Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth
| [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth [message #183031] |
Mon, 03 September 2012 19:12  |
paul h cashman
Messages: 176
Registered: May 2005
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi all
One Question ,How did GM ,set Ride height at the factory ?
I'm sure they didn't make, a lot of trips out of the assembly line to set
ride height.
Paul Cashman
Riverdale GA
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Paul H Cashman
Riverdale Ga
1978 Transmode
1975 Corvette
1978 Beetle Convertible
1989 Harley Davidson Sportster
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth [message #183036 is a reply to message #183031] |
Mon, 03 September 2012 19:42  |
James Hupy
Messages: 6806
Registered: May 2010
Karma: -62
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Well now pilgrim, i have an idea about that. The front wheels have to be
setting on turn plates that can move side to side at least 6inches each.
Trust me on this, as I have become enlightened by experience. If I did not
have Jerry Work's turn plates, I would never have figured it out. When I
sat a coach back down on them, they slid sideways at least 4 inches each.
Kinda like a swing axle VW does when it is jacked off the ground. Your
coach will have to dissipate that energy by driving it if it is not
released somehow. That,s my story and I'm sticking to it
Jim Hupy
Salem, or...
On Sep 3, 2012 6:13 PM, "Paul Cashman" <paulcashman@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Hi all
>
> One Question ,How did GM ,set Ride height at the factory ?
>
> I'm sure they didn't make, a lot of trips out of the assembly line to set
> ride height.
>
>
>
> Paul Cashman
>
> Riverdale GA
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Handling vs ride height [message #183039 is a reply to message #183036] |
Mon, 03 September 2012 20:07 |
midlf
Messages: 2212
Registered: July 2007
Location: SE Wisc. (Palmyra)
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
| James Hupy wrote on Mon, 03 September 2012 19:42 |
Well now pilgrim, i have an idea about that. The front wheels have to be
setting on turn plates that can move side to side at least 6inches each.
Trust me on this, as I have become enlightened by experience. If I did not
have Jerry Work's turn plates, I would never have figured it out. When I
sat a coach back down on them, they slid sideways at least 4 inches each.
Kinda like a swing axle VW does when it is jacked off the ground. Your
coach will have to dissipate that energy by driving it if it is not
released somehow. That,s my story and I'm sticking to it
Jim Hupy
Salem, or...
On Sep 3, 2012 6:13 PM, "Paul Cashman" <paulcashman@bellsouth.net> wrote:
|
Jim - is it your feeling/experience that, with appropriate turn plates, the after ride hight drive to settle the suspension is not necessary?
Steve Southworth
1974 Glacier TZE064V100150 (for workin on)
1975 Transmode TZE365V100394 (parts & spares)
Palmyra WI
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Handling vs ride height [message #183041 is a reply to message #183039] |
Mon, 03 September 2012 20:12 |
James Hupy
Messages: 6806
Registered: May 2010
Karma: -62
|
Senior Member |
|
|
No, check drives are still necessary after you get it close, this will help
eliminate what we went through with Gary Berry,s coach.
Jim Hupy
Salem, or
On Sep 3, 2012 7:07 PM, "Steve Southworth" <midlf@centurytel.net> wrote:
>
>
> James Hupy wrote on Mon, 03 September 2012 19:42
> > Well now pilgrim, i have an idea about that. The front wheels have to be
> > setting on turn plates that can move side to side at least 6inches each.
> > Trust me on this, as I have become enlightened by experience. If I did
> not
> > have Jerry Work's turn plates, I would never have figured it out. When I
> > sat a coach back down on them, they slid sideways at least 4 inches
> each.
> > Kinda like a swing axle VW does when it is jacked off the ground. Your
> > coach will have to dissipate that energy by driving it if it is not
> > released somehow. That,s my story and I'm sticking to it
> > Jim Hupy
> > Salem, or...
> > On Sep 3, 2012 6:13 PM, "Paul Cashman" <paulcashman@bellsouth.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> Jim - is it your feeling/experience that, with appropriate turn plates,
> the after ride hight drive to settle the suspension is not necessary?
