need to be installed so that they cancel each others offset out rotationally. Remember, when you have driveshaft angle, the driveshaft has a jerky rotational motion, not a linear smooth rotation, so one joint must cancel out the other, providing a smooth rotation at the diff.

HOWEVER:

I remember years ago, my brother replaced the rear end in his '41 Chevy for a "vibration", thinking maybe it was the driveshaft within the torque tube being bent. This did not affect the problem, and he subsequently found a bad front wheel bearing was the culprit. Sure seemed for all the world to be a driveline vibration, but was not. The test for this, jack up the rear wheels and run it up to speed...

As to the brown mud in the diff., seems that one got a lot of water in it at some point. Bearings would be suspect in that case, and a bad bearing can create quite a lot of rumble, which some might mis-interpret as a balance issue.

Not saying any of those thoughts are your case, just possibilities to think about until proven wrong.

[bensherb]

Yes, changing bolt patterns is quite easy. I changed a 5 on 5 1/2" pattern to 6 on 130mm pattern by simply drilling and installing new studs.

Not sure what engine you have but some are externally balanced. If this is overlooked and the wrong balancer or flywheel is used you'll have vibration.

True, 3 degrees driveshaft inclination is nothing, but if those 4x4's are running "taller rear axle ratios" ,usually meaning higher, their driveshafts are turning SLOWER at a given speed.

U joint phasing is important, but, perfect zero phase alignment is not always optimum. In some cases the factorys have missaligned U joints intentionally to correct driveline vibration, as GM did with the Camero.

I'm not sure what Corley means by "an offset joint to accommodate the angle better". I understood you have an asymetric u joint with one side that fits the GM yoke and the other side fitting the Ford shaft. Those U joints are made for that purpose and as any other, will work fine if properly fitted. You don't need two of them.

[GiTarMan2]

First - let me say, thank you for all the advice.
then I'll say - OMG! - sometimes I feel overwhelmed by all the crap that has been done to the car. It is absolutely criminal what has been done. You just wouldn't believe it! I dont believe it - I've been restoring vintage and classic vehicles for most of my life and I have never, ever seen anything like this before.

I dont want to go into all the front suspension issues right now, its a whole nother topic. I will tell you a few things I found and let it go at that.
The original Slick Street Stuff (I talked with them) front suspension modifications were further modified by somebody installing a Dodge Onmi power rack & pinion and crap welding the rack arm to the tie rod end across a slip over sleeve. The bushings holding the rack to the welded add on frame were falling out and I found remnants of one of the bushings in my drive way where it had completely fallen out. One of the bushings was trying to be held in with steel hole punched tape like you would use on plumbing pipes.
The tie rod & rack pivot is well out of alignment with the lower control arm pivot point.

I will also say that there were no cotter pins in any of the ball or tie rod joints. The right side upper ball joint was screwed half way out of the upper control arm. This type of upper ball joint is the same as you would find on a Mopar A body Dart or B body Charger - they screw in with a special socket, they do not press in. All of the bolts holding the upper control arms to the frame were loose on both sides to the point of the adjustment shims were falling out. Now this car went to an alignment shop before - how in the hell did that shop not find these problems and report them to the owner. Its Criminal!
I will end this front suspension conversation by telling you the car has terrible , horrible bump steer.
I will not even go into the screwed up wiring in this car - with wires trapped under screw heads causing multiple fuses to blow.

Now I will tell everyone that reads this thread - do NOT ever do this kind of **** to any car and then resell it to an unsuspecting person, it is criminal and you should be put in jail!

Rant Mode Now Off, I'm sorry my anger got the better of me.

Now I need to go to a real professional fabrication shop and speak to a guy about a rear axle. I've got to concentrate on one thing at a time.

[Alan]

You don't have to go to a fab shop. Lets see what you have front and rear on the spring hangers. Let's hope they didn't screw those up.

[Corley]

Yes, changing bolt patterns is quite easy. I changed a 5 on 5 1/2" pattern to 6 on 130mm pattern by simply drilling and installing new studs.

Not sure what engine you have but some are externally balanced. If this is overlooked and the wrong balancer or flywheel is used you'll have vibration.

True, 3 degrees driveshaft inclination is nothing, but if those 4x4's are running "taller rear axle ratios" ,usually meaning higher, their driveshafts are turning SLOWER at a given speed.

U joint phasing is important, but, perfect zero phase alignment is not always optimum. In some cases the factorys have missaligned U joints intentionally to correct driveline vibration, as GM did with the Camero.

I'm not sure what Corley means by "an offset joint to accommodate the angle better". I understood you have an asymetric u joint with one side that fits the GM yoke and the other side fitting the Ford shaft. Those U joints are made for that purpose and as any other, will work fine if properly fitted. You don't need two of them.

This is what I meant by an offset joint. These are typically only used in extreme angle situations. If it is not obvious from the picture, the two axis of the cross are not on the same plain.

http://www.ihpartsamerica.com/store/TW-SF-131.html?gclid=CjwKCAjwxo3OBRBpEiwAS7X62bnQW2jOPx4BHVwVU8ZvfaimZTVoVJR0ABa4dtm6zLStNyMz9hGM5hoCn3EQAvD_BwE

As to phase, it would take a good bit of engineering to determine an out of phase would help anything. Generally speaking, out of phase is a serious no-no.

