Adjustable front T-L link

[WCraigH]

Despite the "interestng" thread about RO's oil pump, here's another interesting topic (I hope).

ADJUSTABLE FRONT T-L LINKS. We've had several threads before about T-L including the number of notches marked on T-L links which proclaim their length. What I think we need is a "kit" which would be 1955 or 1956 specific which would be adjustable. That way, one could compensate for sag in the T-L bars (like I have in my 55 Pat) and also set the static height as one wants.

What's the interest out there in such a kit? I'll pioneer it, but the initial number of kits will determine the $$$. It shouldn't be to bad anyway, except that one would have to supply the T-L struts, like one has to supply the oil pumps for referb.

[Jack Harlin]

CRAIG

Two lengths of ALL thread rod & a turn buckel shouldnt cost very much, plus the heat treatment. Great idea Craig, wish I had thought of it. Jack

[WCraigH]

Packard-friendly town of Pahrump, NV has gotten me connected with "Pahrump Valley Machine" which is a small, but seemingly competent commercial machine shop here. In a few days, I should have the front T-L struts from my Panther converted to adjustable ones. I'll post JPGs at that time. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Guest imported_PackardV8]

try for the maiximum range of adjustment possible.

[WCraigH]

All:

Adjustable Torsion-Level link (1956 varient)

Of course the center sleeve can be made any reasonable length. The maxium overall length is fixed by the minimum thread engagement (about 3/4"). Note the flat in the middle of the sleeve (also one on the opposite side). This should allow adjustment on the car, but I won't know if this actually possible until I install them.

The front links off my 55 Pat are coming off tomorrow morning and going to the machine shop. The machine shop is willing to do a pair at a time, but larger quantities would reduce the cost somewhat, if anyone else is interested.

[RO]

Yep, I'll be following this thread because my Patrician has overall sag, but I am more interested in this Clipper Custom which sags a little to the passenger side the total length of the car.....not much, but it is noticeable. AND, I'll be gald to get away from oil pumps real soon I hope.

[Guest]

With all these threads about the 55 & 56 Packards and thier problems. Oil pumps, lifters, torsion leveling problems, and engines noises. Makes my problem with the Detroit ujoint look kind of mild. Thats why I like owning a high pockets Packard. Graig I saw you post about the Packard grilles, the bumpers on the 55 & 56's look like they should be wearing a BRA. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Guest imported_PackardV8]

Craig; thats fine looking piece of eng'ring. Are they set up for 55 or the 56 TL. There was a change in the radius ground on the TL links for 56.

How are they made?????? Are they made from stock TL links????? OR is ALL of it manufactured as NEW???

[Guest Randy Berger]

I would guess that regardless of center-link length the cost would be about the same for a pair. What is your guesstimate for a pair?

YFAM, Randy Berger

[WCraigH]

PackardV8: I had this first pair made from the stock T-L links for my 1956 Panther (nee Clipper). That way, the curve on each end is correct since it is unaffected. The sleeve is made from mild steel. The thread is the maximum diameter possible given the original link diameter.

Randy: The cost right now is $90/pair, material included. Your local machine shop could duplicate it, but the setup charge for a one-off would probably at least double that price. If you or anyone else sends your links to me, you're looking at additional $ for shipping to/from and gas money to/from the shop.

[bernardi]

Craig -

If you are gathering names for a run of front T-L links, please put mine on it. I hope it won't be necessary to send core links, at least for awhile. My car is in storage, must be moved in another month or two. I won't be able to get the links off before then.

Bernardi

[WCraigH]

Here's the difference between 1955 and 1956 T-L links:

1955 Link top, 1956 adjustable link bottom

1955 bottom retainer left, 1956 bottom retainer right

Packard flipped the orientation of the link in 1956 as can be seen by comparing bottom retainers. Also, the grease seal on the top in 1955 was omitted in 1956.

Adjustable Torsion-Level link installed

Notice the chain retaining the T-L load arm. Here's some clearer shots of the chain setup from my Panther:

chain wrapped around load arm

chain attached to top shock hole

I attached the chain a little differently this morning, using a 1/2-inch threaded rod with thick washers and nuts on the top part connecting to a chain looped around the load arm. However, the method shown above is no doubt stronger and I would recommend that if you don't have the Packard tool.

The link [color:"red"]IS adjustable once installed and loaded. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[WCraigH]

This morning I re-installed the original (but overhauled) driver side front lower control arm on my 55 Pat. For the last two years, the Pat has had the Panther's lower control arms and shocks installed. Since the Panther front suspension is going back on soon, I had to get its control arms and shocks off the Pat since 1955 and 1956 lower control arms are different (shock mount) as previously discussed on this forum.

