total cost involved's front and rear

[absolom]

suspension assemblies

anybody had any experience with this company?

http://www.totalcostinvolved.com/article_det.cfm?articlecat=news&articleid=92&CFID=3904671&CFTOKEN=14692358

looks to be some pretty nice stuff

thoughts?

opinions?

[baz67]

TCI makes good hotrod parts. They work well when used in a hotrod application. IMHO your money would be better spent elsewhere if you want better handling. Pro-touring's bandwagon is getting pretty crowded with all of these hotrod companies jumping on.

This was taken right from your link and it concerns me somewhat "Panard bar option available with 9” rear end only." Huh, a phb is NOT an option on that link style suspension. I guess with you are out of luck with your factory GM rear end.

[absolom]

TCI makes good hotrod parts. They work well when used in a hotrod application. IMHO your money would be better spent elsewhere if you want better handling. Pro-touring's bandwagon is getting pretty crowded with all of these hotrod companies jumping on.

This was taken right from your link and it concerns me somewhat "Panard bar option available with 9” rear end only." Huh, a phb is NOT an option on that link style suspension. I guess with you are out of luck with your factory GM rear end.

so who is there to go with?

i've called dse and they said minimum of 3 months wait for their stuff, i would also like to use a "total package" front and rear from the same company

what about chassisworks' stuff?

[jaybee]

I've seen several applications using that diagonal link for axle location. Looks like a drag racing app to me as ladder bars sometimes use that same type of link. How does that style of lateral location affect the suspension dynamics as opposed to a Panhard?

[silver69camaro]

so who is there to go with?

i've called dse and they said minimum of 3 months wait for their stuff, i would also like to use a "total package" front and rear from the same company

what about chassisworks' stuff?

If you want good parts, you have to wait...period. DSE is 3 months out, we're about the same. It takes time to fab these things up, and we take our time. Heck, there used to be a 8-week wait for our GT55 chassis.

I'm not going to type the whole thing out, but D-links should be used on drag chassis only. It'd take me forever to type out the details...hopefully somebody else will!

[absolom]

so is it a bad design or what?

what are the problesm with that type of design?

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

[absolom]

http://www.martzchassis.net/page1.htm

martz chassis also has some nice looking stuff, and we've dealt with them before and they are good peoples

[baz67]

It is not a bad design if it is used for the proper place. A PT car is not the proper place for that. Well if you want good perfomance for your buck.

Why not upgrade your front sub. You can do wonders for cheap. Unless TCI is forging thier own spindles and being a hotrod shop my guess is the spindles are Mustang II. That alone is not the best set up for a PT car. Alcindo being the exception. The control arms look like the FVSA is too long to create any decent amount of camber gain.

The rear suspension looks like it will have too much roll bind due to the design. Typical for parallel four link suspension and poly bushings. It looks like most other bolt in link suspensions out there. They give up geometry for ease of install. Great if you want ease of install, but not for perfomance.

Take some time and do a search or two here because most of this has been discussed before.

[absolom]

It is not a bad design if it is used for the proper place. A PT car is not the proper place for that. Well if you want good perfomance for your buck.

Why not upgrade your front sub. You can do wonders for cheap. Unless TCI is forging thier own spindles and being a hotrod shop my guess is the spindles are Mustang II. That alone is not the best set up for a PT car. Alcindo being the exception. The control arms look like the FVSA is too long to create any decent amount of camber gain.

The rear suspension looks like it will have too much roll bind due to the design. Typical for parallel four link suspension and poly bushings. It looks like most other bolt in link suspensions out there. They give up geometry for ease of install. Great if you want ease of install, but not for perfomance.

Take some time and do a search or two here because most of this has been discussed before.

i did a search and couldn't find anything on TCI's kit, and actually, for our application, bolt in is a big plus....

we're not looking for super-race car performance, but something that gets rid of leaf springs and is better than stock

kinda like a show car with a pro-touring attitude, if that makes any sense at all


thanks for your replies though, i'm a relative newb to the PT camaro world

:)

[Damn True]

kinda like a show car with a pro-touring attitude, if that makes any sense at all




:)

You mean a street-rod with big brakes and 18"s?

