Watts Link Question

Moderator: Mod Squad

67Straightsix
Registered User
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 3:46 pm

Watts Link Question

Post #1 by 67Straightsix » Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:53 pm

Does anybody have any experience with a watts link in a 67-70 mustang ? I'm getting conflicting info on center pivot mount. Is it better mounted on frame or
axle ? My books say frame , the mustangs I've seen are mounted on the axle. Has anybody run one ?



User avatar
bubba22349
Global Moderator
Posts: 6964
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Flagstaff, Az. 86005 near the old Route 66

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #2 by bubba22349 » Thu Jan 01, 2015 12:56 am

:hmmm: I like them, but no direct experiance with a Watts Link for a 67 to 70 Mustang though the princeaples should be much the same for any aplacation. Built first one for my 1941 Willy's A/G car back in 1970. I mounted the pivot on the center rear of the 9 inch axel houseing with top link going to the top of frame rail on one side and the lower link to below the bottom of frame rail on the oposite side. All of the omes I remember seeing were built much that same way and personally I just don't see how it could work if the pivot is mounted to the frame. Any pictures of a frame mount one? Good luck on your build :nod:


A bad day Drag Racing is still better than a good day at work!

I am still hunting for a project car to build but with my current low budget it's not looking so good. My Ex- Fleet of Sixes these are all long gone! :bang: 1954 Customline 223 3 speed with O/D, 1963 Fairlane project drag car with BB6, 1977 Maverick 250 with C4, 1994 F-150 a 300 with 5 speed.

turbo2256b
Registered User
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:02 pm

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #3 by turbo2256b » Thu Jan 01, 2015 8:57 am

Think OP is talking about this style

http://www.fays2.net/index.html



User avatar
bubba22349
Global Moderator
Posts: 6964
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Flagstaff, Az. 86005 near the old Route 66

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #4 by bubba22349 » Thu Jan 01, 2015 11:46 am

:beer: interesting, that would also work too. :thumbup:


A bad day Drag Racing is still better than a good day at work!

I am still hunting for a project car to build but with my current low budget it's not looking so good. My Ex- Fleet of Sixes these are all long gone! :bang: 1954 Customline 223 3 speed with O/D, 1963 Fairlane project drag car with BB6, 1977 Maverick 250 with C4, 1994 F-150 a 300 with 5 speed.

67Straightsix
Registered User
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 3:46 pm

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #5 by 67Straightsix » Thu Jan 01, 2015 12:32 pm

I've looked at the Fays 2 ,and like it (no welding on the diff.) That is the way all my info. recommends.
However, the cars I've seen at the track (newer Shelbys , and Griggs racing) have the pivot on the axle. For this build it probably does not make any difference.
Just curious if anyone has run one or the other, and how it worked out .

bubba,
Just curious, on your 9 inch, did you make your center link height adjustable and did you weld or bolt on the mounting bracket?



turbo2256b
Registered User
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:02 pm

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #6 by turbo2256b » Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:00 pm

Are you still using leaf springs?



67Straightsix
Registered User
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 3:46 pm

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #7 by 67Straightsix » Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:10 pm

I have leaf springs.



User avatar
bubba22349
Global Moderator
Posts: 6964
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Flagstaff, Az. 86005 near the old Route 66

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #8 by bubba22349 » Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:38 pm

Mine had a coil spring rear suspension I made and welded on the center mounting brackets to the 9 inch housing. And made all the links out of tubing with Heim joints the whole assembly was very light weight as it was strictly a Drag Race Car only. You could probably make your brackets to bolt on the third member bolts if you have the room, instead of welding. Good luck :nod:


A bad day Drag Racing is still better than a good day at work!

I am still hunting for a project car to build but with my current low budget it's not looking so good. My Ex- Fleet of Sixes these are all long gone! :bang: 1954 Customline 223 3 speed with O/D, 1963 Fairlane project drag car with BB6, 1977 Maverick 250 with C4, 1994 F-150 a 300 with 5 speed.

turbo2256b
Registered User
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:02 pm

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #9 by turbo2256b » Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:28 pm

Dont remember anything about wats links on leaf springs

http://www.allfordmustangs.com/Detailed/53.shtml

My 6 uses Shelby drop up front 720 rate front and actually 68 390GT compitition handling springs with trunk mounted battery
All front leafs are clamped togeather all clamp on the erar of the springs removed to allow lift on acceleration.
Aftermarket shackles top hole cut off end with multible holes. Use the hole closest to the top cut the rest off.



