Survey on Hassler shocks

[RGould1910]

What are the pros and cons of Hassler shocks? Ie, do they aid in cornering? Do they provide a smoother ride,. Etc etc Input appreciated.

[Steve Jelf]

Good question. I believe I have some in my auction plunder, but I've never put them on a car. Should I?

[Darren J Wallace]

There was a front set on my 13 when I brought it back to our family, ran it that way for about a year. Took them off with a front axle rebuild. Notice no difference.

[Erik Johnson]

Hasslers are incredibly ugly and detract from the looks of the car.

They are neither sleek nor sporty - they look cumbersome.

My unrestored 1917 roadster had a set of Hasslers that were installed by the original owner. I took them off after I acquired the car.

[got10carz]

I feel they do nothing for the ride on cars with clincher tires. The harsh ride comes from the 60 pounds of tire pressure. I do think on ballon tires it will smooth out bigger bumps.

[NealW]

Our 21 touring came with them installed and our 15 runabout did not. I have driven both on the same day and similar routes, and I can tell you that the 21 with Hassler shocks has a noticeably smoother ride. Some of the difference may possibly be due to the lighter body of the runabout, but it is a smoother ride. It also feels a little different going around a corner. Not saying better or worse, but a bit different.

[Rich Eagle]

I liked the looks of the ones on my '25 touring when I bought it. I remember they smoothed out going over the railroad tracks but kept the car bouncing for a block or so after. They made that car sit a little higher.
I haven't used any since the '70s
Rich

[Jerry VanOoteghem]

Hasslers are incredibly ugly and detract from the looks of the car.

They are neither sleek nor sporty - they look cumbersome.

My unrestored 1917 roadster had a set of Hasslers that were installed by the original owner. I took them off after I acquired the car.

I agree 100%

They also add unsprung weight to the chassis. I've also seen where they seem to alter the front end geometry in a negative way, (maybe other factors, such as wear and improper assembly are to blame here. Can't say.).

[Mark Gregush]

I had rear only on my 1921 Huckster. I found they did help esp going around corners and speed bumps. I never saw the need for them on front, that spring is pretty stiff to start with. If I install a set on my 25 cutdown, I will do the same and only mount on the rear. My 1920 Dodge has them on the rear and I have a set for the front if and when I swap out the wrong springs and axle. Not sure how and if they add un-sprung weight? They aren't that heavy and are springs.

[RajoRacer]

Been on the front of my Racer for near 30 years and being's my front axle sticks out a foot beyond stock, it rides & corners nice. Wife's '25 Coupe sported a full set for 20 years - she enjoyed the ride & the looks !

[John Warren]

I had a set on my 26 Canadian touring when I purchased it. I also didn't re-install them during a front axle rebuild. I did like the looks, but they needed some work, and I haven't done that yet.

[HPetrino]

I've seen photos of Hasslers on the front axle of a TT. Made me laugh. TT rear springs are so stiff that, when empty, it rides like a bronco. Hasslers on the front are pretty much irrelevant.

[ModelTWoods]

I had a full set of Beehives on my 16 touring, I never noticed any negative effects, but I can't say there were positive effects, either. I have a complete set of front Beehives, presently that I intend to sell, plus possibly some odds and ends. I also, have a set of the pancake Hasslers that I plan to put on my 27 coupe unless the rears won't work with Rocky Mountains. I think that I remember reading that pancake Hasslers can't be used with Rockies. Can anyone confirm this?

[DanTreace]

My 1925 touring is fitted with pancake Hasslers, front and rear, has been since 1981. And still on.

I like the ride with the Hasslers, sorta baby buggy like.

When you ride over rail tracks it is apparent these work. My '23 doesn't have them and I can tell a ride difference over the same set of tracks.

[A Whiteman]

TT Truck:

These are a 'flat' pancake style. As the bushes were worn, I took them off. Now rebuilt with new springs I have not yet reinstalled them. Anecdotal reports from club local members about excessive bouncing put me off, but I may try one day.

[George House]

I don’t think it was coincidence that Ford used a sedan in his ad. I think they help topheavy body styles in cornering. Tourings and roadsters not so much.

[TRDxB2]

I had a full set of Beehives on my 16 touring, I never noticed any negative effects, but I can't say the were positive effects, either. I have a complete set of front Beehives, presently that I intend to sell, plus possibly some odds and ends. I also, have a set of the pancake Hasslers that I plan to put on my 27 coupe unless the rears won't work with Rocky Mountains. I think that I remember reading that pancake Hasslers can't be used with Rockies. Can anyone confirm this?

