To GULSTRAND OR NOT TO GULSTRAND??

[67steve]

Hello Experts,

I know this topic has been discussed in length on this forum because i just spent 5 hours reading previous posts. Some say the Guldstrand MOD is only necessary if I will be cornering the car hard. What is considered hard?? I know alot depends on the application. Mine is a street application. But I would like the car to handle as good as posible. I talked with **** at Guldstrand and he told me the MOD would be alot of help for the wide wheels I was planning on putting on the car. **** also told me that Tubular A arms were not necessary and would not buy me much. He also said they were not much lighter and in some cases not as strong as stock. I also talked with one of the tech's at Global West about the MOD and he kind of sounded as if he was not that familiar with the MOD, even know GW's website states that there A arms work with the MOD.? Anyway this was my plan for the suspension and wheel/tire combo for my 67 Camaro: Global West upper and Lower control arms, QA1 coilovers, sway bar, 17 or 18" X 9 or 9.5" with a 265 or 275 for the rear, 17" X 8 with a 245 for the front. Does anyone see a problem with this set up? Will the Guldstrand MOD be beneficial for my application. Will there need to be any trimming to the A arm mounts with this tire wheel combo or will just re drilling the a arm locations be sufficient. Any other info on this set up or do you think I am way off track?

Dazed and Confused:hammer:

Steve M

Future 1967 RS Camoro, 540 cu. in. Rat motor, Tremec TKO 600, Ford 9" Rear, Baer 4 wheel discs, lots of other goodies

[baz67]

Steve, do the Guldstrand mod. You will not regret it. The gain in get in the geometry is worth it. Unless you like the bling of the tubular lowers you do not need them. The GW uppers will add caster.

When doing the Guldstrand mod with GW arms I would not move the holes back, just down. Moving the holes back adds caster. The GW uppers give you more caster then you can use. So if you move the holes back and do the Guldstrand mod you will have a huge shim stack to get the caster to where you want it.

[68Formula]

Verify with a tech (not the one you talked to before), but I think the GW arms will work with the G-MOD without grinding mounts.

Personally, I don't care for the fit of my 275s on a 9.5" on my '68. I noticed witness marks that I'm getting contact on the inside of the wheel well and yet the outside is already into the lip at least a 1/4". I haven't had a chance yet to see if the marks were there before I redid the suspension and put the new rims/tires on it. In static position I have some clearance. I'd be surprised though if the old 14s with a worn suspension were that close to rub. My quarters are original and bondo-free so I can't get myself to roll the lips. Luckily my rear suspension sits a little high for now, and is very stiff so it probably won't actually ever hit. If I go to disc brakes supposedly it will push it farther out still. Somehow there are lots of people getting away with it though. Maybe they roll the lips or a little rubbing doesn't bother them? I think a 255 at least on my car would have been a better choice.

[68Formula]

Verify with a tech (not the one you talked to before), but I think the GW arms will work with the G-MOD without grinding mounts.

Personally, I don't care for the fit of my 275s on a 9.5" on my '68. I noticed witness marks that I'm getting contact on the inside of the wheel well and yet the outside is already into the lip at least a 1/4". I haven't had a chance yet to see if the marks were there before I redid the suspension and put the new rims/tires on it. In static position I have some clearance. I'd be surprised though if the old 14s with a worn suspension were that close to rub. My quarters are original and bondo-free so I can't get myself to roll the lips. Luckily my rear suspension sits a little high for now, and is very stiff so it probably won't actually ever hit. If I go to disc brakes supposedly it will push it farther out still. Somehow there are lots of people getting away with it though. Maybe they roll the lips or a little rubbing doesn't bother them? I think a 255 at least on my car would have been a better choice.

[CarlC]

If you are considering the ATS tall spindle then do not perform the G-mod. If using the stock spindle, then yes, do the mod. There's really no drawback to peforming the G-mod besides not being able to go back to stock.

[David Pozzi]

Tubular upper arms don't weigh less than stock arms, they do allow around +5 deg positive caster which helps keep the wheels flat when you turn the wheels sharply.

[Matt@RFR]

Tubular upper arms don't weigh less than stock arms, You might have to revise that statement pretty soon David. :secret:

:)

[wendell]

Guldstrand suggested to do the mod and told you that tubular A-arms are a waste of money. Your response was to buy tubular A-arms and ask the internet if you should do the mod. If you're not going to listen to Guldstand who are you going to listen to? Your only other options are random strangers on the internet and people trying to sell you stuff. D.G. knows more about racing first gens than the collective knowlege on this site. I've seen his cars and they work.

[Boulder69]

Um, I think he is just considering this combo, hence the request for advice. He seems to be getting as much feedback as possible before making an investment in time and money to upgrade his ride. I don't really see why he deserves a :spank2:. :hmm:

My $.02 is that by the time you factor in the cost of solid bushings, new shafts and ball joints, the tubular uppers begin to look a little less expensive. The G-Mod obviously works well, but I went with DSE uppers with ATS tall spindles and stock lowers. This should give me better geometry for the type of driving I plan on using the car for. At least that's what I've been told by many folks more knowledeable than I. Plus, I don't have to worry about 37+ year spindle/bearing technology when I finally get to beat on it.