You may want to look at the airbag stuff. Big improvement over stock, by no means race quality, and probably falls into a comfort zone with your customer.

[redss86]

This was taken right from your link and it concerns me somewhat "Panard bar option available with 9” rear end only." Huh, a phb is NOT an option on that link style suspension. I guess with you are out of luck with your factory GM rear end.

I think the phb is only available w/ the 9in because it can be bolted directly to the studs for the third member. This can't be done w/ other rearends(except an 8in).

As far as the diaganol link, I think the biggest downfall of it is that it will bind quicker than a phb.

Just my .02,
Joe

[baz67]

As far as the diaganol link, I think the biggest downfall of it is that it will bind quicker than a phb.

Just my .02,
Joe

I totaly agree here.

Abslom,

If you want bolt in then this is the answer http://www.ridetech.com/productinfo/airbarstang.asp This has been proven at the track. There is a thread around here somewhere with head the head track times at the Pigeon Forge event.

Do not be fooled into thinking that just because leafs have been around a while that they cannot be made to work very well. Again just look at the Pigeon Forge results. I would almost say that the TCI is a step backwards for your rear suspension over a good set of leafs. The only disadvantage that leafs have is you cannot easily adjust ride height.

[Madspeed]

so who is there to go with?

i've called dse and they said minimum of 3 months wait for their stuff, i would also like to use a "total package" front and rear from the same company

what about chassisworks' stuff?

Aha You Listen well =)

Anyways I waited 3 months for my wayne due setup.
3 months for the DSE system is well worth the wait Believe me

[novanutcase]

Brian:

Would you say, then, that for Ab's project and expectations of the car that Airide installed into his existing OEM front suspension would be the best compromise? Do you feel that, even with airbags, the TCI front clip would make it worse in terms of geometry? What does FVSA stand for? How about the rear? Would Airbags be a suggestion given the level of car he is trying to do? What sort of rear suspension setup do you think would pair up well with airbags? Sorry for the 20 questions but these are questions that I think both Ab and I would like to learn more about!

John

[redss86]

FVSA= Front View Swing Arm
In other words, it is the point were the upper and lower arms would intersect if they were long enough. Basically if you look at a pic of a from suspension from head on. You would draw a line in line w/ both control arms(upper and lower). The point that the lines intersect is the FVSA. Now, what the advantages of lengthening and/or shortening this, I am still learning.

Hope this helps.

Joe

[novanutcase]

Thanks Jmarti!

[rocketman]

I have used TCI frames for street rods.and they don't build any junk.You can bet that if TCI has it for sale it's top quality products.I have seen there camaro stub in person and I dont think there's a better stub for a camaro,the rear looks well built and useful.I would use it

[Madspeed]

I have used TCI frames for street rods.and they don't build any junk.You can bet that if TCI has it for sale it's top quality products.I have seen there camaro stub in person and I dont think there's a better stub for a camaro,the rear looks well built and useful.I would use it

Ok your right its not junk... its BLING
If you want bling why not just Chrome plate all your original stuff ?
While your at it put some 13" daytons and Hydros too

When we meet on the track road or drag your bling will be behind me because my stuff is proven to work correctly

If you think mustang ll suspension makes for good stuff then have at it =)

Ill stick with my wayne due setup and my Lateral Dynamics 3link rear =)

Here is some info from DSE..
I could not find anything like this at TCI

[Madspeed]

My sub =) and pics of A completed rear from Lateral Dynamics that I currently have on my garage floor to install=)

[baz67]

Brian:

Would you say, then, that for Ab's project and expectations of the car that Airide installed into his existing OEM front suspension would be the best compromise? Do you feel that, even with airbags, the TCI front clip would make it worse in terms of geometry? What does FVSA stand for? How about the rear? Would Airbags be a suggestion given the level of car he is trying to do? What sort of rear suspension setup do you think would pair up well with airbags? Sorry for the 20 questions but these are questions that I think both Ab and I would like to learn more about!