I found this
Appears that they fit original RM but not repro RM
http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/11 ... 1265304010
This is the rear Pancake bracket. The rear hub is not in place, but you can see the bracket, it fits to the rear backing plate where the std. perch mount fits. But, this bracket also 'over hangs' the rear drum, pretty tight tolerance, but it fits ok...

rear.jpg (71.66 KiB) Viewed 3767 times

rocky3.jpg (70.66 KiB) Viewed 3767 times

.except when you put on the new RM external brakes. There is enough clearance for the drum, but the repro RM brakes have that spring bracket at the top, that can interfere with the pancake bracket. [/i]

rocky2.png (480.56 KiB) Viewed 3767 times

other info
Hassler Pancakes with Rocky Moutains http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/80 ... 1260070485

Re: will pancake hasslers bolt to the rear of a big drum ruxtel
Unread post by Wilbur » Wed Feb 27, 2019 5:38 pm
i have pancake Hasslers both front and rear on my 1924 Tudor with a Ruckstell rear axel. Just installed the new AC brakes. All fits and works well.

[Humblej]

I have always liked the look of hasslers, and as a kid with accessory fever I wanted to add them to my T, but cost prohibited acquiring them. Years later with a degree in mechanical engineering and vehicle suspension experience, I can look at the Hassler shocks with a more Newtonian eye and am very interested in reading personal accounts of driving with Hasslers and comparisons of driving with and without them. From a physics standpoint, adding a spring to a spring is still a spring, with all the properties of a spring, and no properties of what we now call a shock absorber. Clearly a hundred years ago a "shock absorber" as touted in the Hassler ad, is not a shock absorber by todays definition, but literally a spring to react to a shock force, ie bump in the road. What we think of as a shock absorber today is a "dashpot", a device to slow down the spring travel thereby dampening the spring. Taking an example of a bobble head doll, the spring allows the head to bob back and forth repeatedly after a single impulse. Adding another spring to the bobble head will either increase or decrease the bobbing action, but the bobbing action is still present. Add a dashpot and the spring force will be offset by a resistance to movement that will cause the bobble head to reduce the number and amplitude of the bobbing. A true modern definition of a shock absorber allows the suspension spring to take a bump in the road but applies a resistance to the spring to keep it from bobbing up and down repeatedly. My model T suspension experience was changed one time when I redid my front springs and added slip plate between the spring leaves. until the slip plate had a time to wear in, the front end took bumps in the road better but continued to bounce wildly like driving over a dirt road washboard. clearly the unlubricated front springs acted as a dashpot to slow the spring force of the leaf springs, but still not a ride we get with a modern hydraulic shock absorber. Hasslers, love them or leave them, I will not be adding them to my car, but will continue to admire how they look when I see them, and continue to be amused at how many accessories were introduced claiming to improve the performance or reliability of the Model T and how many made fortunes doing it. I guess time and history is the ultimate judge, where is Hassler today, and where is Monroe today.

[StevenS]

Add Hassler Shocks to the list of "what oil to use in my Model T", "the best bands for my transmission", "the best spark plugs", etc., etc.

[otrcman]

The Hassler ad that Dan Treace posted yesterday (Thursday) is interesting. The ad touts "The New Hassler Rebound Check and Shock Absorber". What's interesting about it is the term, "Rebound Check". That goes to exactly what Humblej said about adding damping to a spring rather than just adding a spring to a spring.

Does anybody have a set of the "New Hassler Rebound Check" ? The two most common forms of rebound check would be by friction (such as spring leaves sliding against one another) or by forcing a liquid to travel through an orifice.

[TRDxB2]

Excerpts about shocks absorbers of old https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_absorber
"A shock absorber or damper is a mechanical or hydraulic device designed to absorb and damp shock impulses...
In common with carriages and railway locomotives, most early motor vehicles used leaf springs. One of the features of these springs was that the friction between the leaves offered a degree of damping, and in a 1912 review of vehicle suspension, the lack of this characteristic in helical springs was the reason it was "impossible" to use them as main springs. However the amount of damping provided by leaf spring friction was limited and variable according to the conditions of the springs, and whether wet or dry. It also operated in both directions... One of the problems with motor cars was the large variation in sprung weight between lightly loaded and fully loaded, especially for the rear springs. When heavily loaded the springs could bottom out, and apart from fitting rubber 'bump stops', there were attempts to use heavy main springs with auxiliary springs to smooth the ride when lightly loaded, which were often called 'shock absorbers'. Realizing that the spring and vehicle combination bounced with a characteristic frequency, these auxiliary springs were designed with a different period, but were not a solution to the problem that the spring rebound after striking a bump could throw you out of your seat. What was called for was damping that operated on the rebound."