A few things about the swap out that probably are of interest to this forum:

I borrowed a replica of Packard tool J-6065 from Packard-buddy Chris in Texas with the idea of using it for this work and then duplicating it for future work before returning it. The problem with this version of the tool is that it doesn't hold the front load arm high enough:

J-6065 replica in place with lower control arm swung down

The problem with my situation is the adjustable T-L front load arm links. They are longer than stock (which was the point of course). With the load arm in the position shown, the link will not come out. Of course, it came loose when I removed the four retaining nuts on the lower inside and dropped the lower control arm down but while still retained by the lower king pin cross bolt.

To get it re-installed, I had to use the shortest adjustable link I had in "full short" position and I also had to remove the upper rebound rubber. Now that it's back together, I can retain the T-L load arm with a chain as before and get enough clearance to install the longer link.

If you look carefully at the picture, you'll see that there's maybe a 1-inch gap where the J-6065 replica grabs the frame and the top of the load arm. If I had the retaining hole for the cross bolt drilled about 1/2" higher, this will close up the gap and will probably solve the problem, at least I hope so.

Does anyone know if the "real" J-6065 hugs the load arm with no gap? The illustrations (drawings) in the service manual indicate a snug fit.

One other thing: the rubber insulator between the lower control arm and the link retainer was split and pretty worn.

worn link retainer insulator

I had installed a new one from Kanter when I did the disc brake conversion about 2-1/2 years ago. I'm not happy about the wear characteristics, to say the least. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

I only got the driver side done this AM because by noon it was approaching 100F here in Pahrump, NV and despite the swamp cooler running full blast, it was too dang hot to work in the garage anymore! I should get the other side swapped out tomorrow AM and then get the front end re-aligned the next AM. Also, except for that worn insulator everything else including the disc brakes looked great. Hopefully the passenger side will be likewise. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Guest Randy Berger]

Craig, glad to see you're making headway. My repro J-6065 is a much closer fit than yours. I'm assuming Berg made yours also?? In looking at mine when I installed new link insulators, there is a good deal of room IN THE FRAME to put a one-inch or two-inch block of steel and rest the nose of the tool on that block rather than just the frame. The force applied would keep the block in place. One other thing I did was to engage the T/L system to raise the rear end and subsequently lower the front. This would allow room to insert the block I spoke of in the frame.

I just installed new link insulators from Steele ($30.00 a pair) and hope to get as good as use as originals (Ha!, as Jack Harlin would say). One of my originals (pass. side) still looked pretty good. It may have been replaced some time before 1972. I would make a new bottom U-shaped piece with hole in different location to get rid of the "gap". I still think a heavy block of steel to rest the nose on would accomplish your goal.

Don't complain about the heat - it was below 55degrees here today and I'm not ready for winter yet.

YFAM, Randy Berger

[WCraigH]

Thanks Randy! Another great suggestion by a regular contributor to this chat forum. Ya gotta luv it.

As a matter of detail, the J-6065 replica that Chris sent me does not appear to be a "commercial grade" tool. Besides it was freely loaned. I will dup it and fix the thru-bolt hole location to get the desired results.

In the meantime, your suggestion gives me an immediate solution without having to resort the cumbersome chains or wait on my machine shop for duplication.

This is the kind of info that is invaluable to us "hard core" hobbyists. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Guest imported_PackardV8]

I am guessing:

That the factory tool j-6065 is NOT really a special made tool at all but is rather a MODIFIED load arm that acts as a tool. Look at the tool closely and it appears to be a load arm with the pivot section cut off and the link socket tip cut off.

[Guest imported_PackardV8]

Craig:

flip the special tool upside down and set it along side of the load arm to see where it best fits as a pattern.

[Guest Randy Berger]

PackardV8, NO, it is a special tool. The load arm is a forging that looks like an I-beam from the profile. The tool is a solid block of steel. I had to slide the tool up and in till the hole was lined up and then insert the pin. Being able to engage the TL to move the front end down was a great help.

YFAM, Randy Berger

[WCraigH]

Brian:

You're exactly right about getting enough room to fit the longer links. I could not get enough room with the J-6065 tool, even shimmed (bigger shims kept being forced out due to a slight slope on the chassis lip). I ended up using the chain, but had to disconnect the front sway bar from the A-arm and remove the upper snubber to get enough total movement. In addition to using the T-L to raise the rear, I had to jack the lower arm at it's outer extremity to get enough leverage to force the load arm up higher. After all that, I was barely able to get a 1-inch longer than original longest (4 ring, 5" overall, now 6" overall) installed, but installed it is!