John

I am not a fan of bags at all. I guess you could say it is a personal bias. I suggested the airride rear setup because it seemed he wanted bolt in and that has been proven at the track. I feel the airride rear stuff will be better than the TCI stuff though.

I just gave the Airride site a quick look and it seems their control arms do nothing for camber geometry. That is just like every other aftermarket arm out there, BTW. They may add more caster if they designed it in. Maybe Tony will chime in and add some there. So that leave their shock.

For a stock subframe your cheapest, read free, and one of the best mods you can do is the Guldstrand mod. Add the other suggested upgrades and you are good to go. Just because it is a stock frame does not mean it is destained to suck. The ATS tall spindle is another great option. Hard to say if TCI has worse geometry, but I would bet it would be worse than a modified stock sub. A modified sub would be much cheaper as well.

IMO, bags are a tool to raise and lower the car only. If that is a priority over performance then that is what the builder should use.
I really would not suggest bags for anything other than what Airride has designed into their system. I guess that could be my bias again. There have been people that have done it though.

It looks like Airride has something figured out. Their willingness to show off their cars off on the track and not the fairgrounds speaks for itself. If I were forced to have bags it would be only theirs. Who knows the type of bags on the TCI stuff.

If one is building a hotrod then TCI would be fine, but in a PT applicaton....

[novanutcase]

Brian:

It seems that Abslom is looking for a car with more street manners than race but would like to be able to take advantage of improved handling when he does get on it. I would think that Abslom also wants a car that he can show which means he probably would like to slam it. Is this correct Abslom?
Do you feel for a car of this intended use that the Airide system would be a good choice along with some of the other mods you mentioned?

John

[absolom]

Brian:

It seems that Abslom is looking for a car with more street manners than race but would like to be able to take advantage of improved handling when he does get on it. I would think that Abslom also wants a car that he can show which means he probably would like to slam it. Is this correct Abslom?
Do you feel for a car of this intended use that the Airide system would be a good choice along with some of the other mods you mentioned?

John

basically, i would choose coilovers over airide, as TCI offers both, an airide setup or coilovers

and yeah, you're right, something showy, but also better handling than stock, but not really race-track handling

[rocketman]

Ok your right its not junk... its BLING
If you want bling why not just Chrome plate all your original stuff ?
While your at it put some 13" daytons and Hydros too

When we meet on the track road or drag your bling will be behind me because my stuff is proven to work correctly

If you think mustang ll suspension makes for good stuff then have at it =)

Ill stick with my wayne due setup and my Lateral Dynamics 3link rear =)

Here is some info from DSE..
I could not find anything like this at TCI




Well Wayne Due is out of business now so there goes that.

For street car looking for better handling it a good product.If I wanted a racer I'd something differnet,that Lateral Dyanmics set-up will only be best on a road course,IMO it's not a good drag race set-up.

[rocketman]

Guy's take a look at most of these PT car there nothing more than late model street rods.Billet wheels,fancy interiors,shiny paint.

Pt = street rod

[z4me69]

rocketman you hit the nail on the head i have been thinking the same thing for a long while now

[TitoJones]

Well Wayne Due is out of business now so there goes that.

For street car looking for better handling it a good product.If I wanted a racer I'd something differnet,that Lateral Dyanmics set-up will only be best on a road course,IMO it's not a good drag race set-up.

Art Morrision will be releasing a C5 bolt in sub, so it will be back shortly, plus there is 21st century.

As far as the Lateral Dynamics not being a good 1/4 mile seup, you'd be dead wrong there too. directly from L-D's site:
Will it work on the drag strip? Absolutely. There is a perception that a three link system is too weak for drag strip launches, but this is completely untrue. The main issue with drag launches is the ability for the tires to maintain grip with the track surface, and for the torque reactions to be fed into the chassis in such a way that the car doesn't overwhelm the rear tires, but also projects the car forward, not sideways. Three link systems are completely capable at this. For very fast drag cars, and for every other car that will see race conditions for that matter, we fully recommend bracing the suspension pickup points directly, and professionally to the structure of the safety roll cage. We can provide guidelines on how to advise a professional roll cage installer to address this.



