77 T/A Suspension Setup

[O'Neall]

I posted this in the "Welcome" section when I introduced myself, but since it's actually a suspension question figured I'd repost it here. Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

I have a 77 Trans Am that I am restoring and I definitely want to improve upon its stock suspension setup, but I don't think I want to go the full "pro-touring" route. My goal is to basically to have it handle/ride like the 1997 WS6 T/A I used to own. That was the best handling car I've ever owned (stock WS6 suspension)... yet rode well enough to live with as a daily ride. I'm not really looking to build an ultimate "G-machine" that will rattle my fillings loose and send me searching for a comfy chair after an hour's ride. I just want a vintage looking 2nd Gen T/A that will handle (or even slightly outhandle) my old 97. To that end, this is my current plan... but of course, it is subject to change at any moment based on new info (much of which I am hoping to gain from you all!)

-Koni shocks all around
-12:1 steering
-stock 1 1/4" front sway bar
-stock 5/8" rear sway bar
-polyurethane F/R sway bar bushings
-polyurethane sway bar endlinks
-polyurethane leaf spring pads
-rubber U/L control arm bushings
-welded in Comp. Engr. SFCs
-polyurethane body/subframe mounts
-15x8" factory snowflake "WS6" wheels
-245/60R15 front tires, 295/50R15 rear tires (also considering 265/50R15s all around if they'll fit)
-stock coils (reuse originals as they have sagged to a nice ride height)
-stock leafs (new from Eaton Detroit)
(Here I must say that I am torn between adding lowering coils and leafs.)

I don't think the above really qualifies as pro-touring per se, maybe pro-tour-esque??? Maybe more pro-tour from a decade or so ago... heck I don't know!!!

Anyway, so... what's the concensus on the above... good? Bad? Average? I am torn between adding lowering coils and leafs. I really like the looks of some of the lowered cars, but have concerns about suspension travel clearance as well as wheel/tire clearance... and I really want to keep the 2nd Gen T/A 15x8 snowflake wheels, so tire choice is somewhat limited and restrictive perhaps with a lowered car.

[Tom Welch]

Sounds good. I had a 78 ws6 T/A a few years ago and I did the following; Lowered the front end with shorter solid aluminum subframe bushings, even if they are stock height the trick here is solid metal, not flexible, this 1 mod made a dramatic difference in ride and handling. Even more effective when combined with the plans that you have already. I used poly control arm and leaf spring bushings, worked rather well, too. I would suggest the following rubber for your consideration; 275/50r15 for the rear, it fits good on the 15x8" wheels that you want to use and it also works well on the car. The 295/50r15 will fit, but looks like it's too fat for the wheel, lots of sidewall bulge. I wound up using 235/70r15 tires all around for a slight gearing advantage on the highway. The 275/50r15 was a little shorter so I got better off line acceleration with them. Remember that these were factory built pro-touring type cars, if you optimize what you have it will surprise you.

[WS6]

Change your springs out and possibly go with better rims. I have WS6 rims on my WS6 79. I love the look, but the tires are just too tall and there are not many choices performance wise for them. Get the solid body bushings and also get the enginebay braces that triangulate the subframe and firewall. You're not far from your goal and yes I love the way my 96 WS6 formual handles too. Only I added a huge front sway bar and bilsteins to it so it'll handle even better.

[O'Neall]

Did the solid body mounts make the ride harsh? And how about noise? Do they transmit a lot of noise into the cabin. I am going to put dynamat sound deadener throughout the interior... so hopefully that should help... but I am concerned about the negative effects of the solid body bushings/mounts.

[David Pozzi]

Solid subframe mounts are the best way to go. The polly mounts don't really dampen much anyway, you might as well go solid. You won't notice any added harshness worth bothering about.

