[DML] Re: Pearce Design Correction

["David Teitelbaum" <jtrealty@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I never took the joint apart so you are right, I do not want to spread
any misinformation. Anyway the ideal (if it can be achieved) is to
have a joint that fits onto an origional trailing arm (with minor
modifacations), can be captured in the event of a single point
failure, does not rely on 1 critical bolt, moves in 2 planes of
motion, and is compliant. The Pierce design comes close on most of
these points.
David Teitelbaum
vin 10757



-- In dmcnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Bryan Pearce <bryanp@...> wrote:
>
> David,
> 
> Your posting is incorrect regarding the design and operation of the  
> Pearce Design trailing arm mounting system.
> 
> You state that the Pearce Design doesn't have any compliance (rubber)  
> so it transmits vibration into the frame.  However, had you ever  
> driven a DeLorean with the new trailing arms or examined one, you  
> would be aware that rubber does isolate the Heim joint by capturing  
> each end of a Rear Control Arm Pin.  This is not apparent without  
> disassembling the joint.  A picture is worth a thousand words, so  
> please look at a drawing of the system:
> 
> http://www.pearce-design.com/TrailingArmMount.gif
> 
> Just to be clear, I don't THINK this design works, I KNOW it does.   
> The prototype frame and trailing arm system has over 120,000 miles on  
> it and several more production frames are accumulating miles every day.
> 
> If anyone has specific questions about this system or the PermaFrame  
> please feel free to contact me, understand the design or issue in  
> question, and then post accurate information to the DML.
> 
> Bryan Pearce
> 
> 
> On Mar 15, 2006, at 8:56 PM, David Teitelbaum wrote:
> 
> > I am familiar with the Pierce design. It requires a redesigned
> > trailing arm. I was asking out loud for a retrofit that could make use
> > (if possible) of the origional trailing arm while being able to use a
> > Heim Joint. The Pierce design doesn't not have any compliance (rubber)
> > so it  transmits vibration into the frame. The ideal joint would be
> > flexible in 2 planes of motion AND isolate the frame from road
> > vibration. It should also have a way to fail without letting the wheel
> > move too far out-of-place and not be subject to a single point failure
> > (1 bolt). It also has to be adjustable so you can set the thrust angle
> > of the rear wheels. A tall order which is why we have what we have! I
> > agree we can live with it but IMHO it is an item that should be
> > regularly inspected and if properly taken care of we can live with it
> > as it is.
> > David Teitelbaum
> > vin 10757
> >
> >
>









To address comments privately to the moderating team, please address:
moderators@xxxxxxxxxxx

For more info on the list, tech articles, cars for sale see www.dmcnews.com

To search the archives or view files, log in at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnews 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnews/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    dmcnews-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/