Will this be o.k. for the street

[796spdbu]

Hope some can help.I have a 72' chevelle.I want to do a budget built.Here is what I'm thinking.Energy suspension bushings(all ready purchased),hotchkis springs,kyb shocks(gr-2),speed-tech 13''brake brackets w/c-4/5 parts,hotchkis front swaybar,marcus sc&c/howe tall ball joints.That is what I have come up with for the front.For the rear I'm making my own upper and lower c/a's with currie jonnie joints on the chassis side and urethane bushings on the axle side,no rear sway bar kyb shocks,hotchkis springs.The engine will be a vortec head 355'' with a 700r-4 trans,and a 3:73 posi trac 10-bolt.Wheels and tires will be 17x8/17x11 torq-thrustII with 245/45and315/35 bfg tires.Finally here is my questions....Are the marcus tall ball joints going to work for me,I would like to do a track day or two,but mainly spirited daily driving,the joints are listed for $85.00 a piece,I'm not saying they are not worth it, i just dont know.Lastly can i use a monte-carlo ss g-body steering box in the stock 72'chevelle location.Idont mind spending the right money as long as it is in the right place.I want to do this once and that is it.Iant to do this in as little time as possible so no exotic parts,I'll save that for the 67'camaro next year,i'd like to enjoy this car soon as possible.Thanks for any and all help.

[dennis68]

Hope some can help.I have a 72' chevelle.I want to do a budget built.Here is what I'm thinking.Energy suspension bushings(all ready purchased),hotchkis springs,kyb shocks(gr-2),speed-tech 13''brake brackets w/c-4/5 parts,hotchkis front swaybar,marcus sc&c/howe tall ball joints.That is what I have come up with for the front.For the rear I'm making my own upper and lower c/a's with currie jonnie joints on the chassis side and urethane bushings on the axle side,.
You were doing fine until you went poly on the axle. Poly bushings do not ever go on C4L suspension links ever. It does not matter what your intended pupose is. Say it with me, NEVER USE POLY ON A C4L SUSPENSION.

Ohhh, the tire sizing is WAY wrong. You can't run that much split and hope to anything at an open track event short look stylish. 245/315 is too much split. 275/315 is barely going to work. How about either the 275/315 or maybe a 255/285.

[Elusive R]

Why not try the poly bushings out? If you don't like the way it drives/rides, then go get yourself some rubber bushings or the Wolfe bushings dennis has (although somewhat exotic) and swap them out. Since you paid for the bushings, might as well give them a try. Who knows, it might be perfect for your style since you're not running a rear sway bar.

I can't comment too much on your front suspension setup, but it sounds like you've done your research already. I don't see why those ball joints wouldn't work and they'll save you money to prevent you from doing a B-body spindle swap.

Ryan

[dennis68]

Ryan, because it has been scientifically proven that poly bushings induce bind into a system that already has bind designed into it. It is physically impossible for poly bushings to NOT make it worse. You have them, I understand. They still are not right.

It is like trying to convince to someone to make your same mistakes so you’re not the only one or something. They are wrong, no other way around it. They do not work period. I do not care if you think your car works OK with them, it does not.

I thought you were an engineering student….did you skip the kinematics semester? :icon_razz

[jyeager]

Ryan, because it has been scientifically proven that poly bushings induce bind into a system that already has bind designed into it. It is physically impossible for poly bushings to NOT make it worse. You have them, I understand. They still are not right.

It is like trying to convince to someone to make your same mistakes so you’re not the only one or something. They are wrong, no other way around it. They do not work period. I do not care if you think your car works OK with them, it does not.

I thought you were an engineering student….did you skip the kinematics semester? :icon_razz

Actually the Johnny Joints that he plans to use on one end of the control arms will negate any binding. Therefore he's good to go!
http://www.currieenterprises.com/cestore/johnnyjoints.aspx

[Elusive R]

I do not care if you think your car works OK with them, it does not.