What I ended up using for the chain setup was: 2 X 9-link 3/8" chain (NOT 1 long chain in a loop like on my Panther), 2 X 3"-1/2 course thread bolts, 3 x 7/16" flat washers. At the top no flat washer was used where the bolt goes thru the chains into the shock tower hole. In addition, one extra link on each chain was left hanging loose, i.e., I engaaged the 2nd links. The interfernce by the end links shortens the chain a little, i.e., 2 x 8-link chains could be used, but would be longer at the bottom. On the bottom the 3" 1/2 bolt connects the two ends on each side of the torque arm just inside the cup end of the arm. The force on the arm is taken directly by the bolt (which is horizontal), not by the chains, although they are in tension, of course. I used grade 5 bolts, but you could use grade 8 to have more margin of safetly.

Anyway, after all this fooling around, I was only able to button up the driver side and it's starting to heat up again, so I'll defer the passenger side until tomorrow early AM. One nice thing about the collector car hobby is that you can make your own schedule.

[Guest Randy Berger]

Brian, thanks for setting me straight on the look of an original tool - I was just going by the illustrations in the manual. I'll have a better pic in my mind if I ever run across an original.

YFAM, Randy

[WCraigH]

Brian:

My 55 Pat was lower on the driver side by about 1-inch compared to the passenger side and the passenger side was about 1/2 inch lower than the "standard" height, i.e., 10-inch measured from the ground to the "flat section near the outer edge on the bottom of the body side sill directly below the center pillar post" (presuming 4dr), per tsb55T-1 dated Jan 17, 1955.

In my case, the 6-inch (may need some fine adjustment later) link met the above measurement. The passenger side T-L link is about 1-inch shorter in length (final length to be adjusted).

So, I have concluded that both main T-L bars have relaxed over the years and to bring my Pat back to "standard height, both links must be longer, although different and certainly longer than the longest factory link.

I agree with you about the convenience and ease of use of the J-6065 tool. To get finer and greater load arm retention, Packard-Buddy Paul's "J" shaped tool is in order. It's threaded so you can crank on it as necessary. But, you've got to remove some components like the driver side vent tube (which requires removing the battery and its holder) or the generator in order to get access.

The chain retention is kinda scary. You've got your hands and fingers up in the bowels of the front suspension and if something lets go, they are [color:"red"] crunched! However, strong jack stands strategically placed pretty much alleviate that possibility, at least I've never had an embarassing moment...but I'm conservative when it comes to use of jack stands.

[Guest imported_PackardV8]

ok. So the special tool IS special made. BUT, after looking closely at the pic that Craig posted above it sure looks to me like such a special COULD be made from a load arm with just a little bit of hack saw work. No????

[WCraigH]

All: I got the passenger side swapped out this AM. I used the chain from the get-go. Also, having gotten my procedure down, it took about 2 hours less. For edification, I took some digital snaps of the important points:

Two chains, bolts, nuts and washer arrangement

To get maximum upward suspension movement:

Sway Bar disconnected, lower snubber removed

Chain attached at top shock hole

Chains joined with bolt under Load Arm

My Pat now sits about 9-1/2" from the ground to the lower sill and is even within 1/4" side-to-side. Good enough for right now. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[1955packard]

Craig,

I used this tool only once to take the load off the T/L arms to rebuild the upper A-Arm bushings on my Constellation. It worked ok for this application. I bent the clevis bracket with my torch, vise and hammer and drilled it with a drill press. I didn?t have original drawings to follow nor had I ever used one of the factory tools so the outcome didn't turn out to the tolerances it should.

I can see that the clevis bracket holes should be closer to the arm to allow a tighter fit to the T/L arm thus raising the arm higher. The clevis bracket holes could be welded closed and re-drilled to allow a tighter fit. If additional height is needed a shim or bolt of the required spacing could be welded to the nose of the tool to lift the tool higher in relationship to the frame, thus raising the T/L arm up also. Feel free to modify the tool if you wish. I believe the basic design is sound, it just needs tweaked a little to get it right.

It would be great not to have to use a chain setup to hold the T/L arms up high enough to replace the T/L links.

Good luck with your project and put me on the list for a set of adjustable T/L links.