That's what I like about this forum, folks USUALLY are very helpful, and I get a variety of opinions that I can use to make a final decision. Good luck with your project Steve.

[David Pozzi]

You might have to revise that statement pretty soon David. :secret:

:)

Sounds like something is in the works! ;)

Here are stock upper and lower A arm weights complete with shaft and balljoint.
lower A frame 11 lbs
upper A frame 10 lbs

[wendell]

The LD guys are always up to something... David, how's the camaro coming. sorry I haven't been intouch.

[David Pozzi]

Zero progress on Camaro stuff. I was sure I'd be in the middle of working on one of them by now. :(
I decided to do a major cleanup of my shop. I'm making room for a lift which I've needed for a long time. Hopefully once better organized, I'll be able to work more productively. My tow vehicle needs some work, and there is one more race for the Lola this year.

[67steve]

Steve, do the Guldstrand mod. You will not regret it. The gain in get in the geometry is worth it. Unless you like the bling of the tubular lowers you do not need them. The GW uppers will add caster.

When doing the Guldstrand mod with GW arms I would not move the holes back, just down. Moving the holes back adds caster. The GW uppers give you more caster then you can use. So if you move the holes back and do the Guldstrand mod you will have a huge shim stack to get the caster to where you want it.

Brian,

Thank you for the info. Is there a template for the version of the mod you are suggesting? Will I need to grind off any of the mount for the mod, or just simply drill new holes? Will I be able to return the A arms to there stock location if I wanted to.

Thanks for the advice,

SteveM

[67steve]

Verify with a tech (not the one you talked to before), but I think the GW arms will work with the G-MOD without grinding mounts.

Personally, I don't care for the fit of my 275s on a 9.5" on my '68. I noticed witness marks that I'm getting contact on the inside of the wheel well and yet the outside is already into the lip at least a 1/4". I haven't had a chance yet to see if the marks were there before I redid the suspension and put the new rims/tires on it. In static position I have some clearance. I'd be surprised though if the old 14s with a worn suspension were that close to rub. My quarters are original and bondo-free so I can't get myself to roll the lips. Luckily my rear suspension sits a little high for now, and is very stiff so it probably won't actually ever hit. If I go to disc brakes supposedly it will push it farther out still. Somehow there are lots of people getting away with it though. Maybe they roll the lips or a little rubbing doesn't bother them? A 265 might be a better choice, but do search there are very few choices for hp tires in that size either for 17s or 18s. I think a 255 at least on my car would have been a better choice.

Right On Mike thanks for the advice. I think I will be a little bit more conservative on my tires to be safe. I don't want to ruin my freshly painted fender wells or tires.

Thanks,

SteveM

[chicane67]

If you are considering the ATS tall spindle then do not perform the G-mod. If using the stock spindle, then yes, do the mod. There's really no drawback to peforming the G-mod besides not being able to go back to stock.

There is however, a 'stock height' ATS AFX spindle, for use with the Dickiepoo G-Mod.

[67steve]

If you are considering the ATS tall spindle then do not perform the G-mod. If using the stock spindle, then yes, do the mod. There's really no drawback to peforming the G-mod besides not being able to go back to stock.

Thanks for the information Carl. I will check out the ATS spindles. I was under the impression that if you did the mod you could return to the stock A arm mounting location. Odviously I misunderstood. What happens to the stock mounting holes?

Thank You,
Steve M

[baz67]

Brian,

Thank you for the info. Is there a template for the version of the mod you are suggesting? Will I need to grind off any of the mount for the mod, or just simply drill new holes? Will I be able to return the A arms to there stock location if I wanted to.

Thanks for the advice,

SteveM

There is not template, but you can modify the one that is on Guldstrands site to work. I cannot remember if you will need to grind a little on the mount. You could do what David Pozzi did when he did the mod on his car. He cut the entire mount off and trimmed to size and then re welded it to the subframe. That way it is you will not hit the ears. Once you drive your car with the mod you will not want to go back to stock.

[67steve]

Guldstrand suggested to do the mod and told you that tubular A-arms are a waste of money. Your response was to buy tubular A-arms and ask the internet if you should do the mod. If you're not going to listen to Guldstand who are you going to listen to? Your only other options are random strangers on the internet and people trying to sell you stuff. D.G. knows more about racing first gens than the collective knowlege on this site. I've seen his cars and they work.

First of all I am new to this forum and don't want to make enemies right off the bat, but I havent bought anything yet my frame is stripped and I am in a planning stage. I am ATTEMPTING to gather as much knowledge as possible from every source possible. There seems to be SOME very helpful and intelligent individuals on this site that know alot more than I do. You should read the thread a little better before you post such a ignorant statement next time.

