Finished prototype Mustang disc brake spindles

[67efivert]

im curious if you have thought in building a set that would work with a tarus rack to help the lack of turning radius ??
probally out of the question but was just curious

 

[degins]

im curious if you have thought in building a set that would work with a tarus rack to help the lack of turning radius ??
probally out of the question but was just curious

I haven't and doubt that I could. If your talking about the Ford Taurus, I know what your talking about. My wife drives one with the 24V 3.0L. It performs nicely, comparing well vs. its competing breed (I've driven them all as rentals). It revs freely and willingly, but the one thing that really bugs me is that it is such a pig at turning, extremely large turning radius.

 

[brianj5600]

I have granada spindles on my 67 now. I am confused what the new spindle would do for me?

 

[67coupe351w]

We use simple statics to analyse the stresses, and design accordingly.

I'm not tryin to flame you but I sure hope you used more than simple statics to design a suspension component.

 

[degins]

I have granada spindles on my 67 now. I am confused what the new spindle would do for me?

Nothing, you have already performed the swap. Many other owners don't have the time or inclination to find junkyard parts. Donors are becoming hard to find. Let's also admit that a 30 year old Granada is not a treasure trove of salvageable parts. The junkyard operators are not that willing to store the car or spend the time removing parts when they can get $200 a ton for the crushed POS Granada.

 

[degins]

I'm not tryin to flame you but I sure hope you used more than simple statics to design a suspension component.

In my case I didn't design the part. Ford did that in the 70's. The design criteria have been tested through 30+ years of use. I am REPRODUCING the parts using modern metallugical processes and controls.

 

[67efivert]

what I was refering to is that if u use a tarus rack on a classic like some people on here have done u lose alot of turning radius baeause of its 2" shorter over all side to side travel.The tie rod mounting point would need to be moved closer to centerline of the spindle to correct that probally more trouble than its worth for u though

 

[GypsyR]

Now there's a a good thought. Granada spindles are still out there. I bought "loaded" spindles twice. First set $60, the second $50. So new one spindles for $300 interest me very little.
However...It has been found that it is actually comparatively simple (to other rack solutions) to retrofit an 86-91 or so Ford Taurus steering rack into an early Mustang. A creatively handy person able to make up some mounting brackets, fiddle the pressure line, and mate the rack to his steering shaft can do this for less than $300. This sounds awful nice compared to some aftermarket solutions costing thousands of dollars. But...the Taurus rack increases the turning radius to the point of being annoying. Also there are some bumpsteer problems. other than that it works great. There are a few folks driving these even with the drawbacks.
The bumpsteer problems can be addressed to a degree by tossing down a couple hundred more dollars on a 'bumpsteer kit". No help for the turning radius though.
Now if your castings were modified to work well with with a Taurus rack, you'd have a unique product. Using your spindles and the estimated lowball price on the rack swap, people could fit their cars with a good performing rack and pinion steering setup for less than half of what the aftermarket currently offers.
Is there a market? I can't say. TCP seems to moving quite a few of their rather expensive setups. So are some others.
Would I give $300 for replacement spindles. Not until the junkards run all the way dry. Would I give $300 for a pair that would allow me to get the best from a Taurus rack swap? Ubetcha. No other such a simple and reasonably priced option exists.
You've already gone to the trouble of reproducing parts. If it would be worth it to take them this much farther I can't really say. But it sure sounds like an oppurtunity, barring some unforeseen difficulties.

 

[67efivert]

Im gald someone like my views i would defintally buy a set if i could use a rack setup

 

[cstang68]

I'm not tryin to flame you but I sure hope you used more than simple statics to design a suspension component.

What do you mean by this? All he needs to know are the basic forces applied on the loading points of the knuckle...from there calculating the stress/strain the part would experience, then make sure the cross section can withstand it...which is just simple statics. He doesn't need to do a modal analysis on a spindle. I design planes for the military and we do just what degins is doing for prototype production. Simple analysis, quick fabrication, non destructive evaluation (nobody does destructive evaluation in the aerospace world anymore...it's obsolete) and fly the sucker...Then once we get the gov $$$, go back and do FEA (finite element analysis) to see where we can improve the design.

