Sway bar?! Dang...

[Powerhouse]

Hello all.

I recently noticed I am supposed to have an anti sway bar in my 39 P7...but do not. I didn't know thye had sway bars back then...duh. My 57 Bel air never had any either.

SO...I have been searching for a way to get one in there...originals are pretty much no where to be found. Besides they probably are not very good anyway.

I have read about using a Sunbeam Sway bar on this forum..as well as a 70 Ply Cuda Sway bar. I got the idea maybe a custom one would be reasonable. Well...I contacted a nearby custom race shop(with which we have done business before)...and they were WAY off in price at around $900..and I told them it wasn't going in anything performance..just an old daily driver. Oh well.

SO...should i go the Sunbeam/Cuda route or try and find a stocker? I am trying to spend less than $200...preferably $100 or less. Free is an option too.

[Plymouthy Adams]

unless you going to autocross this puppy I do not think you have a real need for a rear sway bar...but the front would benfit from one...

[Jerry Roberts]

Do you have a pick and pull wrecking yard near by ? Perhaps a little looking and measuring would help .

[blucarsdn]

I have been messing with '39 Plym P-8, which is the Delux version, where-as P-7 is a standard model since 1996.. I have parted out several cars to get parts for my P8 conv. coupe.. I have never seen a sway bar, panhard bar, on any P-7, 8.

Are you referring to a rear application, or a front?... ChryCo did use an anti-roll bar on the front of the P-8's, they possibly used this type of bar on the P-7's because of the independent front suspension.

The bar would be a U shaped affair, attached to the front of the frame then to the A arms with links

I might have one of these bars attached to a front clip I cut off of a chassis.

I can supply you with a pix if you want one... Bill

[Powerhouse]

Hey there. I am talking about the front anti sway bar...it may have been called a sway eliminator back then....but it does just what an anti sway bar does.

I have seen them in my research of late on 38 Dodges and such.

I even found sway eliminator linkage listed for 39 plys.

If you have some pics I would greatly appreciate it.

[Dodgeb4ya]

Here is a picture I have of a P8 39 Plym that has only one piece left of the factory sway eliminator-the link stud on the Rt lower A-arm. The car, I think has a NOS MoPar bar and links on it now.

Bob

[Powerhouse]

Thanks.

I am thinking it may be better for my wallet to put a new modern style bar in there. Unless I can find someone with a 39 setup.

[blucarsdn]

The bar you are looking for is a torsion type bar to control body roll during turns. it is not a sway bar which is designed to minimize side sway of the chassis in relationship to the body. I will look at the front clip I have to see if I can get you a pix...Bill

[Powerhouse]

oh. I thought they were considered the same thing.

So an anti-sway bar is not a sway eliminator (as Mopar denotes them)?

Howard Tarnoff posted this

"On my 49 P18 we put on a 1970-71 Dodge Challenger or Cuda rear sway bar with 8 3/4 rear end on the front end. Here are pictures of it before it went on, with the other suspension parts, and installed."

Edited January 27, 2011 by Powerhouse

[rockable]

Addco made me one for about $200.

[Andydodge]

I have seen the mopar "sway eliminator" called a "sway bar" , "anti sway bar" and "roll bar".......I know them as a sway bar........they should be made of spring steel, in general any place that can make coil springs should be able to make up a sway bar as they use the same type of steel, I have a custom made 1" sway bar on my 40 Dodge, handles quite well. Other bars that get people confused are the Panhard bar and Watts linkage, both are used on coil sprung live axles to locate the rear axle and stop it moving transversly across the chassis/body........and then you'd also probably be best to have a rear sway bar as well.......lol............andyd

[Jim Saraceno]

I recently noticed I am supposed to have an anti sway bar in my 39 P7...but do not. I didn't know thye had sway bars back then...

I have one on my '35.

[blucarsdn]

Hopefully I will not start a argument about sway bars, anti-roll bars and panhard bars, in eith case here goes.

In the early days of motor cars various means were employed to minimize and/or eliminate body movement in relationship to the chassis. In the early 1900's a French Company named "Panhard" made cars to which they attached a bar to eliminate side sway of the body.. This bar was called a Panhard bar or tracking bar. It was commonly called a sway bar by most people.

Ford started using a anti-roll bar on the front in 1940 and a Panhard Bar on the front and rear in '47 because of their buggy type springs and shackle set up.

As coil spring suspension became common, a lot of undesirable body roll was experienced, to control the body roll torsion type bars were added to the front ends to minimize the body sway and/or roll. *** I don't think that early manufactures liked the term ROLL.

