Re: [ihc] Scout II front end question

[Howard R Pletcher <n9ads@xxxxxxxx>]

The angle brackets for the inside shackles sound like the factory "sway
bar" mounting arrangement that became standard on 1/1/74, but the angle
iron between the shackles isn't the stock bar.  The stock bar was a flat
piece of steel, 3/8" x 2 3/4".  Depending upon the size of your angle, it
is likely stiffer than the stock bar.

It is interesting to note that while this was advertised as a sway bar,
the original intent of it was an anti-shimmy device.  During 1973, we had
a problem with a batch of ball joints that did not have enough internal
friction which permitted the knuckles to move too easily and under
certain conditions, a sustained shimmy would be experienced.  This would
stop only when the vehicle slowed drastically or stopped.  This shimmy
was caused by a bump or other input causing one wheel to turn to one side
side a small amount, the tie rod then pulling the other wheel, which in
turn would cause in input to the first wheel, and a sort of harmonic
oscillation would occur.  The bar between the shackles altered the
natural frequency of the front end enough to get away from the sustained
motion, but it sold better when it was called a sway bar.

Howard


On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 18:52:34 -0600 "John M. Adams" <jma@domain.elided>
writes:
> On my Scout, I have what I think is a PO modification to the front 
> end, but
> I'm not sure (still pretty new to me, remember...) If it is a mod, 
> it was
> done well, but it doesn't make sense to me that International would 
> have
> done it this way. I'll try to describe it:
> 
> There's a set of two angle brackets, each bolted to the inside of 
> the front
> spring shackles. Actually, the brackets take the place of the inside 
> halves
> of the shackle sets, replacing what is normally (?) a matching piece 
> of
> straight steel. (On the Scout 800, for instance, where the shackles 
> are on
> the front also, they're just two matching pieces, pinned top and 
> bottom.)
> Between these brackets, and bolted to their other surface (90 
> degrees to the
> shackle side surface), there's a piece of angle iron that runs 
> across the
> front of the Scout, connecting the two shackle sets in a more or 
> less rigid
> configuration.
> 
> The whole thing looks "professional" in terms of form and fit, but 
> when I
> look at it, I think "this is wrong". If one side's spring pack is
> compressing, and the other is extending, that rigid connection 
> between the
> two shackle sets will be contrary to their natural movement, right? 
> The
> angle iron will want to twist, and won't be able to. Not much 
> anyway... I
> wonder if the PO was trying to deal with a chronic alignment 
> problem, or
> maybe some bounce or sway, and this was his home-built anti-sway 
> "bar".
> 
> I also wonder if I'm wrong, and this is right, so can't declare with
> *confidence* that this was poorly designed... I have no other Scouts 
> to look
> at, so... digest wisdom appreciated!
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> John A.