Go back to home


We have detected that you are using ad blocking software.
The Classic Ford forum is made possible by ad revenue.
Please disable your ad blocker to ensure that this site lives on.

Hot!Ackerman angle help - I think.....

Author
Paul Dunstan
Supporter
  • Total Posts : 1316
  • Scores: 34
  • Reward points: 4311
  • Joined: 2011/08/01 11:02:49
  • Location: Adelaide SA Australia
  • Status: offline
2020/02/23 20:10:54 (permalink)
0

Ackerman angle help - I think.....

When moving the RS around the garage I've noticed the front tyres making quite the racket when on full lock and assumed the wheel alignment was way out. Did a rough check and all looked ok - within a couple mm.
When on full lock it appeared the inside wheel was not turning tight enough compared to the outside wheel - I could see from the tyre sidewall the load on the tyres was as if it had a heap of toe-in which it does not in the straight ahead position.
So that got me looking into steering and Ackerman angle. Going by some pretty crude measurement I only have approx. 3 deg difference in the angle of my front wheels when turned through 30 degrees - according to my research there should be at least 2 degrees for every 10 for a road car. Don't  get me wrong, the inside wheel is turning at a tighter angle than the outer but not the difference I expect. Drawing it up based on the Escort track and wheelbase I estimate I should have 6 degrees which agrees with my research. So my car has "anti" or reverse Ackerman as the inside tyre tries to follow a wider radius than what it should. This is fine for a race car with large lateral loads but I doubt it's ideal for a road car so it will be a pain to manoeuvre in tight places and may scrub tyres in real world driving.
I'm running Capri style struts and (what I assume) are Mk1 Escort steering arms which I may be mistaken. Please see the images below and if anyone has a clue then please enlighten me.
Is anyone else running the GAZ adjustable front struts and Escort steering arms - if so what has been your experiences?
Also, the car has no engine and is not at it's final ride height (approx. 25mm higher) and if this makes a difference (I'm thinking not)?
Or....am I just overthinking it (as usual) - no wonder this thing is a life long project
PS - Ignore the washers under the tie rod end nut as it's only a temporary thing.... 
post edited by Paul Dunstan - 2020/02/23 20:15:55

Attached Image(s)


Cheers

Paul
#1


5 Replies Related Threads

    BEEVEE
    Aficionado
    • Total Posts : 734
    • Scores: -5
    • Reward points: 2337
    • Joined: 2014/01/02 15:53:02
    • Location: MORNINGTON PENINSULA, melbourne
    • Status: offline
    Re: Ackerman angle help - I think..... 2020/02/24 22:18:44 (permalink)
    0
    "Kerb weight" is most necessary before any Steering Alignment can be diagnosed & adjusted, meaning all "normal" weight must be in car.  Your first guess was right !
    Lack of engine weight will throw all measurements way out. Even more so without box.

    "GOOD BETTER BEST: NEVER LET IT REST: UNTIL YOUR GOOD IS BETTER, AND YOUR BETTER, BEST"
    ( Furphy WW1 HORSE-DRAWN water-tank end-plates)
    #2
    Paul Dunstan
    Supporter
    • Total Posts : 1316
    • Scores: 34
    • Reward points: 4311
    • Joined: 2011/08/01 11:02:49
    • Location: Adelaide SA Australia
    • Status: offline
    Re: Ackerman angle help - I think..... 2020/02/24 23:43:28 (permalink)
    0
    Cheers. I’m sure it’s fine as I doubt I’m a pioneer in this field 😉

    Cheers

    Paul
    #3

    BEEVEE
    Aficionado
    • Total Posts : 734
    • Scores: -5
    • Reward points: 2337
    • Joined: 2014/01/02 15:53:02
    • Location: MORNINGTON PENINSULA, melbourne
    • Status: offline
    Re: Ackerman angle help - I think..... 2020/03/02 10:18:40 (permalink)
    0
    Paul
     
    why all the washers under TRE nut ? ........  None should be there, or one at the most.
     
    No threads are exposed giving doubt as to the nut's inbuilt tensioner being
     
    allowed to engage (Nyloc or "crimp-fit")
     
    Even lower BJ Nut appears compromised due to washer not allowing Nut to go down to Nyloc or crimp-fit to secure Nut.
     
    Bernie

    "GOOD BETTER BEST: NEVER LET IT REST: UNTIL YOUR GOOD IS BETTER, AND YOUR BETTER, BEST"
    ( Furphy WW1 HORSE-DRAWN water-tank end-plates)
    #4
    Paul Dunstan
    Supporter
    • Total Posts : 1316
    • Scores: 34
    • Reward points: 4311
    • Joined: 2011/08/01 11:02:49
    • Location: Adelaide SA Australia
    • Status: offline
    Re: Ackerman angle help - I think..... 2020/03/02 15:07:09 (permalink)
    0
    Washers there just during initial assembly so I could tighten the ball joint and not have to tighten the nylon nut all the time. Lazy. But will all be removed when finally assembled.

    There are no washers under the control arm ball joint nut. The nut tightens securely on the nylon material.

    Cheers

    Paul
    #5
    BEEVEE
    Aficionado
    • Total Posts : 734
    • Scores: -5
    • Reward points: 2337
    • Joined: 2014/01/02 15:53:02
    • Location: MORNINGTON PENINSULA, melbourne
    • Status: offline
    Re: Ackerman angle help - I think..... 2020/03/03 22:40:08 (permalink)
    0
    Well done  ......   no problemo !
     
    Another advantage is final tightening will be done on virgin nylon, thus tighter!
     
    (no pornography intended!); maybe?!

    "GOOD BETTER BEST: NEVER LET IT REST: UNTIL YOUR GOOD IS BETTER, AND YOUR BETTER, BEST"
    ( Furphy WW1 HORSE-DRAWN water-tank end-plates)
    #6
    Jump to:

    © 2020 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1