Coilovers on front

[WASyL]

Hi, new guy to this board. 

I'm in process of building 1950 Buisinnes Coupe that will be mix of rat/hot rod and protouring solutions so that i can daily drive it whole year. I want to delete stock spring, move upper shock mount to frame but install there coilover type shock with Viking and QA1 parts. Will it work properly or will i run to any issues running this kind of shock/spring combination ?

 

best regards

[Sniper]

The issue when I considered that exact thing on my 51 was the upper control arm mount. The upper mount for the coilover would have to be in the same place because that is where the spring pocket is. I'm sure there is a creative solution to it I just haven't figured it out yet. But that was the only gotcha I saw. 

 

I ended up going with a set of one coil cut down Aerostar Springs and some gas charged shocks instead.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 15, 2023 by Sniper

[andyd]

I think the main issue would be having sufficent clearance between the upper a arm and the coil over.........a relocated upper shock mount is doable as the new longer shock is essentially the same diameter as the standard shock however a coilover due to the extra width of the coil spring is wider and may foul on the upper A arm.............to be honest I'm only guessing here, I've made relocated upper mounts as shown in the attached pic and did think that a proper coilover might be an option but just went with the shocks I had.............it would be interesting to see how this idea would pan out........BTW I hope your build is more hotrod than crap rod, crap rods are at least to me a build trying to copy something that never existed in the first place.......tho' having had my 1940 Dodge since 1971 & it being a hotrod, built & painted by me since 1973 I am a little biased ....lol.......but everyone has their opinion I suppose.......main thing is to get it on the road......regards from Ozralia......Andyd  

[WASyL]

Thanks for the input, I hope it won't end up as crap rod as it is suppose to be my daily driver. My coilovers are shorter then stock shocks so there might be some space or I'll just install them in place of stock spring location. As I run car workshop fabricating is ain't issue, just was not quite sure if it will work properly when spring will be on side of suspension not on middle.

[Sniper]

Your coilovers might be shorter than the stock shock but there's two problems number one is that the coilover has a larger diameter and I know I'm not sure what your tire clearance would be. The second problem would be how the upper and lower shock Mounts work in the stock configuration it's fairly inefficient. If you relocate the upper shock mount to the frame then your length options open up but I'm still not sure about the tire clearance part which is why I was looking to put it in the stock spring location.

 

 

[andyd]

In theory the spring being on the side shouldn't make any difference so long as the attachment points are strong enough although I'm not sure how the spring rate and action will be or won't be affected by the type of bushing at either end......coilovers as far as I know usually use 1/2" or better studs or bolts as their mounting points so that should provide a solid enough point that while the coil is now outside of where the stock spring lived it should still provide the necessary absorption of rebound..............you'll have to forgive my poor taste rat rod comment, its just that these things have given some people, especially in areas that are responsible for legistslating what can be done to old cars the wrong idea and a retrograde idea of what hotrodding is all about............lol.............andyd 

[Sniper]

The problem with using the existing lower shock mount is that it is in single shear and was never designed to handle the weight of the car. On my 51 I believe it's 5/8 of an inch in diameter so it's even stouter than your standard half inch. But most if not all the coilover mounts I have seen are designed to work in double shear. Since I have no access whatsoever to CAD or Cam software I prefer to be very conservative.

 

 

 

[kencombs]

Seems to me that selecting a coil-over that will fit into the original spring location would be best.   Shock mounts are almost never designed to support the weight of the vehicle.   The stock spring location is.  A double shear mount in the upper frame pocket and lower a-frame should be fairly easy to do.   However, that choice would place some tight constraints on the coil-over and may require a custom item.  

[WASyL]

thanks for all input, i'll go with stock spring location then
@andyd i now what You mean and it is ok, especially that i'm from other side of the globe and some things are made differently than in States but named same. this is why i said it will be mix of hor, rad and pro and for You it will most likley become just crap rod. 
I'm throwing lots of mods on this car like IRS from BMW E39 Touring, fuel injected 318 Magnum engine, front disc conversion or good grip rather then good looking tires. But i'm keeping old rusty looks with lots of patina, keeping mostly stock interior just renewed etc. Will it be proper mix for cool car or just crap rod i don't know, one thing i know it will be the way i like and want to be and drive it as much as i can.

 

 

[andyd]

Wasyl, I like the idea of the IRS from a BMW, makes lots of sense being that its more available I suppose, if I was building my Dodge now rather than in the mid 70's I'd have at the very minimium  a jag or similar IFS and IRS, probably a Mopar late model Hemi and various modern convienences.....so your approach is fine and just a different way of looking at it...........regards, andyd