 

[degins]

Now there's a a good thought. Granada spindles are still out there. I bought "loaded" spindles twice. First set $60, the second $50. So new one spindles for $300 interest me very little.
However...It has been found that it is actually comparatively simple (to other rack solutions) to retrofit an 86-91 or so Ford Taurus steering rack into an early Mustang. A creatively handy person able to make up some mounting brackets, fiddle the pressure line, and mate the rack to his steering shaft can do this for less than $300. This sounds awful nice compared to some aftermarket solutions costing thousands of dollars. But...the Taurus rack increases the turning radius to the point of being annoying. Also there are some bumpsteer problems. other than that it works great. There are a few folks driving these even with the drawbacks.
The bumpsteer problems can be addressed to a degree by tossing down a couple hundred more dollars on a 'bumpsteer kit". No help for the turning radius though.
Now if your castings were modified to work well with with a Taurus rack, you'd have a unique product. Using your spindles and the estimated lowball price on the rack swap, people could fit their cars with a good performing rack and pinion steering setup for less than half of what the aftermarket currently offers.
Is there a market? I can't say. TCP seems to moving quite a few of their rather expensive setups. So are some others.
Would I give $300 for replacement spindles. Not until the junkards run all the way dry. Would I give $300 for a pair that would allow me to get the best from a Taurus rack swap? Ubetcha. No other such a simple and reasonably priced option exists.
You've already gone to the trouble of reproducing parts. If it would be worth it to take them this much farther I can't really say. But it sure sounds like an oppurtunity, barring some unforeseen difficulties.

I've sold dozens of reconditioned Granada spindles and can assure you that they are no longer that easy to locate and seldom that inexpensive. If you are persistent or know how to search a national database you can find them (if you don't mind shipping charges from out of town junkyards). Most urban junkyards do not keep Granadas in their yard. Despite the heap of valuable parts attached to these gems, operators are likely to crush them immediately upon collection. $350 in hand is worth more than a rotting POS in the weeds.

Like I said before, people like you, that is those who enjoy squatting in the weeds wrangling off a set of spindles, are not my target market. True, most of us reading and posting here are probably that type, but my experience with selling reconditioned Granada spindles (that I squatted in the weeds wrangling off) is that most folks are not so inclined and appreciate ready to use parts devoid of the "loaded" attributes of corrosion and grease and grime and uncertain condition. These are the same people that see value in paying someone else to change the oil in their cars or to clean out the drains in their houses. That is, most of us.

I appreciate your opinion, but I doubt that your valuation of this, or the R&P product that you propose, is objective. In business every little thing you spend time on has a cost and must create value in the product. Just the modeling cost for modifying a spindle is thousands, not including the hundreds of hours designing them, finding someone to manufacture them, and managing their development and production.

 

[TheShagg]

What do you mean by this? All he needs to know are the basic forces applied on the loading points of the knuckle...from there calculating the stress/strain the part would experience, then make sure the cross section can withstand it...which is just simple statics. He doesn't need to do a modal analysis on a spindle. I design planes for the military and we do just what degins is doing for prototype production. Simple analysis, quick fabrication, non destructive evaluation (nobody does destructive evaluation in the aerospace world anymore...it's obsolete) and fly the sucker...Then once we get the gov $$$, go back and do FEA (finite element analysis) to see where we can improve the design.

Um..... yeah.... but knowing the forces applied at the spindle requires more than simple statics. You need to take into account the tallest bump you will hit while the car has the most weight transfer due to cornering, at the fastest speed you will hit that, and what the stiffest spring/shock combo is you would be doing this. Then using the acceleration of the wheel and the spring and A-arm mount resistances you can do some calculations, and throw in a good factor of safety. This is a very DYNAMIC process, not static.

But yes, I agree he doesn't have to do all this so long as he is staying with the same design and KNOWS FOR SURE that the process yields a part that is as good as the original design.

 

[GypsyR]