Remember the term "swing and sway with Sammy Kaye" a band leader from the '30's/'40's.

In late 1930's when Buick went to coil springs front and rear, they used anti-roll and Panhard bars front and rear. Modern cars have both an anti-roll bar and a Panhard Bar, usually front and rear.

The only problem with confusing the terminology is that when you are shopping for a device to control body movement, you might end up purchasing the wrong bar.

After my '39 Plym was drivable I noted that I had what I would consider to be excessive body roll, especially at high speed on curves. My car has a Fatman Stage III front end. Looking the car over I noted that the front end did not have a torsion bar to control body roll. I called Fatman, I was told that the fabricator should have used one of their bars ($175.) which is designed for my application. I talked to the shop that installed the unit, they insisted that they put a bar on the car and that I must of removed it. I called Fatman and got a lesson in suspension 101.

Doing more research on my own I found out the difference in the two types of bars, and what they are designed to do ...Bill

Edited January 28, 2011 by blucarsdn

[Powerhouse]

AHA! Now I'm more confused...hahaha

But I get your point. Thanks for the knowledge.

The term "sway Bar"(actually should be anti sway bar) is just a term commonly used for that bar used in front, or rear, to keep it from handling like crap.

Edited January 28, 2011 by Powerhouse

[blucarsdn]

True, the purpose of either style of bar is to improve vehicle handling.

If the bar has flexible links like the torsion bars on the front end of the '39's, etc., Mopars, the bar is intended to control body roll... The Fatman bar on the front of my '39 Plym is 1" where-as the original bar was a strong 1/2".

Panhard, (anti-sway) bars are always securely attached to the chassis and axle.

Note the "sway bar" in the attached pix which is on the back of my '36 Ford cpe....Bill

[austinsailor]

That is a whole different animal, though. It is intended to keep the rear centered under the car. Otherwise the axle would move side to side in relation to the body as the shackles swung.

I seem to recall the older ones (probably yours originally) didn't have that. I had a 47 Coupe not to long ago and it was quite a wallering thing going down the road with the springs going side to side. I'm guessing that without that bar, the older ones were quite exciting to drive!

I got rid of the F**d. Since I was a teenager those were the sought after cars. Hot rods and all that. A few years ago I bought one at a local auction. Didn't need much, but what an education it was. In 1909 Henry had some state of the art ideas. In 1947 he was still using most of them, unimproved (except maybe for adding that bar) and it was so out of date and weird to work on after a lifetime of mopar stuff I had to get rid of it.

[blucarsdn]

The Panhard, anti-sway bar, shown in the pix was standard on the '47-48 Merc's. In late '47 Ford added the bar to the Fords. By 1947 Henry F was completely out of the picture so modern engineering was creeping into Ford..The rear end under my '36 is a '48 Merc 2 spd Columbia overdrive.

The EFV8's '32-48 were very unstable on the road when driven at speed, i.e. anything over 60 mph. It is a well known fact that HF was a very thrifty man, being such he built cars for the masses at prices that anyone could afford. The EFV8's were simple to operate and thrived on poor maintenance.

Walter P. on the other hand came from a background of railroads and Buick, where well engineered and high maintenance vehicles was the rule of the day.

It has been my observation over the years that Chryco built cars required a higher level of maintenance, therefore it would appear that the average purchaser of a Chryco built car was more of an intellectual. Ford seemed to capture a more young at heart, fast and loose type of customer.

Vehicle suspension can be a very interesting subject... Why did Chryco go to coil springs on the front end of their cars starting in 1934? And then back to I beam solid axles until '39.. GM started using independent front suspension in '34, using I beam solid axles only on some standard models.

The fact of the matter is that on the average, standard I beams and leaf springs cost $11.00 more per vehicle, coil spring suspensions are therefore cheaper, however, there was not enough coil spring manufactures during the '30's in the world to keep up with the demand.

OK.. I know.. more info than most people want, but then again, sometimes it helps to understand why things are done, if more of the reasons behind the thinking is known.

[41D19conv]

the official name for this part on a 1941 Dodge was a sway eliminator. Andy Bernbaumhas the links and bushings for the 39 Plymouth listed in his catalog. The bar should be relativly cheap to have made

[Greg F]

Anyone know where I can get the sway eliminator cushion? I see roberts carries the sway bar bushing part #P295. Are these the same? It looks different in the parts manual, but can't find who else carrries one.

Thanks again...Greg