Looking for pictures of the new 4x2 TwinIBeam.
I have a 65 f100 and just find it freaking crazy they brought back this old idea. Is it good, that is opinion, I just want to see how they re-invented it.

God save the F250 if they decide to make it 4x4 again, ouch.
It was the solid 2x4 platform for 30 years (only like 15 in 4x4).

I like the idea of making new what once was old and all, but I never heard folks who LIKED the TwinI and concerned it might be TOO SOON to bring something back like that. Like bringing back plad, or mullets, or bellbottom pants. These things might have been hip in their day, but when you look back (if you are old enough to look back) you think...wow that stuff sucked.

If you are going to bring back something that worked - how about PUSHROD MOTORS, Like maybe the 300 I6 for god-sakes...put these v6'res out of their missery in one foul swoop. Hell, just make it a OHC to make it look like its new. Man, that would be great.

I digress...
Got any pics? I can't find any on Google.

 

What's next, handcrank starters and carbide headlights?

 

Twin-I-Beam introduced in 1965 F100/250 2WD / 1966 F100 4WD (first year that F100 4WD's have coil spring front suspension) / 1967 F350 (all 2WD until 1979).

Self starter invented by Charles Kettering of DELCO, first installed in 1912 Cadillac. Later on in the decade, GM purchased DELCO, made Kettering their Chief Engineer.

 

I bought a new 1965 F100 with the twin I beam. It was a disaster with two or three attempts by Ford to make it drive and not wear the tires. Ford finally sent it out to a big truck alignment shop and that shop figured out what was needed to make it drive and not wear tires. Ford truck fine after that initial fiasco. I've owned lots of twin I beam Fords thru F350s since and they've all been good.

 

My dad got to meet him about 1946, Mr. Kettering was a consultant to the U.S. Navy who was experimenting with U boat type snorkels on American submarines. It wasn't going very well.

 

Very interesting, thanks for posting this historical info.

The snorkels worked well on the few U-Boats that had them.

By January 1945, Doenitz' U-Boats had been decimated by USN 'hunter-killer' groups, the Brits had broken the Enigma 4 rotor machine codes, so we were reading all their messages.

Alan Turing, working at Bletchley Park invented the first computer to break the 4 rotor Enigma machine codes. It was massive, with 100's of vacuum tubes.

The Brits were reading the 3 rotor Enigma machine codes since 1941 (they captured a U-Boat with the Enigma and all the code books), but all of a sudden, the Germans added a 4th rotor.

The Germans never discovered that their codes had been broken. I can just imagine their shock...when they found out.

 

Did the enigma win the war?
What if?

Anyway, no pics huh?

 

The huge engines - 4 × Fairbanks-Morse Model 38-⅛ 10-cylinder opposed piston diesel engines driving electrical generators on his boat (dad was a radar guy) would suck much of the air out of the boat almost instantly when a wave would crash over the snorkel, causing rapid pressure altitude changes. He said his ears would bleed. He never could hear very well after the Navy lol.

The periscope wouldn't work right while underway using the diesel engines and snorkel, too much water pressure. So some genius loosened the bolts so it would turn easier. Except, now it leaks. Normally periscope duty is a pretty good gig. Suddenly, when cold seawater is running down your back well, now it's the lowliest enlisted man's job till we get it figured out. Funny, that.

They did have a nickel slot machine somebody stole I think from Atlantic city or somewheres, in the control room. They used the monies collected as a hard luck fund for the sailors or somesuch. But, when the boat was in drydock for maintenance a civilian contractor lost his entire paycheck playing, wifey calls base commander, and that, as they say, was the end of that. Oops. I would pay money to hear that conversation. "Slot machine.. what!?!?"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grea..._Power_Program

 

Breaking the German Enigma codes helped win the war in the ETO (European Theater of Operations). It had little to do with the Pacific Theater.

In the Pacific, the US and to a lesser degree, the Brits, also benefited by the breaking of a code, thanks to the Japanese Ambassador to Germany.

Prior to the US involvement in WWII, the USN had broken the Japanese Ambassador's code.

The machine used to break this code was known as MAGIC. The Japanese never made any changes, so the messages were read initially by the US, then the Brits were made privy.

Hiroshi Oshima, the Japanese Ambassador to Germany, broadcast daily summeries of his conversations with Hitler, Von Ribbentrop and/or other members of the Diplomatic Corps.

We read every message!

 

Back to the topic, I can't believe Ford stuck with 'Twin-I-Beam' on the 4X2 2017 Super Duty. I will not won a truck so equipped, period. Rides bad, handles bad, and wears out tires fast.

 

As I recall the early 4x2 Twin I Beam king pin bushings would wear no matter how much grease was applied. I had a '71 half ton. Often times destroyed the axle trying to replace the king pin. And the trunions had to be bored to accept oversize bushings after wear through of the original. Alignment of the bore next to impossible to maintain accuracy. And then when they were correct, load the truck and the camber went askew. And then the front springs would sag with age and the front end was always at a jaunty angle.

And then there was the 4x4 with the Twins. Not much can be said positive about that experiment in disaster. Go out and realign a normal A arm suspension with a negative camber and see how it drives. That should explain a lot to those who never saw or played with the twin I 4x4.

Please oh please do not ever change the solid front axle unless a truly better idea is developed.

 

Thanks for the info on "Boss Kett" who started at National Cash Register and was one of the founders of DELCO. History Channel chronicles many of his other inventions here:
Charles F. Kettering, inventor of electric self-starter, is born - Aug 29, 1876 - HISTORY.com

 

I agree the twinI was an alignment disaster, and when worn out it was quite floppy...however the RIDE was always smooth IMO.

This is why I want to see how they made it BETTER....Like, an ability to align with oversized concentric ball joints, or swappable balljoint bushings (pretty keen idea, and very basic, I would hope they thought of it)

Im not sure what their game is....as I am sure the TwinI is more expensive than just the solid axle and spindles.

and to jump ship again...I sure hope they find a way to plop an Expedition EL onto the frame - seeing that the body is the F150 - get with the program Ford. We want the Excursion back!

 

I just posted this pic on the picture thread but thought you might like an insight to the next version Excursion:

 

My '71 rode great. Front tire wear was pathetic. 2 sets of front springs in 100K miles.

The difficulty comes in the basic concept of maintaining correct road surface contact at all phases of loading and spring compression. No one wants to visit an alignment shop a couple of times a year due to the spring fatigue. And no one wants to visit the tire store more often than necessary either. I understand the design that puts the axis of the I beam as far away from the fulcrum as possible and that creates a small angle change to the pavement. Unequal A Arm suspensions do have some change as well. It would be interesting to hear a FOMOCO suspension engineer comment.