User avatar
CoupeBoy
VIP Member
Posts: 3423
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 12:17 am
Location: Fargo, ND
Contact:

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #10 by CoupeBoy » Tue Jan 06, 2015 12:25 pm

I've been wanting a watts for a few years now on my '68, IMO packaging looks easier with a frame mounted pivot
The axle brackets in this kit would be easy to make as well (compared to the full round axle clamp on type of the Fays2 unit)
751_WattsLink1.jpg

There are a lot of different commonly available type of axle clamps that are used by circle track racers.
Simply google "Circle Track Axle Clamp"
I'm certain with enough research, you could find one that would work.
Like this one from Summit.
Allstar Performance Clamp-On Shock/Trailing Arm Brackets ALL60134

Check out this thread, 1965 Falcon with completely custom suspension.. you have to read through a few pages (the thread has 100..)
Project BLUEprint, 1965 Falcon -- Page 16 Pro-Touring.com
Image
Image
carnalsupply wrote:From a mechanical standpoint, do you think there's any real difference in the effectiveness between the two different mounting points? From my way of thinking the chassis mount is easier to fabricate and reduces a bit of un-sprung weight as opposed to the diff mounted but will need to have various vertically spaced mounting positions to accommodate varying ride heights.
Bryce wrote:Yes, I think chassis mounted watts prop are better than axle mounted. If you are driving the car the axle has a constant height to the ground except for tire sidewall deflection, so minimal height changes. The body moves up and down +-3". When the body moves up or down the center of gravity changes (CG). Since the body/chassis weighs more than the rearend the CG follows the body movement, but not exactly since the rearend does have weight. The watts link pivot point on the prop defines the roll center of the rear suspension. I think it is better to keep the roll center and CG height seperation the same throughout the suspension travel. The reason why; the sway bar is dialed in for that distance between CG and RC. I think it will give you more consistent handling during the suspension travel.
Interesting picture on this page as well.. the brackets that TCI use to mount their 3 link cradle to the rear frame rail.
Project BLUEprint, 1965 Falcon -- Page 18 Pro-Touring.com
Image
Building a 1" square tube frame similar to the Fays2 unit shouldn't be too difficult..

I'll hopefully have my '68 coupe rearend out soon to replace the leaf springs (originals are shot)
FWIW, my '68 has an 8" in it already.

I like to build stuff.. what's your timeline?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.


1968 Mustang Daily Driver Rebuild (on hold for the Season 3/1/2015)
1963.5 Falcon Convertible Build (just getting started 3/15/2015)
Case 1830 Skidsteer FordSix Repower Thread (started 4/4/2015)
1970 170/C4
1967 200/C4
1965 240/bellhousing/flywheel/clutch/3.03 bell pattern
1975 250/flexplate
1975 300/flywheel

turbo2256b
Registered User
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:02 pm

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #11 by turbo2256b » Tue Jan 06, 2015 10:42 pm

So you plan of a watts link on a leaf spring car?



User avatar
CoupeBoy
VIP Member
Posts: 3423
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 12:17 am
Location: Fargo, ND
Contact:

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #12 by CoupeBoy » Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:16 am

I do, knowing full well that none of this is necessary, but I want to try it.
And better still, I can make it, so why not..

I've built a few other things and posted pics here on the forum..
Early Falcon T5 Crossmember
Image
A few bends later
Image

Small Six to Small Block Ford Adapter Plate
The 170 with adapter next to a 250
Image

My latest project..
Custom Built Strut Rods
Still not done, but all the 'hard work' is complete.
Image

It is Winter in Nodak.. today's high will be 1°f after starting off at -13°f and Spring won't even show its face around here until late March, so I have another couple months to finish up my projects.

A watts link shouldn't be all that difficult, I'd suspect the hardest thing to identify is going to be the best spot (behind the axle) and the frame spacing at that location. The rest should be simple cut and weld...