Hmm, for an idea man you're not very open minded are you?
Yes, you don't find Granada spindles in "urban" salvage yards. Because they don't BUY Granadas. They are generally in business for late model crash donors. I am not urban and can lay my hands on a set of Granada spindles tomorrow if I needed them. The price I'd have to check. I don't enjoy taking them off myself but a loaded set for $50-60 is a hard deal to resist. Many yards value them at double that or more.
My neighbor would very much like to know where he can get $350 for a "crusher" car. For extra cash he picks up unwanted cars and hauls them to the scrapyard. A complete Granada complete will bring about $125. Less drivetrain more like $100. Being "suburban" but not an idiot he keeps a close eye on scrap metal prices and only bothers with this side job when scrap is high enough to be worth his while. For $350 a car he'd quit his day job.
You don't have to search out out a "national database" to find used parts. We have this thing called the internet. "JunkyardDog.com" is only one example of a listing of salvage yards nationwide. An example of one of the local yards there is "A and R" salvage with almost their complete inventory on line for browsing.
An even simpler solution would be to call a cooperative local yard who is a member of the "Eden" (or other system). Within about three minutes they can locate and price anything available within your preferred shipping distance or nationwide from other yards using the Hollander or FastParts database systems. No weed squatting required.
I don't get this-"Just the modeling cost for modifying a spindle is thousands, not including the hundreds of hours designing them, finding someone to manufacture them, and managing their development and production"
One. Modeling cost? Locate someone who has done the Taurus swap (or God forbid, do it yourself) and find out how far the tie rod joint location needs to be relocated to correct bumpsteer. Redneck dirttrack racers can figure out how to make thier own bumpsteer gauges, it's not hard. Or you can buy them. Then also sort out how much closer to the spindle the tie rod end needs to be moved so the "throw" of the Taurus rack will match the length of the spindle arm so to correct the steering radius problem. If you passed high school geometry this might take all of an afternoon. If you're feeling ambitious, Granada spindles all also have a bit of a scrub radius problem you could look into correcting.
Then the model itself. Butcher a few spindles by cutting up the tie rod arms and weld them back together with the corrections you discovered in your busy afternoon. Make absolutely sure all the dimensions are exactly where you want them and you have a pair of "models". Is welding cast hugely expensive? My brother in law will do it for $40 per spindle. Ship them to me or him. It's what he does. All this adds up up to rather less than "thousands" and "hundreds" of hours. Though for real quality I'd budget quite a bit more than one afternoon for empirical measuring. If you make a friend who has one the high dollar suspension programs who would run the measurements through to make sure you are likely to get the desired results without causing any ill effects then that would be a really good idea. A certain person springs immediately to my mind, being the owner of such a program, also the owner of a HIGHLY modified 67 Mustang, and who happens to be VERY competent on the subject of modified suspensions. He'd also be the man on that scrub radius thing. If he would help, who can say, but he's not the only competent person out there.
Finding someone to manufacture them. What? Well who's making your spindles now? I mean, really. They can make a sand cast copy of an orginal spindle but not a modified one? (Which incidentally was welded up solely for such purpose, NOT to be used on a vehicle. EVER. Don't get ideas people) And managing their development and production. Err, what is it you plan to do with your copied spindles? Sell some maybe? I had the impression you intended to manage that deal, what's the difference.
The rack might be out of your league. I understand. It's worth looking at with the popularity of upgrading to rack and pinion steering. Many companies seem to be doing quite well selling them. #1 is likely Total Control/Chris Alston since Shelby selected theirs for the "E" cars. There are others out there, Flaming River, newcomers in Australia and small guy "Randall" all doing business. Plus the Mustang II conversion folks such as Heidt's and Fatman's. All pretty good stuff but with drawback the Taurus solution can defeat. One is expense. The best racks are modified new or rebuilt stock racks. The "modified" part is expensive no matter what else. With modified spindles a rebuilt rack can be sourced for a little as $100. Obviously one of the 1000's of common as dirt junkyard Taurus racks even cheaper. The mounting brackets that I've seen are based on the engine crossmember and relatively simple to make with cheap steel stock and can be constructed as a "bolt on". A big advantage over the Mustang II kits which require major and difficult to reverse modification. Plus a couple of the competing rack systems could take advantage of spindles modified the "Taurus way" since their rack systems suffer some of the same diffiiculties.
The questions posed are rhetorical. No need for reply. You're already doing something pretty worthwhile, can you not see it might be well worth your while? Somebody like MustangSteve, Steve Ainsworth, or even Griggs might think so and beat you to it. If doing such is beyond you, fine. It's probably beyond me too. Maybe. Hmm. I dunno. Who's casting your spindles? Darn, too late, I've already told everybody.

 

[GypsyR]

This could have been a heck of a lot shorter.

Degins:"Because I basically just don't want to do anything like that".
GypsyR: "Oh. OK."

 

[67coupe351w]

What do you mean by this? All he needs to know are the basic forces applied on the loading points of the knuckle...from there calculating the stress/strain the part would experience, then make sure the cross section can withstand it...which is just simple statics. He doesn't need to do a modal analysis on a spindle. I design planes for the military and we do just what degins is doing for prototype production. Simple analysis, quick fabrication, non destructive evaluation (nobody does destructive evaluation in the aerospace world anymore...it's obsolete) and fly the sucker...Then once we get the gov $$$, go back and do FEA (finite element analysis) to see where we can improve the design.

I'm still not trying to flame anyone, just participating in a discusion:

I'm saying what TheShagg pointed out for me as well as you need to use more than your first 2 years of college to design a component that will last any length of time. Have you learned about fatigue yet? Id hate to fly in a plane that what built on simple analysis.

We destroy stuff at work in the process of validating the design all the time. We are provided with FEA drawings from design then we install strain guages, pressure transducers, torque transducers, string pots, accelerometers...whatever is needed for the particular component being tested then go out and break stuff and then compare to the FEA. Of course not all tests are destructive but when lives are at risk (even when not) we make dang sure our reccomendations are valid.

