...

Go Back   Lateral-g Forums > Lateral-G Open Discussions > Project Updates
User Name
Password



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-17-2017, 07:38 PM
carbuff's Avatar
carbuff carbuff is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 1,321
Thanks: 18
Thanked 24 Times in 17 Posts
Default

Without copying/pasting all of the pictures in that hub post, man the specs on that hub are impressive! Presumably the stock spindle can handle the above which the hub should now be able to??? That's some serious forces...

Last edited by carbuff; 09-18-2017 at 08:32 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-18-2017, 12:45 PM
Ron Sutton's Avatar
Ron Sutton Ron Sutton is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 2,422
Thanks: 45
Thanked 35 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by carbuff View Post
Without copying/pasting all of the pictures in that hub post, man the specs on that hub are impressive! Presumably the stock spindle can handle the above which the hub should now be able to??? That's some serious forces...
No, I don't think so. I haven't run failure tests on OEM spindles. But I do not think old muscle car OEM spindles could handle 2540# of thrust load without failure. I'm pretty sure ... without running FEA analysis ... that the old OEM spindles would fail at those load levels. The snout would snap off the upright. But we're not seeing 2540# of thrust load on the front wheels. We're seeing 1200# to 1500#.

I have run flex tests on OEM spindles to see how much camber change was happening from spindle snout flex at higher G-loads. A typical GM spindle snout for a 64-72 A-Body, 67-69 F-Body or 64-74 X-Body flexes about .040-.045" at 1400# of load, which is about .5° of camber change. The Ridetech AFX dropped spindle flexes less, because it is a better spindle ... made out of better steel than the old OEM spindles. But in high loads around 1400# ... we see some flex in it as well. Just less. That is why Ridetech team cars utilized the Speedtech ExtReme spindle for awhile & then developed their own modular spindle that utilizes the C7 bearings.

The goal in upsizing the bearings is to handle the 1200# to 1500# thrust loads we're seeing ... to prevent bearing failure ... which can be catastrophic at speed on a road course. The 1130# bearing in some of our packages is "better" than the 917-921# bearings by 20% ... but still need to be monitored. The killer 2540# rated bearing we're utilizing in a lot of kits is overkill. I'd been fine with bearing rated at 1600#-1800#. But this 2540# rated Timken bearing is available through regular parts stores, so I went with it.

Hopefully that made some sense.


__________________
Ron Sutton Race Technology
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Lateral-g.net