1968 Mustang Daily Driver Rebuild (on hold for the Season 3/1/2015)
1963.5 Falcon Convertible Build (just getting started 3/15/2015)
Case 1830 Skidsteer FordSix Repower Thread (started 4/4/2015)
1970 170/C4
1967 200/C4
1965 240/bellhousing/flywheel/clutch/3.03 bell pattern
1975 250/flexplate
1975 300/flywheel

User avatar
CoupeBoy
VIP Member
Posts: 3423
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 12:17 am
Location: Fargo, ND
Contact:

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #13 by CoupeBoy » Mon Apr 20, 2015 6:00 pm

alright guys, I thought I missed the opportunity to do this when my wife started driving the car in early March.
but I'm back on it. I'm going to measure the frame width and make some brackets like the Fays2 uses.
I'd like to find some suitable axle clamps for the axle side.



User avatar
xctasy
VIP Member
Posts: 6209
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND
Contact:

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #14 by xctasy » Sun Apr 16, 2017 6:56 pm

My uncles Rover 3500, my cousins Alfa Romeo, and my 1984 XE Falcon had a Watts link. They provide perfect lateral location, which is why the World Rallye Works Ford Escort's used it.

They later found some better, less restrictive lateral locations, especially for the 450-500 HP 351 Group C Falcons which had a pretty bad upper to lower link geometry problem. Basically RoadGames Falcon but with the best NASCAR engines. And 360 section 19" tires on BBS 11" wide rims, and it could still incinerate tires in any gear...

Image

In my opinion all Watts linkages need a Michael Mumford modification.


this

Image


http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthread. ... -me!/page2

http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthread.php?166676-Rear-control-arm-questions

xctasy wrote:I vote Panhard rod early on. It has some issues, (like a Panhard rod makes one side of the vehicles axle move to one side, and offers less lateral location, than, say a Watts Linkage as used in the World Rally Escort RS2000's, the Australian Falcon, Alfa Romeo, early RX-7's and the last Live axle SN197 Mustang and Mercury Marauder).

Like these ones

Image

Although a race car set up, in my opinion all Watts linkages need a Michael Mumford modification, like used in the race 1981 onwards GM T-cars and 1983 onwards XE 351C Falcon race cars, still use the stock pickups, but deactivate the Watts rocker on the axle. Back in 1983, 500 hp Group C touring sedans wouldn't steer properly because the upper and lower arms were not the same length, and the traditional Ford production Watts Linkage failed to reduce roll steer because the Watts linkage then added roll center changes to the mix.

Image

There are some long running problems with Watts linkages for exhaust pipe clearance (even worse than the Panhard rod) and the inability for the axle to maintain a constant roll center to relative to the chassis with suspension travel.

.........


Image
XEC Ltd ICBE's Inter Continental Ballistic Engines-
FAZER 6Bi (M112 & EEC5) or FAZER 6Ti (GT3582 & EEC5) 425 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
FAZER 6V0 3x2-BBL Holley 188 HP 3.3L/200 I-6 or 235 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
X-Flow Engine Components Ltd http://www.xecltd.info/?rd=10

User avatar
CoupeBoy
VIP Member
Posts: 3423
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 12:17 am
Location: Fargo, ND
Contact:

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #15 by CoupeBoy » Sun Apr 16, 2017 7:26 pm

I'll have to go look at that Mumford info more closely. From what I remember; with the "right" setup, you can set the toll center BELOW the surface of the road.

After seeing the I tail setup, I always wondered if the additional engineering would be noticeable by an amateur like myself.



67Straightsix
Registered User
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 3:46 pm

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #16 by 67Straightsix » Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:44 am

The mumford system looks interesting - I haven't looked at it before. The problem i see is fitting the pivot points in the space available, and still have room for fuel tank ,and exhaust. The watts link causes enough problems with one pivot. Now there's two pivots to build brackets for. Do you think the gain is worth it for a street car that will see some track time? I know the same question can be asked about watts link vs panhard bar.



User avatar
xctasy
VIP Member
Posts: 6209
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND
Contact:

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #17 by xctasy » Mon Apr 17, 2017 10:55 am

From the Locost forum. A way to keep open non limited slip axles and 450 hp 347's hooking up.


67Straightsix wrote:The mumford system looks interesting - I haven't looked at it before. The problem i see is fitting the pivot points in the space available, and still have room for fuel tank ,and exhaust. The watts link causes enough problems with one pivot. Now there's two pivots to build brackets for. Do you think the gain is worth it for a street car that will see some track time? I know the same question can be asked about watts link vs panhard bar.



