I received this from Jason (Thanks Man!), who spotted it over at bbnh.tumblr.com through Just a Car Guy.
This is one very twisted 1960 Chevy.
Hooniverse Weekend Edition: Last Call; The Very Definition of Torque!
By Jim Brennan
Aug 8, 2010
Jeff Glucker
Only thing that is holding down the front end is a massive pair of cajones.
It's probably pretty cheap to run this thing since front tires last forever and it only uses one wheelie bar.
If it's so light it's starting to float away, fuel economy must be pretty good too.
I wonder how many runs he gets per bumper, though?
seriously the only thing that could possibly improve this photo is SPARKS
^ win and win. goodnight everybody!
pretty sure that if you look up "torque" in the dictionary you will see this photo.
My Auntie used to have a P38 Range Rover 4.6, I used to be impressed by the way the torque rocked the car when revved, then I realised that the windscreen wipers, opening the windows, sunroof or glovebox would rock the car just as well. Her dampers, bushes and airbags were all knackered. Nice car, that was.
This actually originated through my site as you can see from the notes
http://speedonbigboy.tumblr.com/post/912932774/3-…
I believe I'd be checking the mounts for my rear end and beef them up a tad. Also check then panhard bar to see if it's still in one piece.
What Panhard rod? If it's stock, it's just got coil springs, and upper and lower trailing arms.
My mistake I guess. I had a vague memory from long ago, back when I worked around American cars, that most cars had a panhard or some sort of equivalent to keep the 3rd member in place. Too many brain cells are dead. Did I mention my collection of short pieces of wire?
LOL! They were pretty primitive. Some cars like the Cadillacs had a U-shaped upper arm that attached to the differential housing with a ball joint. At least the Chevys had coil springs, starting in '58. ("Full Coil Suspension"). The Fords and the Mopars still used leaf springs.
You, sir, were totally correct. '59 to '64 x-framers had 2 lower and 1 upper (rh) trailing arms, and a panhard bar. The 1st year (58) had a central upper wishbone and no panhard, so they were willing to update.
reply mis-placed – this was for dmilligan
I suspect the X-style frame is more to blame in this case. They look so cool, but have some pretty mean flaws, as evidenced here.
Not to mention you never want to get T-boned in a X-frame car, since there's no protection, unlike with a perimeter frame.
This has to do with suspension rate and travel. The whole raison-d'etre of x-frames was the fantastic torsional strength. The weakness was indeed side-impact penetration.
Hrm. Well, considering your username and my reliance on hearsay, I have to assume I was talking out of my butt. Unintentionally, of course. Thanks!
Lowrider meets drag car. Very cool.
Despite the frivolity of the picture, a serious question: Is that really an effective way to launch, or would he be better served by some stiffer suspension & wheelie bars to force all those torques into turning the wheels instead of lifting the car?
I think a set of traction bars or ladder bars would help. Or maybe some limiter straps.
And they were twistin' the night away…