A buddy of mine is working on a couple of 59 LeSabres, both of them are Canadian cars. One is a flattop hardtop the other is a sedan, now here's the funny thing; the rear axle in the flattop looks out of place, and when measured up, the torque tube from torque ball to rear U-Joint flange is 42 inches. The wheels are actually set forward the 3 inches, and the car looks stupid. It also looks like it was actually driven that way, and the rear springs are kinked forward accordingly. On the sedan, it's 45 inches. What car would have a 42 inch torque tube? I assume it should be the same, the 45 inch version fits. So was the one torque tube out of a 58 or earlier car, or was it from a Triple Turbine, or was it from a standard transmission?
Well now, this is getting weirder. Thanks for clearing that up. I honestly thought that the older cars were on smaller wheelbases, I guess I was wrong, as usual. No, it's certainly shorter than the other one, and both cars are on the 123 inch wheelbase. They should use exactly the same axle housing and torque tube housings, and yet the flattop is exactly 3 inches shorter than the sedan, which we know has never been apart. It would make sense if the car was an Electra frame and they tried to use a LeSabre rear axle assembly in it. But it's definitely a LeSabre body and frame. So that's why I was wondering, did the Triple Turbine use a smaller torque tube, maybe it was longer than the Twin Turbine? I don't have the dimensions of that, but that is looking like the only explanation, otherwise it wouldn't even bolt up. I don't know that they ever put a Triple Turbine into a LeSabre, they were offered in Invicta, (same body as LeSabre) I don't think it was offered with the smaller engine.