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Steve Southworth
> 1974 Glacier TZE064V100150 (for workin on)
> 1975 Transmode TZE365V100394 (parts & spares)
> Palmyra WI
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Handling vs ride height [message #183090 is a reply to message #183041] |
Tue, 04 September 2012 12:36 |
Keith V
Messages: 2337
Registered: March 2008
Location: Mounds View,MN
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
| James Hupy wrote on Mon, 03 September 2012 20:12 |
No, check drives are still necessary after you get it close, this will help
eliminate what we went through with Gary Berry,s coach.
|
But the question remains....
How did the factory set ride height?
did they drive it, set it drive it?
I doubt it.
there has to be a more manufacturing friendly solution...
Keith Vasilakes
Mounds View. MN
75 ex Royale GMC
ask me about MicroLevel
Cell, 763-732-3419
My427v8@hotmail.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth [message #183121 is a reply to message #183036] |
Tue, 04 September 2012 19:44 |
Ken Henderson
Messages: 8726
Registered: March 2004
Location: Americus, GA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jim,
Are you saying that the swivel plates Jerry's delivering now DO have
lateral as well as rotary freedom? I was concerned about that when he
originally announced his design which seemed to only rotate.
By the way, this morning Ted Petty and I aligned his front end. He's just
finished installing a rebuilt engine and front clip with 1-Ton. We used my
jigs, laser level, and polyethylene sheets w/Masonite for swivel plates.
It went quite well, but, as usual, the driving was critical.
It was obvious that his ride height was 'way off -- a ruler said 2" low.
After making a "rough" adjustment of 10 screw turns per side, we took a
several mile ride, then measured and calculated adjustments (at 6 screw
turns per ride height inch). We had <1" to correct on each side. His work
area required that we jack the coach to make the adjustments. We then took
another short ride, maybe only a couple of miles. When we re-checked the
heights, they were MORE than an inch off! So, with no more adjusting, we
went for a longer ride, maybe five miles, over an intentionally rough
route. The ride heights were then exactly where we'd hoped.
Despite the Caster-Camber-Toe rule, since he'd already set the eccentrics
for maximum caster and intermediate camber, and we could see that toe was
off, we started "backward" by adjusting toe first. After laser aligning
to parallel with the frame, we measured toe directly with 60" beams on each
side -- 5/32" of toe-in. That came out to ~0" by barely touching each of
the tie rod ends.
Camber measured at -0.2* on each side. We decided to leave that because
the coach was driving GREAT:
Hands-free except for road crown effects. He's going to watch tire wear
and other effects closely and adjust accordingly. To have tampered with it
while it's driving so well would not have been worth turning the bolts.
Nope, we didn't touch caster; didn't even measure it because we couldn't
get but a tad more (by going to positive camber), and it didn't seem
necessary "from the driving".
Ken H.
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 8:42 PM, James Hupy wrote:
> Well now pilgrim, i have an idea about that. The front wheels have to be
> setting on turn plates that can move side to side at least 6inches each.
> Trust me on this, as I have become enlightened by experience. If I did not
> have Jerry Work's turn plates, I would never have figured it out. When I
> sat a coach back down on them, they slid sideways at least 4 inches each.
> Kinda like a swing axle VW does when it is jacked off the ground. Your
> coach will have to dissipate that energy by driving it if it is not
> released somehow. That,s my story and I'm sticking to it
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Ken Henderson
Americus, GA
www.gmcwipersetc.com
Large Wiring Diagrams
76 X-Birchaven
76 X-Palm Beach
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Handling vs ride height [message #183125 is a reply to message #183090] |
Tue, 04 September 2012 20:11 |
Ken Henderson
Messages: 8726
Registered: March 2004
Location: Americus, GA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I'll bet in a production setting, it doesn't take long to have a pretty
good idea how much settling to expect. Then, there's that "Dealer Prep"
charge, for which customers MIGHT have gotten an after-driven check/set.
Ken H.
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Keith V wrote:
>
> But the question remains....
> How did the factory set ride height?
>
> did they drive it, set it drive it?
> I doubt it.