Just an FYI for those looking at aftermarket subs:

DSE is the only company to post up geometry figures on their sub, and after comparing it to our geometry, we have better gamber gain, and better bumpsteer than they do. If you add a set of GW tubular arms to the equation, the caster gain is greater too.
Don't discount a properly set up factory subframe, it will surprise you on the street and road course.

Tyler

[rocketman]

A 3 link may work but would not the best set-up.It's simalier to a 4th gen f-body set-up it works but could be better,if I'm going dragin it's a 4 link only.JMO

[rocketman]

rocketman you hit the nail on the head i have been thinking the same thing for a long while now


Which is perfectly fine,I like the refined muscle car look.My wife's 68 camaro is one these late model street rods,so my 69 vette for that matter.

To each is his own.

[Steve1968LS2]

A 3 link may work but would not the best set-up.It's simalier to a 4th gen f-body set-up it works but could be better,if I'm going dragin it's a 4 link only.JMO

Huh?

And what makes you think a four link is superior to a three link?

Just curious ;)

And a 4th gen is a torque arm arrangement and is not like a three-link.

[Steve1968LS2]

Well Wayne Due is out of business now so there goes that.

For street car looking for better handling it a good product.If I wanted a racer I'd something differnet,that Lateral Dyanmics set-up will only be best on a road course,IMO it's not a good drag race set-up.

Again, what makes you think the three-link wouldn't be good for drag racing? What technical parameter does it lack? Is it about the anti-squat?

[Steve1968LS2]

I have used TCI frames for street rods.and they don't build any junk.You can bet that if TCI has it for sale it's top quality products.I have seen there camaro stub in person and I dont think there's a better stub for a camaro,the rear looks well built and useful.I would use it

Better in what way? Better geometry? Nicer welds? better placement of the rack and less bumbsteer? Nicer looking or better engineered for performance? Is the suspension an improvement over say the DSE unit or a unit that uses C5 components?

I will agree that they do make nice parts that have beautiful workmanship.

[rocketman]

Huh?

And what makes you think a four link is superior to a three link?

Just curious ;)

And a 4th gen is a torque arm arrangement and is not like a three-link.


The 4 link has better axle control,anti sqat,there's very little body roll,the way the 3 link is designed it is more for circle track and road course for the body roll.

How is the a TQ arm and a 3 link not a like, same design with almost the same mounting points.the TQ load is centered on the center of the axle.

[Steve1968LS2]

Umm.. a torque arm suspension is a torque arm suspension and a three-link is a three link.

It's like saying that anything with four links is a four-link or that all four-links are the same.

How does a four link have better axle control? I assume you don't mean side to side since both require a centering device like a PHR or Watts.. well except for a triangulated four link :)

[rocketman]

Better axle control,by disbruting the TQ "load" evenly across the rear end.As where a 3 link is center loaded and would be likely to unload.IMO

Not that you cant unload a 4 link,I'm far from a chassis expert.Just going off the experince I have with both set-ups(drag racing and circle track racing).

[Stu Seitz]

I have used TCI frames for street rods.and they don't build any junk.You can bet that if TCI has it for sale it's top quality products.I have seen there camaro stub in person and I dont think there's a better stub for a camaro,the rear looks well built and useful.I would use it


Like Steve said, better in what way?

[rocketman]

Better in what way? Better geometry? Nicer welds? better placement of the rack and less bumbsteer? Nicer looking or better engineered for performance? Is the suspension an improvement over say the DSE unit or a unit that uses C5 components?

I will agree that they do make nice parts that have beautiful workmanship.


Well better than a stock sub frame,for sure and depends on what your goal is.I think the design being round tube would be lighter and stronger than a box style unit.For the street it would be a better ,I'm not fimialer with a DSE unit so I cant compare.Why would a sub with c-5 be better,unless you are copy the exact suspension of a c-5 all you have is c-5 parts on a sub frame.

After reading my own words,what a pretty broad statement that I made.

[68Formula]

DSE is the only company to post up geometry figures on their sub, and after comparing it to our geometry, we have better gamber gain, and better bumpsteer than they do. If you add a set of GW tubular arms to the equation, the caster gain is greater too.