I thought you were an engineering student….did you skip the kinematics semester? :icon_razz

Wow, thanks for letting me know that my car doesn't work. And don't worry, I not only took kinematics, I got an A. :icon996:

You just need to stop presenting your opinion as fact. Yes, poly induces more bind - we get it - and that part is a fact. Saying that they are flat out wrong for everyone is your opinion. Maybe some people like how it drives with full poly and no sway bar. Maybe some like full rubber and a big bar. Some might like all rubber and no bar. Or 1/2 and 1/2. Or any other combo. They all work, you just might prefer one over the others because it feels best to you. Maybe some people aren't planning on driving their car around with spherical bushings at every corner. There are many different driving styles/habits/preferences. Please just be a little more open minded. I only suggested that he try the poly bushings to see how he likes them. Then he can decide for himself what's best for his car. I think I'm done with this thread so I don't hijack it more than I already have - my apologies to 796spdbu.

Ryan

[dennis68]

not sure what happened there...

[dennis68]

Wow, thanks for letting me know that my car doesn't work. And don't worry, I not only took kinematics, I got an A. :icon996: Cool, so we are on the same page. That said...
You just need to stop presenting your opinion as fact. Nothing I have stated in this thread was an opinion, it is proven fact
Yes, poly induces more bind - we get it - and that part is a fact. Good, we agree
Saying that they are flat out wrong for everyone is your opinion. Maybe some people like how it drives with full poly and no sway bar. Maybe some like full rubber and a big bar. Some might like all rubber and no bar. Or 1/2 and 1/2. Or any other combo. They all work; you just might prefer one over the others because it feels best to you. Maybe some people aren't planning on driving their car around with spherical bushings at every corner. There are many different driving styles/habits/preferences. Please just be a little more open minded. I only suggested that he try the poly bushings to see how he likes them. Then he can decide for himself what's best for his car. I think I'm done with this thread so I don't hijack it more than I already have - my apologies to 796spdbu.That is like recommending that someone try driving with undersized brakes, sure they may work OK, for a while. Then, at the worst possible moment the poorly designed system will reveal itself for what it is...inferior. The result will be a bunch of head scratching while looking at the carnage wondering what went wrong (assuming everyone is OK). There is no situation in the world where purposely running inferior parts is "OK, maybe he likes it that way".

I pride myself on leaving my opinion at the door when I enter these arenas. I may slip occasionally but for the part if I state it, it is not an opinion. I don’t think this is a hijack as he wants to know what other shave to say about his theory. I have told him that it will, without question, induce more bind into the system than was already present. You state that he might like it. Good tech for the suspension thread.



On edit, maybe we need some kind of refinement of the rules of the board around here, I know quite a few have gotten some feathers ruffled lately for having their "opinions" squashed by tech in the TECH SECTIONS. Just my .01 (I don't have .02 to spare). I’m pretty sure we have some opinions type sections too for those who want to freely express them.

[dennis68]

Actually the Johnny Joints that he plans to use on one end of the control arms will negate any binding. Therefore he's good to go!
http://www.currieenterprises.com/cestore/johnnyjoints.aspx
Wrong. Running Jonny Joints will not negate the affects of running solid ends (polyurethane) at the other end. This theory has been tested and by overwhelming amounts disproved at CC.com....would like a copy of the test. I happen to have it handy.

PS, I have JJ on my axle now so it's not a vendor bashing issue here.

[796spdbu]

Hey Dennisand Ryan,
I dont have the rear poly yet.I only have the front,are they too wrong.Dennis,I have been on the site for a couple of years now,just sitting quietly and reading the posts tring to build my cars to the best of performance,both suspension and braking,drive train comes last if the car stil moves on its own power.Dennis,you have become one of the names i became fimiliar with as I have read some pretty amazing things,because of you and pozzi i have started looking into differnt engineering colleges,kinda hard for a 27 yr.old guy to do but what the hay.Any way,to my point,Ihave come to respect your opinion.Hope i can meet you some day and pick your brain.Ryan,I also respect your opinion.As for the rear control arms,I have built a few rock crawling jeep suspensions with the johnie joints with good results,but I also know that they are differnt animals as far as handling.I really thought that they would take the bind out of the system.Thanks dennis for setting me straight.So idea would be JJ on both ends??How about straight heim joints,I have used these in many race cars i have built and owned.They were drag cars though.I know heims are precesion parts but how a bout wear and mileage life.Iknow how rough they ride on the street as do the jonnie joints,so ride dont really matter nor does the noise of either of them.Do the g-body malibu suffer from the same rear four link bind and does that mean my full hotchkis suspension...suck.What if any thing will cure both of these cars.My malibu is finished other than the engine tuneing.I want to take either of these cars on the first annual pro-touring cruise in june.Does the poly in the front suck too,I have heard bad about del-rin bushings also and thought the poly was a better way to go.Do i need a rear bar,cause i have heard that they also add to the already mass amount of bind?Wheels and tires will the 285's look lost in the rear on a 9.5" wheel,they wont fit on an 11" with out bulge will they?I dont want to run a lot of back spacing because that causes bearing wear,right.Will the 275"s rub on hard cornering with a 9.5" in the front they dont look right on 8's(ive tried).I know im asking alot but i like to do things right once? Any help will be greatly appriciated.I havnt even started on the suspension yet so I very open to any proven designs.How about the sterring box?Will the g-body SS box work?I can fab my own rear control arms just need to know what to run on each end.Thanks again.Greg

