Re: SP merger

Posted by Steve203 On 2015/3/21 23:00:38

<i>Allison might have had to set aside the interconnected bar concept, instead designed a split bar system: separate sets of bars for front and rear.</i>

Two issues there: splitting the bars eliminates one of the features of TL: upward motion on one wheel is translated to downward load on the other wheel. Instead, a split bar system, while cushioning the shock, would still transmit the force to the body. Second, you can't do variable rate with a torsion bar. Why did Chrysler use leafs in back? You can do variable rate with leaf springs, to compensate for a full gas tank and loaded trunk.

<i>I seem to recall that the Step-Down sunken floors were approximately three-four inches below the top of the outer frame members which were more like five-six inches deep....can anyone verify or correct? (Need to find the early SIA article) The attached photos suggest if they were able to run the torsion bars under the floor wells, they would have had scant but sufficient clearance.</i>

In the step down's I have looked at, it looked like only a couple inches, but your pix look like it's more. The only way they could clear a full TL system would be to have raised boxes under the seats. In your pix, see how the bottom of the seat is on top of the driveshaft tunnel? I would propose a box under the seat as high as the top of the tunnel, the full width of the body. That would provide room for a cross brace providing lateral rigidity and move the brace above the level of the bars and exhaust pipe. The brace under the front seat would provide the support for the back of the trans and the load leveler system, and the brace under the back seat would provide attachment points for the trailing arms.

<i>Directing Hudson engineering to develop a high-efficiency OHC six for a new compact/intermediate line in the early 1960's would have been a great diversification move to keep the company profitable.</i>

I wouldn't bother with a new generation 6. I'd keep the 308 only to provide a transition for existing Hudson owners, only as long as the Packard engine bay was long enough to accommodate it. Hudson was a premium brand and 6s were just about dead ducks in that segment by the mid 50s.

<i>Fortuitously, the Henry J tooling went missing before it got there.....</i>

One of my K-F books says the Henry J tooling was on it's way to the existing Kaiser plant in Israel when it went missing.

India would be less accommodating to the Jet as they drive on the wrong side there.