> there has to be a more manufacturing friendly solution...
> --
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Ken Henderson
Americus, GA
www.gmcwipersetc.com
Large Wiring Diagrams
76 X-Birchaven
76 X-Palm Beach
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth [message #183135 is a reply to message #183121] |
Tue, 04 September 2012 22:21 |
James Hupy
Messages: 6806
Registered: May 2010
Karma: -62
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ken, no. The plates have a backing material. Glued to the back that will
slip when enough pressure is applied. That is what happened when i lowered
a coach onto them. I don't think it was planned to do that.
Jim Hupy
On Sep 4, 2012 6:44 PM, "Ken Henderson" <hend4800@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Jim,
>
> Are you saying that the swivel plates Jerry's delivering now DO have
> lateral as well as rotary freedom? I was concerned about that when he
> originally announced his design which seemed to only rotate.
>
> By the way, this morning Ted Petty and I aligned his front end. He's just
> finished installing a rebuilt engine and front clip with 1-Ton. We used my
> jigs, laser level, and polyethylene sheets w/Masonite for swivel plates.
> It went quite well, but, as usual, the driving was critical.
>
> It was obvious that his ride height was 'way off -- a ruler said 2" low.
> After making a "rough" adjustment of 10 screw turns per side, we took a
> several mile ride, then measured and calculated adjustments (at 6 screw
> turns per ride height inch). We had <1" to correct on each side. His work
> area required that we jack the coach to make the adjustments. We then took
> another short ride, maybe only a couple of miles. When we re-checked the
> heights, they were MORE than an inch off! So, with no more adjusting, we
> went for a longer ride, maybe five miles, over an intentionally rough
> route. The ride heights were then exactly where we'd hoped.
>
> Despite the Caster-Camber-Toe rule, since he'd already set the eccentrics
> for maximum caster and intermediate camber, and we could see that toe was
> off, we started "backward" by adjusting toe first. After laser aligning
> to parallel with the frame, we measured toe directly with 60" beams on each
> side -- 5/32" of toe-in. That came out to ~0" by barely touching each of
> the tie rod ends.
>
> Camber measured at -0.2* on each side. We decided to leave that because
> the coach was driving GREAT:
> Hands-free except for road crown effects. He's going to watch tire wear
> and other effects closely and adjust accordingly. To have tampered with it
> while it's driving so well would not have been worth turning the bolts.
> Nope, we didn't touch caster; didn't even measure it because we couldn't
> get but a tad more (by going to positive camber), and it didn't seem
> necessary "from the driving".
>
> Ken H.
>
> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 8:42 PM, James Hupy wrote:
>
> > Well now pilgrim, i have an idea about that. The front wheels have to be
> > setting on turn plates that can move side to side at least 6inches each.
> > Trust me on this, as I have become enlightened by experience. If I did
> not
> > have Jerry Work's turn plates, I would never have figured it out. When I
> > sat a coach back down on them, they slid sideways at least 4 inches
> each.
> > Kinda like a swing axle VW does when it is jacked off the ground. Your
> > coach will have to dissipate that energy by driving it if it is not
> > released somehow. That,s my story and I'm sticking to it
> >
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth [message #183140 is a reply to message #183135] |
Tue, 04 September 2012 23:49 |
Ken Henderson
Messages: 8726
Registered: March 2004
Location: Americus, GA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
OK, So to allow for the inherent lateral and arcing movement of the tire
patch, the swivels probably should be placed on something like a stack of
polyethylene sheets, huh?
Ken H.
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 11:21 PM, James Hupy wrote:
> Ken, no. The plates have a backing material. Glued to the back that will
> slip when enough pressure is applied. That is what happened when i lowered
> a coach onto them. I don't think it was planned to do that.
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Ken Henderson
Americus, GA
www.gmcwipersetc.com
Large Wiring Diagrams
76 X-Birchaven
76 X-Palm Beach
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth [message #183153 is a reply to message #183140] |
Wed, 05 September 2012 07:46 |
James Hupy
Messages: 6806
Registered: May 2010
Karma: -62
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ken, I was thinking of something more like a bed installed below floor
height with caged ball bearings loose ones, to allow several inches of
lateral movement. I drew up sketches of what I think will work & when i
get the time....