[BRIAN]

I agree, not everybody is after the same results. The parts chosen are not dangerous combination, correct? I do prefer rubber bushings but probably for a different reason. I guess clarify what end result you are looking for. Some guys will do simple shock swap and swear car out performs a race car. Others will never be satisfied. Good luck.

[crashbox455]

any four link is going to have kinematically-induced forces placed on the links, whether you've got poly or not.

so any kind of four link is "flat out wrong"

denny is on the right track, meaning for his purposes, and the purposes of the people this site was created for, poly bushings on a four link is "wrong". that is correct.

based on the question asked, i don't think the original poster is much of a hard-core suspension guy. nothing wrong with that, but IMO there are other more appropriate forums out there for questions like that. i don't think throwing bushings into a clusterfeck like a chevelle rear is money well spent. for this guy, or others, it may be the best choice that fits in the budget.

having said that, i would like to point out to the chevelle guy that the Mule has rubber bushings, and Stielow made a good case as to why in the original PHR series.


what, you don't have all 41 issues featuring the Mule? isn't that a prerequisite for joining this forum?

[yody]

WOW 41 issues of the mule! Dennis, take a chill pill, you learn a few things and now have turned into the know-it-all tech police, give it up, I know you are on a quest of teaching everyone with an A body about the correct ends for the links, but you are trying to force feed it. I see you have definetly learned your stuff in the last year, but only time will teach you to have patience and offer your "opinion" not make it a fact that has to be followed, and not "care" so much if people don't just take your ideas as facts, or just too ignorant too listen. I could see if what he was doing was going to be dangerous but it isn't. Now i do fully agree with you on the poly Crap, but you should worry more about your own ride. I know you are just trying to share your info with this guy, but this Isn't CC.com so chill out.
p.s. have you prepared your excuses for that blue firebird blowing past you in the upcoming buttonwillow event?......:)

[Blown353]

I'll jump in here and try to explain why you don't want poly in the rear end-- it leads to increased roll stiffness. While that isn't a bad thing (a sway bar does it too) the poly's give you unpredictable and nonlinear roll stiffness response. It's different every time based on the suspension loading and orientation of the links. The car never responds the same way twice.

What that translates to in an A-body is snap oversteer in a corner over road irregularities (bumps), as the suspension cannot articulate freely and in a linear fashion. Rather than ride smoothly over the bump, the polys will cause the rear to "skip" and break traction.

Years ago I ran poly on the back of my car for a week, and that's only because I didn't have time during the week to remove them the very next day. I had to wait for the next weekend! The first time the rear end "skipped" around a corner and tried to pass the front I decided I had enough.

You don't want poly not just because it's "wrong" for the stock converging 4-link, you don't want them because they make the car VERY unpredictable in a turn, especially one that isn't glass smooth! Trust me, you don't want to have the nagging doubt as you sling the car into a turn asking "gee, I wonder if it'll stick this time..."

If you never push the car hard through turns, the polys will suffice but ride very stiff. The moment you start pushing it hard through turns however they become a matter of safety because of the unpredictability they induce in the rear suspension.

Dennis has it 100% right here. The best way to get the best results out of the stock C4L is exactly as he described. It won't be a 100% ideal rear suspension but it will stick pretty good, and more importantly be predictable and safe in the twisties.

Troy

[wally8]

OK, here comes the circle tracker POV.

Wissota modifieds are restricted to running this suspension only. As a result they have developed it about as far as one could imagine.