[81Nascar]

Hey Jon. Glad to see you over here. Go with the solid frame bushings. That makes the suspension do the work instead of the body. Think of it like this the 3rd and 4th gen cars were unibodies, but were mounted to the car with no bushings. The frame was welded to the floor. I've got the the solid bushings on my 81 and my 71 Camaro. They actually make the car feel more solid and don't transfer road problems. If it feels like that then you have other problems. A solid frame reveals poor suspension pieces pretty quick in my opinoin. That's the whole trick with the connectors. You want to reduce flex to the point the car doesn't flex if possible. Soilid bushings would help achieve that. Poly still has some flex in it. I look at it like this ...if you are going to weld upthe connectors might as well go all the way. A side note have you seen the new frame connectors form Chriss Alston's Chassisworks? The new G- connectors. Theywork in combination with a x type brackest as well that fits between the connectors called the G-support. I have wanted to do something like this for a while and the best part is that the frame connectors are predrilled with holes for the g-support so you can unbolt it when you need to take something out. With a T-top car you want all the support you can get. Anyway I thought I would throw that out there. I've got SSM frame connectors, but I am considering the Chassisworks set up now for my 81. I like the concept better and they follow the floor pan.

[Bandit]

Sounds like a plan, but PLEASE don't install stock springs. Go with a total vehicle setup from either Hotchkis or GW. The kit is an amazing performance bargain, I paid just over $1,000 for my Hotchkis TVS and it included most of the parts on your list, and greatly improved the stance and handling of the car. If you are worried that the aftermarket springs will ride rough, don't think that way. These are street kits for the most part with part-time track ability, all you have to do is pick the appropriate spring rates. Mine rides much better now with the TVS. The feel is quick and responsive, but not a bit harsh. Also I wholeheartedly agree with others here that you should do solid body bushings. I don't think you will achieve the level of handling you're looking for with the parts you have listed. At least look into it before going the route you had planned. Also did I read that right, that you want to install 295 tires on a 8" rim? If so, you risk rolling the tire right off the rim on a hard corner--that's way too wide a tire unless you have at least a 9" rim IMHO.

[O'Neall]

All right... you all have sold me on the solid subframe/body mounts. It was 81Nascar's point that the 4th Gen subframes were welded right to the unibody that really sold the deal. Can't get much more solid than that I did LOVE the way my 97 WS6 rode and handled.

So now... who makes the best solid mounts? Suggestions.

As for the Hotchis TVS... I am going to seriously look into that... thanks for the tip!

[Marcus SC&C]

Yep,pretty good plan. The `79 WS6 cars would pull .79G with 65 series tires. Not too shabby. I think I`d go 235-60-15 up front and 275-50-15 in the rear. You can go a lot larger. I had a `78 with 265-50-15s in front and 295-50-15 rear on AR Outlaw III 8.5" wheels. It looked wicked but the tires rubbed when you pushed it really hard. New springs wouldn`t be a bad idea,say Hotchkis all around. The old ones are probably softened quite a bit by now. The extra rate of the new performance spring will help the handling a lot too. The front end geometry of 2nd gens is pretty decent but they can use a lot of alignment help. A set of our adj. upper arms would let you run say 1/2* camber and +5* caster. That makes a BIG difference in performance. You can go with a taller upper ball joint with those arms to give you more - camber gain too. That`ll help keep the tall sidewall tires perpendicular to the road and reduce sidewall flex. They`re such cool cars. I may have to get another one some time. Mark SC&C

[Jeremy]

I have solid subframe mounts, the front structure kit, and CE sub frame connectors and as the others have said it won't make things more harsh. I have found that it makes the ride better as all you have to worry about is suspension movement not the car flexing.

If you want a package deal on subframe mounts, connectors, and the engine bay braces, give DJ at pro-touring-fbody.com a look. If you want all this from one place he has it and I would ask about a package deal.

If you don't mind multiple vendors, I would go with the g supports and braces talked about. It looks like a well thought out system and will furtehr firm up the chassis.

I tried the same thing as you of running the factory springs and they just really didn't work, at least on the fronts. They were too soft and my car actually rides better now with a stiffer front spring. I run the VBP system set now on the second setting, but for a traditional set up I would go with the Hotchkis as well.

[O'Neall]

Jeremy... thanks for the info... I really appreciate the first hand experience with your similar set up! Very cool! (I already have a set of CE SFCs too (not on the car yet, I bought them over a year ago)). Anyway, like I posted above I am definitely going to go with the solid mounts now... you guys have convinced me!! LOL!!! I know Pro-Touring F-body has them... and I have thought about the front structure Y braces too. But that may be overkill for me. PTFB also sells a coils/leaf package that is about $130 cheaper than Hotchkis'... any word on how the two compare?

Speaking of Hotchkis, I did look up the Hotchkis TVS and it looks like a great buy if I was wanting their sway bars (since that is a big part of the price). But I guess I'm just not sure that their 1 3/8" & 7/8" hollow bars are really too much better than the stock 1 1/4" & 5/8" solid bars. I'm sure they are lighter, but not so sure they would be much more effective controlling body roll to justify the price. Figure I can stick with my stockers add some decent springs and the solid mounts (and new ball joints, tie rods, etc.) and some Energy Suspension poly swaybar bushings and endlinks and be bucks ahead in the long run with basically the same effect. Am I way off base here?

[Jeremy]

I don't think the y braces would be overkill as I don't think you can every get a 2nd gen too stiff without a cage.

I can't comment on pro tourings springs, but DJ is a stand up guy. I bought a set of his competition arms a year or two back and he has since updated the arms with some improvements. He saw on a post on TAC that I was having trouble getting the alignment specs I wanted and is willing to give me a price break on the new arms. Not too many companies will discount prices on new items just because you bought an earlier model.

If you like the Hotchkiss ride height, their springs would be the easiest to just install and go. I would get their matched shocks as well.

The sway bars would not be high on my list of must haves. While the weight reduction would be nice, I actually believe they are a little softer, at least on the front than the ws6 bars.

Performance tires and wheels are a must have, if you ask me. While I love the look of the snowflakes, they wheel never perform as well as a 16, 17, or 18 inch combo.

[O'Neall]

Yeah, but I just love the 8" snowflakes to much to give 'em up! LOL I'm hoping somebody someday make a 17" version of them!!!!

As for shocks... I already have a full set of Koni adjustables, so I think I'm set there. I know Bilstiens are supposed to be good (that's what Hotchkis sells)... but I still think Konis are the standard when it comes to shocks.

[Marcus SC&C]

I`d leave the stock bars,they work great and best of all you already have em! Nothing wrong with the Konis either,great shocks.
I`m with ya on the WS6 snowflakes. I had them on a couple of my TAs and even my Turbo Regal. I should never have sold my last set. :banghead: On my last one I used the 16" `87 WS6 black centered "basket" wheels. They`re a little bit like the snowflakes but they`re getting really hard to find now too.
For enough moolah you could have the centers cut out of the the snowflakes and have them welded into custom billet 17" outters to make 17" snowflakes. Oh would that be sweet! Mark SC&C

[6'9"Witha69]

Or, if you really had moolah to burn call MHT or another custom wheel place and have them whittle up a set for ya.

Where is the puckered a$$hole smiley??

[O'Neall]

Well, maybe this collarboration between Year One and Burt Reynolds (see link) will result in a set of 17" snowflakes. One can dream can't they!

http://www.yearone.com/news.asp?nsl=1&nslSEC=10&nslURL=http://www.yearone.com/Articles/news_dp.asp?AID=135 (http://www.yearone.com/news.asp?nsl=1&nslSEC=10&nslURL=http://www.yearone.com/Articles/news_dp.asp?AID=135)

Thanks for all the advice guys... I'm getting closer to finding the magic formula... I can feel it!!!!!! :twothumbs

[EricU]

have you seen the new frame connectors form Chriss Alston's Chassisworks? The new G- connectors. Theywork in combination with a x type brackest as well that fits between the connectors called the G-support....the frame connectors are predrilled with holes for the g-support so you can unbolt it when you need to take something out.