Jim Hupy
Salem OR
78 GMC Royale 403
On Sep 4, 2012 10:50 PM, "Ken Henderson" <hend4800@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> OK, So to allow for the inherent lateral and arcing movement of the tire
> patch, the swivels probably should be placed on something like a stack of
> polyethylene sheets, huh?
>
> Ken H.
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 11:21 PM, James Hupy wrote:
>
> > Ken, no. The plates have a backing material. Glued to the back that will
> > slip when enough pressure is applied. That is what happened when i
> lowered
> > a coach onto them. I don't think it was planned to do that.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth [message #183164 is a reply to message #183153] |
Wed, 05 September 2012 08:42 |
Ken Henderson
Messages: 8726
Registered: March 2004
Location: Americus, GA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
That sounds fine for a fixed installation, but for portable use, poly
sheets seem to work well. I suppose the metal plates with grease between
them might be better -- but a whole lot more messy.
Ken H.
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:46 AM, James Hupy wrote:
> Ken, I was thinking of something more like a bed installed below floor
> height with caged ball bearings loose ones, to allow several inches of
> lateral movement. I drew up sketches of what I think will work & when i
> get the time....
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Ken Henderson
Americus, GA
www.gmcwipersetc.com
Large Wiring Diagrams
76 X-Birchaven
76 X-Palm Beach
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth [message #183172 is a reply to message #183031] |
Wed, 05 September 2012 09:38 |
JohnL455
Messages: 4447
Registered: October 2006
Location: Woodstock, IL
Karma: 12
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Greased poly sheets?? I have kit and plan to use before Amana. I can bring if I'm able to attend. Also 1 225 75 16 LRD Micheline rag on very nice 16" grey domed Steel Radial wheel.
John Lebetski
Woodstock, IL
77 Eleganza II
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth [message #183190 is a reply to message #183153] |
Wed, 05 September 2012 12:40 |
GMC_LES
Messages: 569
Registered: October 2009
Location: Montreal
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Have any of you guys seen how the professional alignment plates work? I
haven't seen them personally,but my father used to be a front end &
alignment specialist in the '60s. I asked him if ever had his swivel plates
apart. He said frequently to keep them clean and moving freely. He has seen
various different types of swivel plates but said the principles were the
same in all them
He described them as two square metal plates with a 3rd round plate
sandwiched between them. The center plate could be metal or plastic with a
large number of holes positioned in a circle. Bearing balls were placed in
these holes. The balls were slightly larger in diameter than the thickness
of the plate. The entire assembly was then liberally greased and assembled.
To keep the plates from moving or sliding when a vehicle was moved onto or
off of the plates, two pins were placed through the assembly in holes
located in the corners of the plate. These pins were removed once the
vehicle was in place. He said the better plates had more balls to
distribute the weight and reduce wear. Some designs had several
rows/circles of balls as well to reduce dishing of the plates. These plates
were designed to allow movement in any horizontal direction as well as
rotational movement, which is why you needed to install pins to imobilize
the plates. Some designs used a raised pin in the lower plate that was just
tall enough to engage the center plate without touching or passing through
the top plate. The center plate would have a large center hole (4-5") to
accomodate the pin & allow for large lateral movement while preventing the
swivel pad from skateboarding across the floor.
Perhaps this is what Jim had in mind as his "Bed" idea.
These plates could be made with a thickness of 1" or possibly less. A few
pieces of wood cut to fit around these plates could serve as a ramp so that
the plates have less tendancy to move when driving onto them.
I've been wanting to build my own set for several years now. This
discussion has put the idea back on my roundtoit list.
Thanks,
Les Burt
Montreal
'75 Eleganza II 26ft
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:46 AM, James Hupy <jamesh1296@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ken, I was thinking of something more like a bed installed below floor
> height with caged ball bearings loose ones, to allow several inches of
> lateral movement. I drew up sketches of what I think will work & when i
> get the time....