[CarlC]

If the G-mod is performed and stock arms used then the mount must be trimmed to allow for A-arm clearance. This trimming removes the stock mounting holes.

If the G-mod is performed using aftermarket tubular arms then the mount will likely not need trimming, hence allowing for a return to the stock mounting location.

If the mount is cut off the subframe and re-welded back into place to replicate the G-mod then there is no going back to the stock location.

I forgot about the stock-height ATS spindle.

[67steve]

Thanks for the clarification Carl. What is the advantage of the ATS AFX spindle?

Thanks,

SteveM

[TitoJones]

Thanks for the clarification Carl. What is the advantage of the ATS AFX spindle?

Thanks,

SteveM

It adds a similar improvement to the front geometry as the Guldstrand mod. Since you read over 5 hours of G mod info on this site, I think you have a pretty good grasp of what the mod does for the car, but for those who do not this is what it all boils down to-

The F body front suspension lacks a good negative camber curve. The fixes for this shortcoming is a relocation of the upper control arm attachment point on the frame (G-mod) or putting on a taller spindle. We made a taller spindle to help improve the car's handling characteristics. When we were finished engineering and testing the geometry of our AFX spindle we found that on an otherwise completely stock frame, we could get more negative camber gain than either a G-modded vehicle or a DSE weld in coil over kit. When we started adding tubular control arms and bumpsteer adjustable outer tie rod ends, we recorded geometry data that equaled- and in certain areas- surpassed $6700 aftermarket subframes. All of this in a simple bolt on spindle.

Tyler

[67steve]

Is a taller spindle the same thing as a drop spindle? I am new to alot of these terms. Reading 5 hours of info for me is probably like reading 30 minutes to someone else. I start to digest all the info the next day after reading.:doh: :razz:

Thanks , Steve M

[Boulder69]

Not the same thing. The spindle is actually taller from ball-joint to ball-joint, resulting in a better camber curve. Dropping the upper control arm mounts changes the angles in a similar way.

Many taller spindles also have drop, but any drop more than an inch or so begins to cause other issues. Dave Pozzi has tons of info on that. The ATS spindle does have some drop, but I believe it is just a hair under an inch and was neccessary to clear the C5 bearing packs. Shouldn't cause any of the issues Dave mentions, such as tie rod interference with the wheel.

Which brings up what I personally feel is another huge benefit of the ATS setup - no more old-school bearing/spindle pin technology. The C5 bearing hub seems much more safe and trouble free. No burned up bearings from open road race use, and your life isn't riding on a 35+ year old stub of steel sticking out there. I broke the pin clean off of the spindle on my old 72 Jimmy once, good thing I was pulling in the driveway when it happened or I could have been seriously injured or killed. I'm not gonna beat my camaro like I did the GMC, but that experience still haunts me a bit.

Herb Adams has a great book that goes in-depth on all of this suspension geometry stuff. Tony Huntimer has a fantastic book on all aspects of PT cars, I highly recommend that one as well. -eric

[Z06vet]

How will the use of 2" drop springs affect the use of the taller spindles and/or the guldstrand mod? I will be installing the springs soon, and would like to do everything at once. Scott

[baz67]

How will the use of 2" drop springs affect the use of the taller spindles and/or the guldstrand mod? I will be installing the springs soon, and would like to do everything at once. Scott

Nothing bad. In fact it will help in getting the UCA in a better position and lower your center of gravity.

Edit: Now you do not want to do the Guldstrand mod with the taller spindle as it can do undesirable things to front geometry.

[JEFFTATE]

I just finished doing the Guldstrand mod on my 1969 Camaro. It was pretty easy. I only had to trim the top corners or "ears" of the mounts.
About 3/4" or so. I didn't have to trim all the way until the original holes were gone. Just enough to get clearance during the full range of motion. I did have to trim the bottom of the rear a-arm itself to get clearance at the the frame. You'll see what I mean if you do the mod.

[Marcus SC&C]

Tubular upper arms don't weigh less than stock arms, they do allow around +5 deg positive caster which helps keep the wheels flat when you turn the wheels sharply.

I have to call you on that too David. I just weighed one of our Pro-Lite adj. tubular arms for a Chevelle...6.5lbs. with ball joint and hardware. 1st gen arms run about 7lbs. complete. Nothing new,we`ve been selling them for about 4 years now. :)

The G mod is great on cars with stock height spindles. Bear in mind that on a lowered car with the G mod your alignment options will be limited. We recomend The G mod on cars with our Stage 1 and Stage 2 suspension packages for 1st gens. They work well without it but even better with it. Combining the two gives you geometry gains approaching the better tall spindles but using the stock ones. For those who don`t want to drill/chop up their car for the G mod we have a new package (not even on the site yet) with a new HD tall upper ball joint that is very close to that with no other mods,straight bolt on. A nice alternative for folks who already have big brakes on their stock spindles. Mark SC&C