Hassler shocks are designed to slide on the leaf springs (red triangle) and have stops (white outlines). The stop on the leaf spring is the spring clamp and causes the Hassler spring to be engaged to stiffen to leaf springs downward motion and prevent them from bottoming out. The boss on the lever arm causes the Hassler spring to be engaged on the rebound of the leaf spring. The design suggests a dampening effect. The question then is under what conditions would the Hassler spring become engaged in either direction. Today's roads are much different than those of old. The only ruts are railroad tracks, furrows and roads in the spring thaw.
Perhaps the reason for using them is to demonstrate the technology of the day and perhaps experience a smother ride

[RajoRacer]

Does anybody have a set of the "New Hassler Rebound Check" ? - I do Dick - you interested ?

[otrcman]

No, Steve, but thank you. I just hoped that somebody could show us the difference between a regular Hassler and one with the damping feature.

The car that I have now was purchased by my Dad in 1961, and a picture taken soon afterward shows Hasslers installed. When I inherited the car in 1997, the Hasslers were gone. For one reason or another, Dad had taken them off. We never discussed it, so I don't know why he removed them. But he really liked accessories, so there must have been a good reason to remove them.

Dick

[TRDxB2]

No, Steve, but thank you. I just hoped that somebody could show us the difference between a regular Hassler and one with the damping feature...

Dick

Perhaps my explanation above should have described that dampening effect of the design a little better. On small oscillations of the leaf spring the Hasslers would just be sliding on the leaf spring and no additional force of the Hassler spring would be engaged. On moderate oscillations as the leaf spring went up and down; the sliding motion of the Hassler springs base would cause the Hassler spring to force the leaf spring back in the opposite direction; the back & forth motion is what is damping the oscillations. If it weren't for this sliding motion the Hasslers they would just make the leaf springs stiffer all the time.
The beehive spring itself is also part of the equation. Technically called a Conical Helical Compression Spring. This design causes the coils to progressively change in diameter to give increased stiffness with increasing load.
Make sense?

[BuddyTheRoadster]

The Hassler rebound check was a sort of snubber like Gabriel snubber and the "shock absorbers" that were option on 1926-1927. Rebound check is a perfect name, because that's exactly what it does. Here's the patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/US1646583A/en

My 1923 roadster came with single Hasslers front and back, and it sails over railroad tracks like they're not there. You do have to be careful with extra deep intersection gutters however. It's also worth nothing that Hassler beehive springs were originally sold in different "strengths" depending on application. The sales literature said that the springs were color coded, but with a century of painting, sandblasting, and repainting...

I also vaguely remember hearing that Hasslers change the front axle geometry, and when installing or removing a set, the axle needs to be turned 180 degrees (or the spring perches swapped) to change the camber. Perhaps better mechanics than I could chime in?

[John Warren]

As Buddy mentioned when Hassler shocks are installed, the perches need to be swapped side to side. This was the reason I removed the ones on my car. Because they were installed wrong, they needed repair. I still want to reinstall them some day because they are part of the cars history.

[DanTreace]

Chris

You are correct on install of the original Hassler shocks, those ‘Beehive’ types have coils in various strength for the different Ford body styles, plus they do need the spring perches to be removed and relocated, moving the left perch to the right, and right to left, transposing them to keep axle tilt.

However the New Hassler, 1924 ‘Pancake’ style uses the same flattened coil spring for all body types, and they use new front brackets that don’t need the perches to be removed or transposed, but only each spun in its position to turn the shackle hole outboard. So they mount easy.


"Beehive" Hassler

scan0042 (373x475) copy.jpg (110.9 KiB) Viewed 3430 times

1924 New "Pancake" Hassler

Click on image to enlarge for reading:

[Norman Kling]

I didn't see this problem, but it is a safety issue. Fortunately neither my friend nor I were injured, but I will describe what happened: We bought a set of the currently manufactured Rock Mountain Brakes. We installed them on a 17 touring. The car had hasslers on it but the brakes wouldn't fit with those hasslers in place, so we removed the hasslers from the rear axle. In doing so, one of them sprung across the garage with great force. We were in a different direction, but if someone had been on the other side, could have had a serious injury.
Norm

[RajoRacer]

Were you utilizing the correct spring compressor tool to remove the springs ?