> Jim Hupy
> Salem OR
> 78 GMC Royale 403
> On Sep 4, 2012 10:50 PM, "Ken Henderson" <hend4800@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > OK, So to allow for the inherent lateral and arcing movement of the
> tire
> > patch, the swivels probably should be placed on something like a stack of
> > polyethylene sheets, huh?
> >
> > Ken H.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 11:21 PM, James Hupy wrote:
> >
> > > Ken, no. The plates have a backing material. Glued to the back that
> will
> > > slip when enough pressure is applied. That is what happened when i
> > lowered
> > > a coach onto them. I don't think it was planned to do that.
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GMCnet mailing list
> > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> > http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> >
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Les Burt
Montreal
1975 Eleganza 26ft
A work in Progress
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth [message #183213 is a reply to message #183190] |
Wed, 05 September 2012 15:26 |
Ken Henderson
Messages: 8726
Registered: March 2004
Location: Americus, GA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I've cut 12"x18" "tile board" (Melamine coated Masonite) pads to provide a
smooth surface on pavement. Put one of those in front of each front wheel
and place 3-4 similar sized sheets of 6 mil polyethylene on top of them.
Push the coach onto them. Aside from having to push the coach since
there's no way to lock the moving components together, it works great &
could hardly be cheaper.
Ken H.
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Les Burt wrote:
> Have any of you guys seen how the professional alignment plates work? ...
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Ken Henderson
Americus, GA
www.gmcwipersetc.com
Large Wiring Diagrams
76 X-Birchaven
76 X-Palm Beach
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth [message #183234 is a reply to message #183213] |
Wed, 05 September 2012 19:35 |
GMC_LES
Messages: 569
Registered: October 2009
Location: Montreal
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ken I totally agree that your method works well and can't. E beat regarding cost. My only problem is that most of us will be working outdoors where the poly is easily blown around. A few stones or weights cure that but I still like the idea of a proper tool to do the job. Many of us like our tools and trinkets!
Les Burt
Montreal
On 2012-09-05, at 4:26 PM, Ken Henderson <hend4800@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> I've cut 12"x18" "tile board" (Melamine coated Masonite) pads to provide a
> smooth surface on pavement. Put one of those in front of each front wheel
> and place 3-4 similar sized sheets of 6 mil polyethylene on top of them.
> Push the coach onto them. Aside from having to push the coach since
> there's no way to lock the moving components together, it works great &
> could hardly be cheaper.
>
> Ken H.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Les Burt wrote:
>
>> Have any of you guys seen how the professional alignment plates work? ...
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Les Burt
Montreal
1975 Eleganza 26ft
A work in Progress
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth [message #183267 is a reply to message #183031] |
Wed, 05 September 2012 23:15 |
Adrien G.
Messages: 474
Registered: May 2008
Location: Burns Flat, OK 73624
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Paul,
>>>>> One Question ,How did GM ,set Ride height at the factory ?
I'm sure they didn't make, a lot of trips out of the assembly line to set ride height. <<<<<<<
I think that it was set at a close general setting to make it drivable, because when I worked at a Chevy dealer in '69-'70, all new vehicles that arrived went through a front end alignment, along with a complete check over.
Some vehicles had a pile of bolts in the trunk, that caused us to search for their location, and we felt good if we found places for most of them.
Adrien & Jenny Genesoto
75 Glenbrook (26-3) Mods LS3.70 FD / Reaction Sys / 80mm Front&Intermidiate / Hydroboost / 16" Tires / Frame Rebuild / Interior Rebuild
Yuba City,Ca. Text 530-nine-3-three-3-nine-nine-6
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth [message #183385 is a reply to message #183190] |
Thu, 06 September 2012 15:05 |
James Hupy
Messages: 6806
Registered: May 2010
Karma: -62
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ken and Les, good description on both counts. I have used the Sioux and ez
liner turning plates, and what i am suggesting is for a permanent install.
I have no experience with greased garbage bags, but anything that allows
free movement should work. Some things might work better than others for
some people. My preference is for a known level surface like my shop floor.
