wow, it's been so long since I've seen the '49 suspension that I didn't realize how almost exactly the same the Studebaker front suspension is...
but anyway
from napaonline.com
'53 'vette front wheel bearings - B52/B01
'49 Chevrolet front wheel bearings - B52/B01
'53 Chevrolet 1500 truck front wheel bearings - no matches found
'53 Chevrolet 3100 truck front wheel bearings - B52/B67
I'm still skeptical. Could not find anyone selling spindles and/or lower control arms to 100% demonstrate this, but I'm pretty sure that the front suspension was just straight lifted from the '49 sedan.
Those years are not high on the replacement part list any longer ;-)
Those suspensions were "State of the art" at the time.
What I don't get are the folks who spend a lot of money restoring vintage vehicles, that they never drive BUT the stick a conversion suspension under them for "better handling" Somehow I doubt you really need that gear when your driving 5moh to the trailer !!
Again you falsely accused. You've sure made a career of that. I changed nothing, and quite frankly definitely wouldn't if it meant I'd stay in your kill file, not that I was in the first place, liar. It could be that the proxy server changed what servers it uses to get here or some such, but still that's not in my control.
That may be the case, but that isn't what I said above. My spouse was equal owner of the van, and by cashing the check it stated acceptance of a co-owner to a settlement of full reimbursement for a faulty van. To go after Ford for hospitalization and physio costs (according to legal counsel who charged nothing, so gained zero by dissuading us) after that would have been a very long drawn out procedure, with no guarantee of a win which meant we could have also been stuck with the cost of large legal fees. We decided to chalk it up to experience, and to next time be suspicious of any business that is too quick to offer reimbursement.
"Furthermore" you are just proving you know squat once again, but are all too willing to jump in and act as if you do. When one co-owner is unavailable the other as equal co-owner can sign and cash. Secondly the van was written off, there was no signing over. Try reading for comprehension next time. You should change your name to Dick.
it's not a horrible suspension design if the geometry is right. The later Studebaker suspension (with a little more caster) is quite driveable in modern traffic, only thing I really miss is anti-dive. Some performance shocks and fatter sway bars help if you're into such. The real weak link is the awful Ross steering boxes, not the suspension itself. Replacing with a Saginaw box is a good move although the ratio is still slow. Some people have adapted R&Ps from late model cars with the inner tie rod ends close to the center of the car to make them work similar to the original center-pivot style steering of the Studebaker; I've never driven a car so adapted though so I can't comment.
The nice thing about a kingpin/trunnion suspension is how abusable it is. My '55 Stude had a seized lower outer trunnion when I bought it; I didn't realize it until I tore it down to rebuild it. The lower knuckle was rotating on the trunnion shaft as it'd sheared the tapered key rather than freeing the shaft up in its threaded caps. Obviously had variable caster :) but it still drove OK. A car with ball joints would have dropped the corner on the ground! Obviously it is all made right now, although I wish I'd spent the $$ for later model kingpins and knuckles so I'd have the later geometry.
AMC still used kingpins/trunnions into the late 60's if not later, FWIW. I suspect that ball joints are cheaper and have fewer moving parts and that is really their main advantage, not performance or reliability.
I've been a passenger in a Porsche, never drove one, and definitely not a Ferrari. I've also not been in a newer Corvette, but from the looks of it the nose has been redesigned in a way that is more practical for driving in states that have roads of all elevations, rather than California flat surface roads. (Yes Brent aka Mr know it all, I realize there are a some roads in California that curve and have hills, but no where near as many as some other states.)
I've been a passenger in a Porsche, never drove one, and definitely not a Ferrari. I've also not been in a newer Corvette, but from the looks of it they nose has been redesigned in a way that is more practical for driving in states that have roads of all elevations, rather than California flat surface roads. (Yes Brent I realize there are a some roads in California that curve and have hills, but no where near as many as some other states.