[Mark Gregush]

Interesting thought on the sliding. The base is lodged against the next leaf, if they did slide it would be down the leaf they are sitting on. I would think the angle they are mounted would prevent them from sliding as the spring pressure should keep them tight against the end of the next leaf. Don't know for sure, but they sure could I guess. My only experience with them is on the rear, with clipped leaf springs, tapered leafs may be different. (?) When I mounted mine, I add a filler block between the one cross bolt and bottom of the main leaf, so while they worked great I may have prevented them from sliding.

[ModelTWoods]

I had a full set of Beehives on my 16 touring, I never noticed any negative effects, but I can't say the were positive effects, either. I have a complete set of front Beehives, presently that I intend to sell, plus possibly some odds and ends. I also, have a set of the pancake Hasslers that I plan to put on my 27 coupe unless the rears won't work with Rocky Mountains. I think that I remember reading that pancake Hasslers can't be used with Rockies. Can anyone confirm this?

I found this
Appears that they fit original RM but not repro RM
http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/11 ... 1265304010
This is the rear Pancake bracket. The rear hub is not in place, but you can see the bracket, it fits to the rear backing plate where the std. perch mount fits. But, this bracket also 'over hangs' the rear drum, pretty tight tolerance, but it fits ok...
rear.jpg
rocky3.jpg
.except when you put on the new RM external brakes. There is enough clearance for the drum, but the repro RM brakes have that spring bracket at the top, that can interfere with the pancake bracket.
rocky2.png
other info
Hassler Pancakes with Rocky Moutains http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/80 ... 1260070485
rocky 1.jpg
Re: will pancake hasslers bolt to the rear of a big drum ruxtel
Unread post by Wilbur » Wed Feb 27, 2019 5:38 pm
i have pancake Hasslers both front and rear on my 1924 Tudor with a Ruckstell rear axel. Just installed the new AC brakes. All fits and works well.
AC Brakes.jpg

Well, This being true, I'll probably have a set of rear and possibly front and rear pancake Hasslers for sale. Since I'm running a Ruxtell, the Rocky Mtns. (even though they are reproductions) are more important for my safety than the Hasslers.

[TRDxB2]

Hassler Beehive springs made for different T's. No idea if they assumed just vehicle weight or added in some passenger weight to determine the proper spring rate or did some trial-n-error method. In any case if someone wants to do the math here's the formula explained, https://www.engineersedge.com/calculato ... _14934.htm

These are the springs - doubtful if any color codes survived - also we weigh more then they did

[Mark Gregush]

Frank;
Does that flyer show the parts for the Dodge Hasslers, and if so could you copy and email them to me?
Thanks for posting the scans of the pages. In the past when I put together a set, I just matched all the springs. Didn't know they came in different sizes. Part No 27 in the first cut is the compression tool for installing.

[TRDxB2]

Frank;
Does that flyer show the parts for the Dodge Hasslers, and if so could you copy and email them to me?
Thanks for posting the scans of the pages. In the past when I put together a set, I just matched all the springs. Didn't know they came in different sizes. Part No 27 in the first cut is the compression tool for installing.

It appears that the catalog is for Ford cars only and there is no reference to Model Year. Here is the link to the an old forum discussion (Jay in California) & displays the entire 103 catalog http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/41 ... 1394937519
I Goole'd the internet and couldn't find any reference to Hassler/Dodge
Just read the Hassler installation instructions and noticed that reference to the T bolt. Turns out that they used a spring compressor, T13, to compress the spring while on the ground and then used #27 the T bolt to hold it compressed during installation. T18 was used to drive the nut on #27
I believe the picture in the catalog is missing the bride that would span the top of the spring

These are advertised as compression tools

[Mark Gregush]

Frank thanks for checking and posting the link. I was given T-11 the hub cap tool.

[namdc3]

My 2c since there are a couple things I didn't see covered. Besides the original color coding mentioned, some springs are also stamped with their number (41, 42, etc.). I think part of the problem with various reports is that people don't realize there were different springs, and many cars have the wrong springs or a mixture of springs. Also, many of the arms you find are bent or have very worn holes, which would lead to geometry problems. There is a left and right front arm and even a long bolt vs. short bolt version (although that doesn't affect function). As covered above, the perches have to be swapped on the beehive style, which some don't know. Hence, there are some set-ups that work as designed and others that work poorly or could even be unsafe. Further, you have ride feel, looks, and originality vs. accessories - all subjective things that people get worked up over but don't really affect one's personal decision. If you decide to use hasslers, be sure to use a matched set that is in sound condition and install them correctly/safely.