Jwid
Jim hupy
Salem (currently at a rest area in Sheridan, wy, headed for billings MT by
tonight.)or.
On Sep 5, 2012 11:40 AM, "Les Burt" <gmc.les@gmail.com> wrote:
> Have any of you guys seen how the professional alignment plates work? I
> haven't seen them personally,but my father used to be a front end &
> alignment specialist in the '60s. I asked him if ever had his swivel plates
> apart. He said frequently to keep them clean and moving freely. He has seen
> various different types of swivel plates but said the principles were the
> same in all them
>
> He described them as two square metal plates with a 3rd round plate
> sandwiched between them. The center plate could be metal or plastic with a
> large number of holes positioned in a circle. Bearing balls were placed in
> these holes. The balls were slightly larger in diameter than the thickness
> of the plate. The entire assembly was then liberally greased and assembled.
> To keep the plates from moving or sliding when a vehicle was moved onto or
> off of the plates, two pins were placed through the assembly in holes
> located in the corners of the plate. These pins were removed once the
> vehicle was in place. He said the better plates had more balls to
> distribute the weight and reduce wear. Some designs had several
> rows/circles of balls as well to reduce dishing of the plates. These plates
> were designed to allow movement in any horizontal direction as well as
> rotational movement, which is why you needed to install pins to imobilize
> the plates. Some designs used a raised pin in the lower plate that was just
> tall enough to engage the center plate without touching or passing through
> the top plate. The center plate would have a large center hole (4-5") to
> accomodate the pin & allow for large lateral movement while preventing the
> swivel pad from skateboarding across the floor.
>
> Perhaps this is what Jim had in mind as his "Bed" idea.
>
> These plates could be made with a thickness of 1" or possibly less. A few
> pieces of wood cut to fit around these plates could serve as a ramp so that
> the plates have less tendancy to move when driving onto them.
>
> I've been wanting to build my own set for several years now. This
> discussion has put the idea back on my roundtoit list.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Les Burt
> Montreal
> '75 Eleganza II 26ft
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:46 AM, James Hupy <jamesh1296@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Ken, I was thinking of something more like a bed installed below floor
> > height with caged ball bearings loose ones, to allow several inches of
> > lateral movement. I drew up sketches of what I think will work & when i
> > get the time....
> > Jim Hupy
> > Salem OR
> > 78 GMC Royale 403
> > On Sep 4, 2012 10:50 PM, "Ken Henderson" <hend4800@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >
> > > OK, So to allow for the inherent lateral and arcing movement of the
> > tire
> > > patch, the swivels probably should be placed on something like a stack
> of
> > > polyethylene sheets, huh?
> > >
> > > Ken H.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 11:21 PM, James Hupy wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ken, no. The plates have a backing material. Glued to the back that
> > will
> > > > slip when enough pressure is applied. That is what happened when i
> > > lowered
> > > > a coach onto them. I don't think it was planned to do that.
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > GMCnet mailing list
> > > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> > > http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GMCnet mailing list
> > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> > http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> >
>
>
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Hndling vs ride heigth [message #183410 is a reply to message #183385] |
Thu, 06 September 2012 18:08 |
Ken Henderson
Messages: 8726
Registered: March 2004
Location: Americus, GA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jim,
You're certainly right to use ball bearing, lockable, recessed, swivel
plates in your shop. But for us now'n'then-ers, that's not practical. The
polyethylene sheets (or garbage bags) (NO grease necessary) make an
almost-as-good option.
Kind of a pain to have to push the coach onto them, but driving on is out
of the question. :-)
Ken H.
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 4:05 PM, James Hupy <jamesh1296@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ken and Les, good description on both counts. I have used the Sioux and ez
> liner turning plates, and what i am suggesting is for a permanent install.
> I have no experience with greased garbage bags, but anything that allows
> free movement should work. Some things might work better than others for
> some people. My preference is for a known level surface like my shop floor.
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Ken Henderson
Americus, GA
www.gmcwipersetc.com
Large Wiring Diagrams
76 X-Birchaven
76 X-Palm Beach
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Oct 04 19:27:57 CDT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.05086 seconds
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
