![]() ![]() Under the hood, the Italien had the much-loved 390 cubic-inch V8 engine fitted with a rare tri-power carburetor setup with finned cast aluminum air cleaner used on M-code production cars. ![]() The result was a true showstopper, and the Italien ended up being one of the most popular cars on tour at the time. The exterior was finished in an eye-catching, deep Candy Apple Red hue, a color that evokes power, speed, and boldness. New front fenders and doors from a 1963 Thunderbird, a Ferrari-inspired egg-crate grille that partially concealed the turn signals, a chrome-plated hood molding, and no less than 80 custom trim pieces made the donor vehicle almost unrecognizable.Īdditionally, the interior was customized with bucket seats front and rear, luxurious leather upholstery, faired-in rear seat headrests, and chrome-plated moldings. The car received a dramatic fastback roofline for greater aerodynamics, and fiberglass was used instead of steel to reduce weight. The vehicle started life as a standard 1962 Thunderbird convertible and was subsequently remodeled at the Dearborn Steel Tubing (DST) facility in Michigan based on the drawings sent by Ford Styling. This is the 1963 Ford Thunderbird Italien, a one-off show car developed by Ford Styling and built by long-time Ford prototype and show car supplier Dearborn Steel Tubing (DST) specifically for exhibition as part of the Custom Car Caravan, a Ford factory tour that visited the Autoramas and major dealers between 19. Obviously the thought of negative consequences of such an alteration hasn't stopped anyone from doing either of these over the past 60-odd years.Ford made over 4.4 million units over the model's lifespan, but the car you see pictured here might be the most famous Thunderbird ever. Now when it comes to modifying front springs to lower a car, I'm sure there are also sound engineering and safety reasons why not to do this at all, but they're not coming to the front of my mind at the moment. Granted, I'm sure Eaton's rep has a somewhat jaundiced view of this since they're in the business to manufacture and sell springs, but from an engineering standpoint it makes all the sense in the world to the lowly architect that I am. The recommendation the person from Eaton Spring had was, as Novanutcase suggested, dearching the spring, or having a new spring made to the specifications you need for your adjusted ride height. Altering a driveline's geometry may result in lovely little things happening like premature U-joint or differential gear/bearing wear/failure, maybe even binding in a severe situation. This isn't even considering the change in angle in the driveshaft between the output shaft at the rear of the transmission and the front input yoke of the differential gear carrier (it's typically preferred to have a slight (3-degree) angle in the driveshaft). In short, you're creating a lever for the axle housing that allows it to pivot/move further than if it was sitting directly on top of the spring, especially during acceleration/spring wind-up. Lowering blocks were a low-buck, backyard engineering-type of modification that, while easy and simple to do, may end up presenting more problems than you're aware of. I watched a web video on automotive restoration/modification over the weekend via a link on The Lincoln Forum that had a person from Eaton Spring advising NOT to use lowering blocks as this alters the geometry and creates a fulcrum (?) between the spring and axle center-line.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |