68 Camaro Rear Leaf Suspension Help

[Varkwso]

Just installed a "correct" monoleaf replacement system for a 68 Camaro.

Kit had new springs, bolts, nuts, shackles, bushings, spring pockets, etc. - they look real nice.

When I went to bolt up the rear end to the leafs one side goes in fine (no surprise there) but the other requires major prying, pushing, and swearing to get the brackets to line up to the rivet on the bottom. Reinstalling the driveshaft was very tight - required some jacking around to slip the yoke in.

I have installed probably a dozen rear leafs on Camaros, Firebirds and Novas and never had this problem before. This is my first monoleaf rear leaf though on this chassis.

* The parts removed are identical to the parts installed (other than being old - i.e., bushings)
* The leafs are installed correctly - not a whole lot of ways to mess that up - I think:hammer:
* The rear end is centered by the rivets in the bottom of the leafs.
* The car is still in the air on jackstands on the frame.

Any clues why this suspension is so "bound up":nopity:

thanks!

[baz67]

How did the old leafs come out? Did they seem bound as well? Is it the original axle housing?

[Varkwso]

How did the old leafs come out? Did they seem bound as well? Is it the original axle housing?

The old leafs came out pretty easily - very little rust or crud. They did not seem bound up. The bushings were totally shot. The original bottom plates were missing. It had a set traction bars for the bottom plate. The kit came with a new bottom plate - identical to ones I have around the shop.

The rear end in the car is a 12 bolt 4.11 posi - and seems original - it is definitely a monoleaf rearend. Have not really looked for codes or casting numbers on it to determine if it is a 68 correct for the car.

[Steve Chryssos]

Well the first thing I would do is check the floorpan for signs of hidden damage. Check around the trans tunnel, cowl, seat mounts and other structural areas for unusual wrinkles. That is probably not your problem, but you should still check. If the car is undercoated,
it might be easier to check from above by lifting the carpets.
Beyond that, I would guess that your replacement front spring hanger is the problem. Compare it with your old spring hanger or try installing your old spring hangar. Are the tires centered in the wheelwells?

[Varkwso]

Well the first thing I would do is check the floorpan for signs of hidden damage. Check around the trans tunnel, cowl, seat mounts and other structural areas for unusual wrinkles. That is probably not your problem, but you should still check. If the car is undercoated,
it might be easier to check from above by lifting the carpets.
Beyond that, I would guess that your replacement front spring hanger is the problem. Compare it with your old spring hanger or try installing your old spring hangar. Are the tires centered in the wheelwells?

Spring hangers are identical. Could not find any signs of a twisting in the floorpan but I am going to see if the car is "square" in the back half. Tires are not back on yet - but I am going to check for centering on the new SSBC rear discs I put on for him!

[Patrick]

I believe there is some amount of 'adjustability' in the front spring hangers. Have you tried loosening the mounts to see if that helps? Also, you can measure from the old spring eye to the rivet/locator on the spring and compare that to the new spring--maybe the manufacturer did not position the rivet/locator properly. Lastly, with the springs on their sides- lay a new spring on the old spring-lining up the eyes and see if there is any difference.

[Varkwso]

I believe there is some amount of 'adjustability' in the front spring hangers. Have you tried loosening the mounts to see if that helps? Also, you can measure from the old spring eye to the rivet/locator on the spring and compare that to the new spring--maybe the manufacturer did not position the rivet/locator properly. Lastly, with the springs on their sides- lay a new spring on the old spring-lining up the eyes and see if there is any difference.

I did all that before I put them in - other than the arch difference in the new versus the old they were the same. There is pretty limited adjustibility in the front spring pocket - I already played with the "stack up tolerances" there. Glad to see I am thinking of most of the stuff :hand:, so far. It has been frustrating not to "fix it" quickly....

I found out from the owner that it had been hit pretty good in the right quarter at some point - there may be the issue.

The car is together but it is definitely "pre-loaded".

Thanks for all the tips - keep them rolling in!

[Varkwso]

It is still not quite right. Installed everything on the back end and we put on tires. with a load on the springs the driver side is definitely off center in the rear wheel well (to the front - the direction we had to force it to fit) - pass side is centered fine. The springs are equal and as square as I can determine using tape measures.

There is no way the drive shaft is ever going to fit. The car currently has a T400 and it came with a powerglide - I think the driveshaft may be original - it is at least 1 inch to long to install and probably 2 inches too long to fit correctly.

My suggestion is taking to a frame table to see if it is off kilter - any other options?

thanks

[Varkwso]

Latest update in this saga...

Put in a correct length driveshaft for a T400 in a 68 Camaro and it now fits like a charm.

With weight on the springs the driver side rear wheels are centering a little better. When it is running under its own power again we will run it by a frame machine to check "true"...

[Steve68]

Just read this and was going to tell you the drive shaft is wrong, but you figured it out, good job, Steve