On the basis of R1 Sevens testimony

I designed and built a mumford linkage for my car. There was a little bit of buzz about them in the Locost community a few years ago. But since there was (is) not a lot of info about them out there, I think most everyone steered away from them. I decided to go for it and it seemed to work out just fine. It gets my roll center pretty low in the rear at about 4" above the ground.

The picture in the previous post is from the Superformance S1. They put a mumford linkage in that car and ran it with an open diff. I talked with a dealer at a local autocross where I got to see one of those cars run. He had no wheel spin, even with the open diff.



A open diff is a non Detroit Locker, non LSD, not slip limited differential

This was how the Aussies did there work in 1984, reversing the rocker arm from the center of the axle housing to a point downward and out side the axle.


Video 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIiEV0DILBw


and

http://texaslocost.homestead.com/Mumforddrawing.html


It simplifies the whole system, and creates space for exhaust, and yes, you have to consider your tank shape to suit.

Compared to the triumph of engineering over common sense, this system trades off fuel capacity for the lowest roll center.
The skills of whizz kids creates a NASA ground support philosophy makes the modern Watts linkages too complicated.

Video 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVYhSJhnac8


Even AVESCO walked away from a pure Mumford back to a Watts system, simply because its really dang easy to CNC a complicated Watts link,


the Mumford is so simple, it hurts. Video 1 shows the simplicity.

Video 2 shows a triumph of really kick a$$ smart CNC machining over common sense. As EnglertRacing96 says in the Youtube footnotes, this is the common dirt track Z bar, and it works great. It divorces the springing and linking, so its doing a little more than just providing lateral support. I don't dispute that the set up for a dirt tracker requires this.

It interests me that the common lectures of

1. the evils of over thinkin' it and

2. adding complication and

3. the importance of KISS approach have

resulted in the Video 2 complication just so common in the industry. People don't seam to divorce springing from lateral control. Leaf springs do both, a Watts link does only lateral location.

There is a time and place for complication, and that's for instances where you've gotta bring 12 men home from the Moon.

Complicating a suspension system when there is another simple alternative is the reason some aspects of live axle chassis design forces you to keep adding sh!+ to it. I'm not knocking Engineers, and intelligence, nor the US approach of consultation and team work....it all has a vital place. I'm not just convinced that pile-ing parts of parts is the right one in this instance.

This is just like push-rod engine rocker arm leverage, going from 1.5:1 to 1.73....you have to see yourself around the complicated, and do the simple modifications to get there.

Or like short or long tube headers, and debating which one is best. You first build a concept in steel, and compare it to the alternative. Horse trading or matching to race horses, and seeing which one offers advantages.

A gas tank is easy to cut and shut if the suspension set up offers another dimension of simplicity. Our exhaust systems for live axle vehicles are compromised by the movement of the axle tube, so we hook in a multiple plane 2.5 or 3" tube bend. The Mumford arm gives space for a more Jag IRS style of straight through the gap exhausting, like the Shelby 68 center thru type.


Image
XEC Ltd ICBE's Inter Continental Ballistic Engines-
FAZER 6Bi (M112 & EEC5) or FAZER 6Ti (GT3582 & EEC5) 425 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
FAZER 6V0 3x2-BBL Holley 188 HP 3.3L/200 I-6 or 235 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
X-Flow Engine Components Ltd http://www.xecltd.info/?rd=10

User avatar
bubba22349
Global Moderator
Posts: 6964
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Flagstaff, Az. 86005 near the old Route 66

Re: Watts Link Question

Post #18 by bubba22349 » Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:44 pm

:beer: this is turning into a good discussion! My question though is how much weight does the Mumfordd setup add to the chassis? I can see that it would likely be a good system for a road corse type car any pictures of on installed in a car? In my case the whole purpose of using the Watts Link system in my 1941 A/Gas Willys (Drag race only car) was to reduce the total weight as much as possible. I got it down to 1800 pounds during construction (this was dry no fuilds, wiring, and front clip wasn't painted) with the Ford FE, C6 , and 9 inch rear with coil spring combo. :thumbup:


A bad day Drag Racing is still better than a good day at work!

I am still hunting for a project car to build but with my current low budget it's not looking so good. My Ex- Fleet of Sixes these are all long gone! :bang: 1954 Customline 223 3 speed with O/D, 1963 Fairlane project drag car with BB6, 1977 Maverick 250 with C4, 1994 F-150 a 300 with 5 speed.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest