Whats the best G's recorded on a skid pad with a Gbody?

[Stg1Regal]

Read an article awhile back about a susepension set up on a 69 Camaro , it was a 6 cylinder suspension car with a v8, and it did terrible on a skid pad.

With what I consider to be bolt on upgrades to the suspension, it did .97 g's from .80 g's. up & low arms springs ft and rear, and frnt sway bar , a subframe connector, 17" tires and no rear sway bar.

Now a older article I read on a G-body Monte, with b-body spindles a correct offset upper arms a big ft sway bar, and rear bar, and springs, managed a best of .89 g's?

Can or will a G-body do better?

Seen most of the arms out there are geared to accomodate various spindle heights or tall ball joints.

The kit in the Camaro had the factory spindle with bigger brakes.(from what I read)

Im not comparing companies or kits just wanted to know what all it took to get a Gbody up there?

Thanks

[canadiantbone]

car craft did an article back a few years with a cutlass doing .97 on the skid pad check out www.fe3xolds.com there's a link there to pictures & the article.

[T-CHRGD]

A link to the article http://www.houlster.com/olds/fe3x2.htm

A big reason why I had my original set-up, Heavy front bar and Stock rear bar. Great, balanced feel.

This was, of course, before I went to www.scandc.com (http://www.scandc.com) and went Totally off the deep end :rolleyes:

[silver69camaro]

All you need is a good camber setting and sticky tires. Slaloms is where it really gets tricky.

[Stg1Regal]

T-CHRGD

Thanks for the link, I heard about that car, back when i was building my 84 Cutlass.. 403 car... wanted to do something similar,but never found out any info on it.

The rims on it are awesome!!! Gottis, wouldnt mind having those in todays world they'd fit right in.

Yep , you did go over board in agood way, got several pics printed off of your setup with notes, to put in my "Wish, Hoping for, and gonna get sumday" file.

Sounds like that Olds setup was spot on, but wouldnt try it for me, any other thoughts on different G-bodys running auto cross, salom racing.. or anything like that?

I know they can handle better than they do, doing the SC&C set up seems to be the least exspensive. for the fronts. and your set up on the rear is exactly what I want.

Just dont dont want to go off on the deep end, so..... 17" rims maybe the Cragar Soft D's, and those inexpensive, kumho summuto tires? brakes will be GM style add ons ? upgrades, like LS1 rotor brakes front and rear.

thanks guys .....any and other and more suggestions appreciated, trying do this on a budget.
( wife in school, youngest daughter pregnant still living at home with b/f ) youknow the normal stuff...... but i got a good start.

[Norm Peterson]

At first glance, the springs and bars for that Cutlass looked like a recipe for moderately heavy to outright heavy understeer. Then I realized that the weight distribution was ~58% front, so the 63/37-ish Lateral Load Transfer Distribution isn't all that bad after all. 5% more front LLTD than front weight % seems to be as good target as any to at least shoot for initially in a front engine RWD car.

63/37 LLTD would be terrible on my Malibu (non-AC, lots of aluminum engine parts, battery in trunk) that scaled at about 53/47 weight distribution.


I think I've had a hardcopy of that Cutlass article saved somewhere . . . along with a couple of other G-body chassis/suspension handling articles.


Norm

[Stg1Regal]

Norm do you think you could find them and post them?

Thanks

[Norm Peterson]

Find them = probably
Scan them = definitely
Post them = iffy at best (I don't think I have nearly enough attachment space left).


Norm

[Stg1Regal]

Then poosiblely send them to me... @

[email protected] ?

Thanks :)

[Stg1Regal]

Got them ... thanks Norm!!

[6spdmalibu]

Any way to post the information for others to view?

[Norm Peterson]

I can e-mail them out. Ideally, somebody would have a way of hosting them.

So far, I've found a 3-page article and a 5-page article. The B&W scans came out at about 1MB per.


Norm

[Memphis]

You can host them on tinypic

[Norm Peterson]

All I know about sites like tinypic/photobucket/etc. is that I can't get there from here (work computer).


Norm

[jackfrost]

Norm,

I can host them.

442 AT digitallights DOT com

[jackfrost]

the files are about 1Mb each:

http://dave.digitallights.com/pics/A-bodyCurveTuning1.jpg
http://dave.digitallights.com/pics/A-bodyCurveTuning2.jpg
http://dave.digitallights.com/pics/A-bodyCurveTuning3.jpg
http://dave.digitallights.com/pics/A-bodyCurveTuning4.jpg
http://dave.digitallights.com/pics/A-bodyCurveTuning5.jpg

http://dave.digitallights.com/pics/SundayDriver1.jpg
http://dave.digitallights.com/pics/SundayDriver2.jpg
http://dave.digitallights.com/pics/SundayDriver3.jpg

[Norm Peterson]

Thanks.

[nowukno]

At first glance, the springs and bars for that Cutlass looked like a recipe for moderately heavy to outright heavy understeer. Then I realized that the weight distribution was ~58% front, so the 63/37-ish Lateral Load Transfer Distribution isn't all that bad after all. 5% more front LLTD than front weight % seems to be as good target as any to at least shoot for initially in a front engine RWD car.

63/37 LLTD would be terrible on my Malibu (non-AC, lots of aluminum engine parts, battery in trunk) that scaled at about 53/47 weight distribution.


I think I've had a hardcopy of that Cutlass article saved somewhere . . . along with a couple of other G-body chassis/suspension handling articles.


Norm
Hey Norm, could you foward me a copy too please?
[email protected]

[nowukno]

Oh!!! nevermind Norm i see it on the above posts

[6spdmalibu]

Those are some great articles.
Didn't notice any numbers, or "seat of the pants" remarks to the handling of each suspension set up.

[6spdmalibu]

Although now that I think about it. Found it interesting that a longer lower a arm was used with the camaro spindles instead of the usual shorter upper a arm.
With todays wheels and the wider track width might be used to gain better scrub radius?!