Tyler
:postpics:


If you're going to say that, you have to show us the numbers, man!

[TitoJones]

:postpics:


If you're going to say that, you have to show us the numbers, man!

They are located in this thread:
http://www.lateral-g.net/forums/showthread.php4?t=5158&page=11&pp=10&highlight=Geometry

Tyler

[68Formula]

Sweet! Looks like we have some data to digest.

[Ralph LoGrasso]

Guy's take a look at most of these PT car there nothing more than late model street rods.Billet wheels,fancy interiors,shiny paint.

Pt = street rod

That statement is both incorrect and ignorant as there is an apparent demarcation that exists between street rods and pro-touring cars. However, there is an inherent problem realized when attempting to disassociate the two genres; this problem is presented not within the genres or as a mere classification issue, but rather by the owners and builders. What you refer to as being the same (PT and street rods) is actually a synthesis of styles lacking an appellation. In its most distilled form, you've got owners who build street rods (clarification: there is nothing wrong with street rods), and then attempt to categorize them as pro-touring (perhaps to benefit from the already established allure and market segment of these vehicles or perhaps simply in an attempt at fitting into a genre). For example: take your archetypal street rod formula: intricate, though impractical interiors, heavy 20" billet wheels, and an expensive paint job with no suspension modifications, and apply that to the muscle car platform; what you have here is a street rod in muscle car form, and as it may assume the appearance of a pro-touring car, it is now being incorrectly designated as one. This exists all as effect of the evolution of the street rod genre: muscle cars have now become the new street rods and rather then classify them as such, most have simply decided "hey, since they sort of look like pro-touring cars, lets take advantage of the already existing genre and just call them pro-touring instead of creating something new". You demonstrated this yourself by stating that though your wife’s car is essentially a street rod, you classify it as being pro-touring. True pro-touring cars are built with an emphasis on function as they are built to be driven hard; but do not misconstrue this as I am not saying that all pro-touring cars are race cars, in verity, none are (perhaps some street fighters, but not pro-touring cars). A '69 Camaro bedecked with a $15,000 paint job, twenty or twenty-two inch wheels, an impractical interior and subframe connectors is simply not a pro-touring car, sorry. Add some suspension modifications, big brakes and a driver who utilizes them, and then you've got a pro-touring car. Please do not confuse the two genres. I felt the need to clarify this, as the amalgamation of genres is detrimental to the true pro-touring genus.

[mini69]

:pics2: i Have Been Waiting For This Subject Too Come Up Reason Being I Posted About It A Little While Back. I Just Recieved My Front Subframe From Tci. it Took About 4 - 6 Weeks. It Is A Really Well Done Frame. I WAS ORIGINALLY GETTING A WD FRAME BUT HE WENT OUT AT THE BEGINNING STAGES OF GETTING IT ORDERED SO I HAD TO GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARDS . I AM REALLY HAPPY W/ TCI PRODUCT I LOOKS LIKE THEY THOUGHT THIS ONE OUT . THE FRAME I MOCKED UP ON MY CAR TODAY AND FIT LIKE A GLOVE NOW TIME TO PUT ON THE SHEET METAL AND MAKE SURE ALL THE GAPS ARE GOOD BEFORE PAINT ARRIVES I HAVE NO SPECS ON IT YET AS FAR AS THE TRACK GOES they Should Have Their Track Figures Shortly I Was Told From Their Tech Department. Some Body Was Saying That Their A Arms Are Mustang II But They Are Made In House Just For Thier Suspension Package. I Told Them About The Site And He Was Going To Check It Out And Post Sometrack Stats When They Come Available . Here Are A COUPLE Pictures OF THE FRAME ON THE CAR .
____________
MINI69

[absintheisfun]

Seeing that on the car itself makes me more comfortable with the idea of getting it. From its pictures online, it looks like bicycle tubing. It looks MUCH stronger with the car attached--at least it gives it some perspective.

My subframe is bent, so I was shopping for a new one, and I was leaning towards Martz, but I'm having some second thoughts now...

