How a Cal-track works

[Jeff Lee]

Originally Posted by Tom Goldman

Shocks dampen movement .
They have nothing to do with suspending the car.

And that's what I meant without getting into the action of the shock. The rear of the springs does "suspend" the rear of the car. The "suspension" as I called it is the act of controlling the movement of the rear of the car suspended by a leaf spring in this case.

[gmonde]

you really cant say that its compared to a ladder bar ,or even a slapper bar ,,, it works more like a canter lever ,,,as the power is applied to the drive shaft the rear begins to rotate, at that point the lever action is moved to the pivot bell crank of the cal track witch loads the front of the spring where flexing takes place the most ,, even cars with big horse power the body has minimal separation from the tire ,,,it gives the rear a chance to rotate and hit the tire with out the shock of a slapper bar,not as solid as a ladder bar ,,, great design in my opinion ,, I am used to making my own stuff but ,it works gmonde

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

Barry, I'm still going with the ladder bar. I see the lower link that pushes, but I fail to see the upper link that will pull.
If I might clarify, I see the Cal-trac as a sophisticated form of a slapper bar, better able to control spring wrap up..thereby acting as a ladder bar.

Mark. To point I agree but...In my thinking... The front spring section is a link correct? From the housing to a pivot point (spring eye?. The lower CT section is also a link, correct? If it were all connected (ladder bar) at some point I would agree but it does not. In any case they work GREAT!

[Jeff Lee]

Trivia: Competition Engineering made the "slide-a-link" back in 1972 or so. A friend of mine has them on his '72 Demon 340 G/S (?) that hasn't changed since he built it from a new car in 1972. Based on that, I'm under the impression John Calvert borrowed the concept and improved on it by eliminating the soft spot in the middle of the bar.
Which begs the question; which version is better? Personally, I see no use for the urethane shock absorber in the middle of the bar. But I see there are some real fans of the design. It would be an interesting test on the same car. Anybody here try testing the two?

[Mark Yacavone]

Originally Posted by Barry Polley

Mark. To point I agree but...In my thinking... The front spring section is a link correct? From the housing to a pivot point (spring eye?. The lower CT section is also a link, correct? If it were all connected (ladder bar) at some point I would agree but it does not. In any case they work GREAT!

Nope..Don't think so.
Semantics aside, I'd say they constitute one link, all inclusive.
The "missing link" would have to be above the axle center line on the housing to function like a true 4 link.

[George Mirza]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lee

Trivia: Competition Engineering made the "slide-a-link" back in 1972 or so. A friend of mine has them on his '72 Demon 340 G/S (?) that hasn't changed since he built it from a new car in 1972. Based on that, I'm under the impression John Calvert borrowed the concept and improved on it by eliminating the soft spot in the middle of the bar.
Which begs the question; which version is better? Personally, I see no use for the urethane shock absorber in the middle of the bar. But I see there are some real fans of the design. It would be an interesting test on the same car. Anybody here try testing the two?

Jeff,
That would be an interesting test. I do know of one racer who switched for the slide a link to the Cal tracs and saw a major improvement.
I think the difference between the two is the slide a link will work with a steel multi leaf spring, where a Cal Trac works best with a mono leaf. From what I've seen, I'm yet to see a car with multi leaf srpings work like one with a mono leaf when using the Cal Trac set up. But I've seen some good working cars using Slide a links and multi leaf springs.
George (still using SS springs)

[B Parker]

Jeff the opposite is true. Cal Tracs came before slide o link. I had gone threw Moroso when they were designing the slide o link. Guess what was lying on the table. Are you sure your friend didn't have the Steve Hanby set up. Barry

[Lee Valentine]

Autofab in Maryland had a setup like Cal - Tracs in the late 80's early 90's I had them on my E/SA 68 Camaro with fiberglass Mono - Leafs.

[Tom Goldman]

They all owe their basic design to the ET Traction Master bars.
I had these on my first car in '69 , and they were around long before that !
One of my Uncles' had a set on his C/A '47 Ford in the early '60's
The newer bars have refined the adjustability and function, but the basic concept belongs to ET.

[Tom keedle]

Originally Posted by Tom Goldman

They all owe their basic design to the ET Traction Master bars.
I had these on my first car in '69 , and they were around long before that !
One of my Uncles' had a set on his C/A '47 Ford in the early '60's
The newer bars have refined the adjustability and function, but the basic concept belongs to ET.

thanks for the pic!
i'd heard of 'em but never seen one...how'd they work?

plan is (on my rambler) to try cal-tracs, slappers and just clamping the springs...this gives me one more thing to try