The extremely abused rescue rig we have has a bad pin on the drivers side. It lost the grease cap and started to seize. Sprayed it good and tried moving it while on a jack and it freed enough that it would come apart. Then they decided not to fix it !!!
The Pinto used the same tialights as the Mverick ;). The Bobcat got an extra set of lens on each side - the Bobcat taillights looked like you melded left and right Pinto tailights together and installed one set of the melded together tailights on each side. _________________ / | | /_____________|___| Pinto Style Tailight _____________________________ / | | \ /_____________|___|_____________\ Bobcat Style Tailight
That and the bigger chrome front grille were the only significant differences between Pintos and Bobcats of the same year..
The 1.6L Engine and Manual Transmissions were definitely from Europe. So was the original 2.0L OHC I4 offered in Pintos. The automatic transmission offered in early Pintos was a US built C4. The 2.3L OHC 4 sold after 1973 in Pintos was a US built engine and significantly different than the European
2.0L OHC. The V6 sold in later model Pintos was imported from Germany. The Pinito's front suspensuion was not a derivative of the suspension used by Mavericks and Falcons. The Falcons (and Mavericks and Fairlanes and Mustangs from the 60's and early 70's) used a coil over top A-arm type front suspension. The coil spring acted between the top of the upper A-arm and the underside of a pocket in the sheet metal that formed the engine compartment. The Pintos had a separate front suspension sub-frame and the coil spring operated on the lower A-arm. It was actually a much better set-up than used by the Falcons (or older Mustangs).
True, but the basic floor pan was different and there were improvements to the suspension (although the basic design and many parts were shared).
The 2.3L four was produced in the US. The V6 used in Pintos (and Mustang II's) was never produced in the US.
Wish the grill and hood would have fit perfectly the 3 times I had to replace them on the Bobcat after people drove up on the hood. All of those times insurance wrote the Bobcat off, giving me the resale value instead. At that time it was still legal to buy the car back for a couple of bucks, go to a junkyard and fix it up. All 3x I had to get Bobcat grills, Bobcat hoods, only the radiators were either Bobcat or Pinto. Having said that the guys that put them on were friends with car knowledge as opposed to trained and certified mechanics so they probably didn't know you could alter the Bobcat to fit Pinto grills and hoods.
The hood was also different. I know, I had to replace mine 3x. One was more rounded on the front lip, making the lip slightly shorter than the other. At some point (I think after 1977) they became identical on certain models like the roundabout.
You're giving your young age away :-) At my age in a Corvette I'd look like an old man who can't face the fact that he's old hahaha. My cars are now old people's cars like the Corolla and Yaris sedan. The Yaris hatchback is for the few children (actually late teens, early 20's and early 20's have their own cars, sporty ones too lol) who haven't figured out it is time to fly the coop yet. My spouse and I can't wait to downsize to a much smaller 1 level home with below ground level basement for storage.
You didn't notice that I said you had to change the header panel? What is it you say about reading comprehension???
If you notice I said you can bolt on all the parts that make up the different areas.
Namely the header panel, grill and hood. The difference is in the header panel and trim shape at the front of the hood. the rear and sides are the same. The fenders are the same as well.
Maybe you should take a look at the actual part numbers off the Hollander interchange listing some time.
Yes I always say read for comprehension, and I'm saying it to you now. I said "...so they probably didn't know you could ALTER to Bobcat to fit Pinto grills and hoods". Making an alteration is changing, modifying, adjusting to fit.
You were wr>>> Nothing that wasn't purely cosmetic. You can take a Pinto door and bolt
In fact if by header panels you meant the two pieces on either side of the grill, that is wrong too because the amber lights were different between the Bobcat and Pinto for many years before they became identical in the last few years of production, after the lawsuits.
Maybe you should read for comprehension. You're just preaching to the choir trying now to cover up the mistakes you made earlier. I already knew the differences between the Bobcat and Pinto since I owned both, and had to repair the Bobcat 3x so I know what parts on the front end were NOT identical and couldn't just be bolted on. Nice try though.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.