[bensherb]

That's a weird U joint. Clearly not meant for any rpm, slow rotation only. With the U joint's slightly out of phase they remain loaded all the time reducing most harmonic vibration at the cost of a slightly shorter life, but yes, generally and ideally they should be in phase, aligned with one another.

[GiTarMan2]

Hi guys , sorry about my rant.
Lets see answer some questions. Yes the 4 link bars are parallel and not triangulated. I dont know what the GM 5L vortec engine came from originally but from the information I have the engine and transmission came from the same vehicle, so they should be matched.
The drive shaft phasing is in phase verified first by me placing the shaft on a level concrete floor with the shaft yoke ujoint cap holes flat on the floor, there was no teetering or seesaw of the shaft, and then by the driveshaft shop I had it fixed and balanced at. They told me the drive shaft was bent and out of balance but it straightened out and balanced fine. They balanced it with the new ujoints and new rear ford flange.

At the moment I'm waiting on a new transmission extension housing bushing and seal that I will be installing later today. I also found the left rear brake drum has a flattened and cracked part like it was dropped, see pic. I have a new one I'll put on today at the same time. I took the transmission cross member out while taking the trans extension housing off and looked at the trans mount, all seems good there. Also the engine mounts and rubber bushings, they look good, newer and all bracket bolts are tight.

Get you up updated on the rear axle in a moment.

[GiTarMan2]

Went down and spoke to an automotive fabricator to see if they have a jig to cut and shorten an axle if we go that route. They do, nice setup.
Was looking into other rear axles, there are several 94 - 98 ford mustang available at the local pick and pull. These would be 8.8s, 60.25 inches wide, 5x4.5 bolt pattern, disk brakes but with coil springs.
Using one of these would only make the tires / rims out farther about an inch on each side.

We could get some spring perches for the axle tube and a set of leaf springs and U bolts to mount it to the car. Also come up with some shock mounts. That would eliminate all the kludged up 4 link bracket problems and the offset pinion ranger axle.
Been looking at the car frame to see what we have there. see picks
The width of the front box is 2.875 width and the rear mount is 2.5 sleeve width with the sleeve having an inside dia of .88. Would have to find springs that are the correct width , length and bushings to match.

New heavy duty 5 leaf springs seem to be available to fit this 53 Champion like stock. just would have to get them centered on the mustang axle tube and get the pinion angle set right before welding on the perches.

/In all the research I've done on this rear offset axle, some say it will work if the driveshaft angles are equal and opposite and it doesn't matter if the driveshaft has both a vertical and horizontal angle as long as they are equal and opposite. Others say it wont work, it will never work.

I came across some information yesterday that suggest the axle in the car now is the third axle that has been in this car. First was the original Studebaker, then a 2002 Ford Explorer with 3.73 gears and 31 spline axles shafts, now this 94 Ford Ranger 8.8 with 4.10 gears and 28 spline axle shafts. This is verified by the tag under one of the bolts on the diff and having an axle shaft out and counting the 28 splines when I replaced the outer shaft bearings and seals.

My parts are in, gotta go pick them up. I'm also going to swap around the wheels ( supposed to have been checked and balanced) front to back and take her for a test drive.

[bensherb]

/In all the research I've done on this rear offset axle, some say it will work if the driveshaft angles are equal and opposite and it doesn't matter if the driveshaft has both a vertical and horizontal angle as long as they are equal and opposite.

This is True, works fine, at least it has for over 40 years in several cars I've put together.

It sounds like stock springs will bolt right in still. In this pic, the bushings and shackles on the far right are the factory ones I removed from my car. They'll fit right into the spaces you measured. In my opinion the shackle bushings are a poor design allowing the shackles to "Z" and the rear end to move sideways under the car far too easily. The bushings and shackels on the left are ones I made to replace them that eliminate that tendency. With a 60+ inch wide axle side movement will be a problem with anything larger than a tiny tire, especially radials as they're wider in the sidewall area than bias tires.


I made my bushings from Delrin, some will say it's too hard and will transmit too much road noise, but I haven't noticed any significant difference from the stock bushnigs. There's very little, really hard rubber in the stock shackle bushings, so not much isolation there to start with. Here are the dimensions for the bushings I made.

[Corley]

When the diff is both offset and lower, it's really just offset but at an angle. So, the overall offset is just the geometric sum of the two angles. (You can do the math, I'm too stupid.) In your case, probably about 4 degrees, but at an angle, not vertical or horizontal. Assuming that the trans output shaft and pinion shaft are on the same plain, this should not be a problem at all, and I would say it is NOT the source of your vibration. Have you jacked up the rear wheels and run the speed up to the vibration point to make sure it's coming from the rear end? Next, if that still vibrates, remove the wheels and brake drums, and run it up to see if it could be a wheel / tire issue. Next, pull the driveshaft, put a plug in the trans to contain the oil, and run it up to make sure it's not something in the engine/trans area. Next, run it up in neutral, to make sure it's not engine associated. Are all the fan blades on there??? Stuff like that.

Just some more thoughts to consider...