Please keep us updated on how it turns out!

-mcw

[novanutcase]

The only problem I have with the TCI clip is that they say that the spindle is not M2 and that they make their own but what did they base it off of? From looking at it it looks like they based it off of the M2 spindle. TCI please correct me if I'm wrong but just because they say they make their own spindles doesn't make it better. TCI has built it's reputation on pro street and hot rod parts and chassis and M2 was the way to go in these categories. For them to have come out with a modified front sub this quickly makes me suspect as to what they based that off of. Was it a clean sheet design? Even if it was they had to have based it on some component to begin with and then improved it and it looks to me like the component they used was M2. TCI, again, correct me if I'm wrong. I suspect they took a somewhat modified hotrod spindle and designed it around that as a spindle would be the more expensive of the components to design from a clean sheet of paper.
If anyone else wanted or wants a WD frame I have the number to his lead fabricator who has opened his own shop. PM me and I will be glad to give it out. Wayne told me he is more than competent to build whatever you need and if there are any issues Wayne says he will be happy to help out and get the problem straightened out.

[mini69]

I Keep

[MonzaRacer]

I am not a fan of bags at all. I guess you could say it is a personal bias. I suggested the airride rear setup because it seemed he wanted bolt in and that has been proven at the track. I feel the airride rear stuff will be better than the TCI stuff though.

I just gave the Airride site a quick look and it seems their control arms do nothing for camber geometry. That is just like every other aftermarket arm out there, BTW. They may add more caster if they designed it in. Maybe Tony will chime in and add some there. So that leave their shock.

For a stock subframe your cheapest, read free, and one of the best mods you can do is the Guldstrand mod. Add the other suggested upgrades and you are good to go. Just because it is a stock frame does not mean it is destained to suck. The ATS tall spindle is another great option. Hard to say if TCI has worse geometry, but I would bet it would be worse than a modified stock sub. A modified sub would be much cheaper as well.

IMO, bags are a tool to raise and lower the car only. If that is a priority over performance then that is what the builder should use.
I really would not suggest bags for anything other than what Airride has designed into their system. I guess that could be my bias again. There have been people that have done it though.

It looks like Airride has something figured out. Their willingness to show off their cars off on the track and not the fairgrounds speaks for itself. If I were forced to have bags it would be only theirs. Who knows the type of bags on the TCI stuff.

If one is building a hotrod then TCI would be fine, but in a PT applicaton....




Ok so why are we getting all wound up and i have NEVER seen anything on what type of vehicle its going on?
Please lets get some information on whats involde here before we bash parts.
OH and BAZ if you think air ride is just to raise and lower a car go look at RTH2 and tell me its "just to raise an lower.
Until you drive a set up (lets get you a ride in the Air Ride euiipt chevelle and then you can bash air springs)
I really get a pain when people call air springs "bags" and then go to lengths to give them a ho hum.
As for Mustang 2 stuff not working for limited PT use ,yes it can be done.
BUT its not perfect and has many limitations.
Air springs have been around for decades and they do work. As for performance benefits the uses are boundless. A TCI set up with shockwaves would give the best all around use of M2 parts, maybe even crutch its inherint liabilities (non pt optimized design) BUT to say its not going to work or has no use is a little premature.
AS for the ART AirBar setups you cant beat getting rid of leaf springs for handling and go look at ART's first sttreet challenge and you will see a M2 set up wit air on a PROSTREETER making laps(albeit slower) with the rest of the cars and it has a blown 351 Clevland too which isnt the best lowend puller.
I hate the fact also that people will not look at the benefits of possibly non standard/current parts.
If i had my druthers I would look at the platform being built then make educated decisions rather than the "its a kit that fits which makes it s easy to use" .
My personal question is will the TCI kit with ART Shockwaves(over TCI air ride) in the V30 package do what you want. Doies ART make a rear setup that will work on your package(as I have yet to see what you are working on besides a tiny picl of what looks like a blue car, Mustang? or? ).
Please give me something to work with not just a pic of a setup and ask if it will work and no car/engine/trans/application.
Lee Abel:6gears:

[baz67]

Lee, please read the entire thread before you comment. Because most of your questions are answered. Also, if you read the thread you would have noticed I mentioned RTH and how well the AirRide set up worked. As I said before it seems that they have something figured out. I do wonder if there would be any difference in time if the AirRide car had a set of springs the same rate as the air shock with a set of triple adjust Penskes. I am sorry if my opinion is not the same as yours.