Does anyone have a link to the Alston "G-connectors" I saw their weld in sub-frame connectors for the 2nd Gens, but not anything like what you have described.

Also, does anyone make a roll cage kit for my 77 TA? I was planing on installing a full cage and using the car as a track car, but that has changed since I just bought another car to turn into a spec racer (dont tell anyone here that it is a BMW!!!). Anyway I now plan on running the TA on the street, but still want to put a partial cage in it. Any ideas?

The car is a pretty straight California car that does not have t-tops (best part is the car was free).

Thanks, Eric.

[WS6]

pro-touring f-body was listing cages.

That year one venture sounds great, but they must ditch those ugly ass wheels. I need to send an email. be right back.

[SHANE 73Z]

Does anyone have a link to the Alston "G-connectors" I saw their weld in sub-frame connectors for the 2nd Gens, but not anything like what you have described.

Also, does anyone make a roll cage kit for my 77 TA? I was planing on installing a full cage and using the car as a track car, but that has changed since I just bought another car to turn into a spec racer (dont tell anyone here that it is a BMW!!!). Anyway I now plan on running the TA on the street, but still want to put a partial cage in it. Any ideas?

The car is a pretty straight California car that does not have t-tops (best part is the car was free).

Thanks, Eric.

The skinny on the G-connectors is that they are still in development, indefinately. They basically took the Total Control line for Mustangs and are going to apply it to the Camaro.

Shane

[EricU]

The skinny on the G-connectors is that they are still in development, indefinately. They basically took the Total Control line for Mustangs and are going to apply it to the Camaro.

Shane

Does anyone have any idea on how long "indefinately" is?

And yes I realize the question sounds stupid.

What about fabbing up a set at home? Has anyone done this? I am pretty much gutting my car, so welding in the car is not a problem.

Thanks, Eric.

[EricU]

While we are talking about 2nd Gen T/As, I have a question about the following link that I found over it the "Wheels & Tires" area

Can 315-40/17s really fit under the rear with out mini-tubs?

And if so, why mini-tub?

I was planning on getting a Currie 9" with disks for the rear, but now that I have a different track car and the T/A will be a street car I am not sure if I wont just rebuild the stock rear diff and add disks to it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.oldsmobility.com/fitting-wheels.htm (http://www.oldsmobility.com/fitting-wheels.htm)

17-inch: 17x91/2 with 6-inch back-spacing up front; you’ll need to modify the steering stops or the lower control arm to prevent contact. Camaros use 17x10 rears, Firebirds use 17x11, both with 6-inch backspacing. As mentioned in the 15-inch recommendations, you’ll need to remove the seatbelt retractor and bulge. Use tires with an aspect ratio of 40 or less with widths of 275 front, 295-315 rear. This is a really tight fit, so success will vary
car-to-car.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Marcus SC&C]

We`ve already got a set of the Alston subframe/X brace on preorder. As soon as they`re in production we`ll have the skinny for ya. We`ve used the TC Mustang version and they worked really nice so we have high hopes. Mark SC&C

[Mean 69]

I have seen a few second gen cars with 315's on the back, without mini-tubs, but in my opinion, the cars don't look that good. You need to raise the rear of the car up to do so, or run REALLY high rate rear springs, because the contours of the outer wheel tubs angle back towards the car pretty "steep." If you run the car low, you'll probably end up hitting the outer tubs pretty fast in bump. We did a couple mini-tub deals on a pair of 70 Camaros while installing our 3-Link kits, and now can fit 335's on the cars, without it looking like a 4x4. If you don't have an issue cutting the car up a bit, it's worth it in my opinion. Of course, our rear suspension is worth doing if this holds also...

Mark

[79T/Aman]

who makes a 315-40-17 tire?

[Bandit]

Can 315-40/17s really fit under the rear with out mini-tubs?

Not on my car--I had to beat the crap out of the seat belt retractor bulges with a hammer, and pull the exhaust in a bit to fit 285's, and they still rub a bit. It would be even worse with taller sidewalls. 285's are like a foot wide, which is plenty for me.