 

[degins]

67coupe351w, TheShagg, cstang68, Scarebird, and others concerned with engineering issues,
I am approaching the strength, stress, fatigue issues empirically. Compared to the originals, the new heat treated steel casting have about 20% higher ultimate tensile strength (UTS) and yield strength (YS) with a conservative temper (at least equal elongation properties). As you probably know, the endurance limit (EL) is the limit of the repetitive stress that a metal part can endure without risk of failure from metal fatigue. EL can be estimated for tempered steels of UTS under 1000 mpa at about 50% of the UTS. Since the original material of construction has a UTS well less than 1000 mpa, and the new parts UTS is greater than the original, the new part's EL is at least as good as the original.

The original part has been endurance tested over the last 30+ years in something like 4 million units (believe it or not, that many Granada, Monarch, Comets, Mavericks were produced). Also consider that the new application for these spindles is classic Mustang. Most of those Mustangs (65-69) utilized a spindle that was only about 85% as thick in cross sections (pin and arms), with the ball joint mounting bosses about the same dimensions. I hope this puts your doubts to rest.

 

[cstang68]

Um..... yeah.... but knowing the forces applied at the spindle requires more than simple statics. You need to take into account the tallest bump you will hit while the car has the most weight transfer due to cornering, at the fastest speed you will hit that, and what the stiffest spring/shock combo is you would be doing this. Then using the acceleration of the wheel and the spring and A-arm mount resistances you can do some calculations, and throw in a good factor of safety. This is a very DYNAMIC process, not static.

But yes, I agree he doesn't have to do all this so long as he is staying with the same design and KNOWS FOR SURE that the process yields a part that is as good as the original design.

I'm sorry but hitting a bump is an instantaneous increase in the force on 1 point...there are no dynamics involved. You would use a load factor to bring the additional shock loads into consideration. Static analysis does take the acceleration into account...F=ma no? =]

Sure, a spring/dampener system has dynamics involved, but the force exerted on the spring/shock from the knuckle can be assumed to be an impulse.

I completed 4 years of college at the #7 aerospace school in the world, and I'm currently working on my MS in composite structures...

 

[cstang68]

I'm still not trying to flame anyone, just participating in a discusion:

I'm saying what TheShagg pointed out for me as well as you need to use more than your first 2 years of college to design a component that will last any length of time. Have you learned about fatigue yet? Id hate to fly in a plane that what built on simple analysis.

We destroy stuff at work in the process of validating the design all the time. We are provided with FEA drawings from design then we install strain guages, pressure transducers, torque transducers, string pots, accelerometers...whatever is needed for the particular component being tested then go out and break stuff and then compare to the FEA. Of course not all tests are destructive but when lives are at risk (even when not) we make dang sure our reccomendations are valid.

Through NDE, you can calculate material properties (young's modulus, poisson's ratio...ect) just by using UT, and you can test every part you send out and know exactly what properties each piece has, rather than assuming a constant quality through destructive testing randomly within a batch.

Now active NDE is currently being introduced into aerospace world. Acoustic emmision testing is the newest NDE technique where you can actually actively measure the integrity of a structure.

I'd reccomend "Nondestructive Evaluation Theory, Techniques, and Applications" by Peter J. Shull. Its pretty amazing what you can learn through NDE.

 

[67coupe351w]

I'm sorry but hitting a bump is an instantaneous increase in the force on 1 point...there are no dynamics involved. You would use a load factor to bring the additional shock loads into consideration. Static analysis does take the acceleration into account...F=ma no? =]

Sure, a spring/dampener system has dynamics involved, but the force exerted on the spring/shock from the knuckle can be assumed to be an impulse.

I completed 4 years of college at the #7 aerospace school in the world, and I'm currently working on my MS in composite structures...

In your statics class you learned F=0, it was your dynamics class where you learned F=MA. You didnt learn anythign about fatigue in your statics class either. Sure you can get a general idea of forces you might expect to see with a static analysis but there is so much more to it than that.

There is a diffrence between having a good grasp on real world situations and your 4 years at the #7 school in the WORLD. I'm sure you hitting us with your credentials would be a very dynamic process.

 

[67coupe351w]

Through NDE, you can calculate material properties (young's modulus, poisson's ratio...ect) just by using UT, and you can test every part you send out and know exactly what properties each piece has, rather than assuming a constant quality through destructive testing randomly within a batch.

Now active NDE is currently being introduced into aerospace world. Acoustic emmision testing is the newest NDE technique where you can actually actively measure the integrity of a structure.

I'd reccomend "Nondestructive Evaluation Theory, Techniques, and Applications" by Peter J. Shull. Its pretty amazing what you can learn through NDE.

I'm not saying you have to be destructive to have a good test. I'll have to get ahold of that book. I'm just sayin theres more to vehicle suspension than Statics, thats all. We should quit before this poor guy's thread gets locked