Could you please expand on the boundless performance benefits of bags?

[novanutcase]

Monza - I agree that Bags, oh sorry, Air shocks definitley have their place in the grand scheme of things. I think Baz67 is coming from a place in which his ideal setup is more hard core road race oriented then where you are coming from in terms of application for Abs car(Baz please correct me if I'm wrong!) but rather than argue about what works better, I think the thread has gone off on a tangent. AB wants a car that is not full out road race but won't wallow like a stuffed pig in the corners. He wants a car that he can take to a local car show and dump in the weeds and look cool. IMO, Cool + spirited driving(Not road racing) = AirRide. This is not to say that this is the only way this can be done but for ease of installation for the rest of us that can't weld up an intake from a coke can and a coat hanger this seems to be what will be the best compromise for AB.

[Texas Bob]

I wanted to revisit this as I've inherited mini69's camaro (above pics) with the TCI subframe. I emailed TCI and got this back. I think it's agreed that there are better subframes for performance minded builders and that this would be a notch below that.


"I think the general consensus on "the
internet" is that we are mostly a show company but in fact we are
diehard race geeks. It is true that the Rod Chassis's we build have
owners that are primarily into show more than go but our new Muscle Car
product is as stated for "Muscle". As you're probably aware the 1st Gen
Camaro and 3rd Gen Nova share the same suspension. We have both a 1st
Gen Camaro and 3rd Gen Nova test vehicle that Super Chevy magazine has
tested very thoroughly. Both cars will sustain over 1.0g on street tires
and they weigh in excess of 3500 lbs with driver. They both have also
pulled low 1.5 & high 1.4 short times at the drag strip with a DOT
approved road racing tire.

Keep in mind this chassis is identical to yours as is the parts we would
sell for it. Here is a video of Super Chevy testing the Nova equipped
with our front and rearend.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Vkofd8L2kzs

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CpUy9wcAtJY


None of the components on this system are from a Mustang II front end.
We do offer a bunch of Mustang II front ends for other vehicles but for
the Camaro we only sell a complete custom made system. It is based on a
37-48 Ford Spindle so bearings and brake parts are readily available
from pretty much any parts house. Because this system is a custom built
deal no control arms other than ours will work. The coilover sizes we
use are pretty much standard in the industry and can be changed easily." - Jason Wilcox, TCI sales Rep.

Guess I'll hold on to it and spend my $ elsewhere. Now I just need to get rid of all the polished pieces on it. I hate shiny chrome!

[68Formula]

:hmm: I thought we had already concurred that the suspension geometry does not address the short comings of the GEN I suspension, and the results from their testing were (to be tact) skewed by using a race-only alignment, race tires (that perhaps are street legal), and tied-down suspension. Not a multi-purpose setup unless you like to bounce around on the street, and stictly race in parking lots.

https://www.pro-touring.com/forum/showthread.php?t=41532&page=2

Did they mention how they fix the camber gain, eliminated bumpsteer, etc?

[Texas Bob]

Well of course they didn't. The man is trying to sell me his product. Just like when I joined the Marine Corps. The recruiter will tell you what you want to hear so that you sign on that dotted line. I'm at a lost here. I'm going to take a hit if I sell it and I'll have to fork up quite a bit to get into something else, prolonging getting the car done. Ah!

[68Formula]

Don't worry, you'll find someone to buy it. If they have a good frame take it as partial trade, and then with a little research you can figure out how to make it out handle the TCI for the same cost. Or you can throw it under the car and live with it (just don't expect too much from it). Keep in mind, never used gets more $$$ than slightly used.

I wouldn't compare TCI to the Marines. Good, bad or ugly I bet you got more out of being a Marine then you will ever realize. Can't say the same about their suspensions.