Guess what? They use poly bushings. Bushings unlike you've probably ever seen. The outer casing is about 2 to 2.5 inches in diameter and the bolts are typically 5/8 inch. What that makes is a bushing with a lot of poly material in there. That's the key to making this type of suspension work; a compliant bushing. Poly is fine, it just depends on what durometer of poly you're using (yes, you can get different values). In fact, most of these suspensions have bushings with two different values of poly in them to aid in forward bite while still being compliant in roll. When Denny talks about Poly he's talking about that off the shelf crap that is typically marketed to street guys.

For those who don't know exactly why the bind is bad, it's because it is a progressively increasing spring rate. You typically stiffen a rear spring to loosen up a car. This means your car will get progressively looser as you roll harder into the corner and the spring rate starts to approach infinity. This doesn't happen at a linear rate and thus you find the limit of the car all of a sudden. It's a bad deal, especially for an inexperienced driver. It can happen on the street too depending on what kind of nut you are on the on ramps.

So there you have it. Denny is sort of right but not completely.

I would also agree that no one wants the semi-hostile environment of CC.com and that Denny is generally a little overbearing in his tirade against poly bushings but by the same token, this place shouldn't devolve into a tech-free zone like other forums. Most of you know which one I'm talking about. Opinions are fine but don't get PO'd when someone gives some actual tech that doesn't agree.

I've read a lot of the archives and this site seems to have been built by some pretty hard core guys. I'd hate to see them decide to head somewhere else because of too much unsubstantiated psuedo tech. I've talked to several people who feel the same way. This is not to mean that people shouldn't ask questions, just be prepared for the answers.


Wally

[yody]

Agreed not exactly the same thing, but same idea, i was running poly in my rear sway bar and leaf springs, the rear was so stiff! It too would "skip" and break traction, believe i had to much roll stifness, the stock rear swaybar wasn't designed fo rhte polyurethane bushigns, it wasn't very thick but the combination of the poly in the bar and springs created an undesirable handling scenario, you never new when traction was going to break, pretty unpredictable aka dennis's comparison to inferior brakes. What Dennis is saying is true, what minute you will be going through a corner and either a bump or just no more traction will give you snap-oversteer, not the greatest thing or the safest

[gen3bu]

greg,
the 275/285 will fit perfect on a 9.5 wheel. there is a guy in washington that has the 275 on 9.5 combo up front on a monte ss. here is his website: http://home.earthlink.net/~bzdel/
good luck

kevin

[yody]

I would also agree that no one wants the semi-hostile environment of CC.com and that Denny is generally a little overbearing in his tirade against poly bushings
:lol:



this place shouldn't devolve into a tech-free zone like other forums. Most of you know which one I'm talking about. Opinions are fine but don't get PO'd when someone gives some actual tech that doesn't agree.

:grouphug:
couldn't of said it better! lets get back on track, and not let this post get dissolved

[zbugger]

Cody, care to tell what you were running out back? What springs? What size bar? I hate to say it, but I think you could have lost that by losing the rear bar. Besides that, you have leaf springs. They act differently than the C4L on A and G body cars.

[Blown353]

Wally, good info! I wrote my post referring strictly to off the shelf, super high durometer poly that you get from Energy, PST, et all. That is was what my experience was with. I threw it in the trash as soon as I could! Yes folks, it really was that bad. While some people report good results with off the shelf poly's, I'm fairly certain these people have never hucked their car into a fast turn. The moment you do that you quickly find why hard poly bushings are a terrible idea in the rear of these cars. Add some bumps in that turn, or better yet fully boxed upper control arms and you'll receive an extra-special lesson.

Wally, with the lower durometer Poly's as you described, I can see it working; basically you would have bushings that would perform as the compliant factory-style rubber bushings, only more durable. Having ran my rear with boxed lowers / stock uppers and fresh rubber all the way around for a while, I can attest to that being a very well functioning setup. Nice, smooth, and predictable. A tiny bit of lateral "squirm" of the rear end on turn-in, but once it took a set it was very predictable. The squirm on turn-in was disconcerting though, which is why I changed to my current GW/Edelbrock setup. I'm supposing you could tune that squirm out with the circle track pieces by playing with bushing firmness, namley in the upper arms since they control the lateral movement of the rear end.

Happen to have a link for the circle track bushings? I'm not going to run out and switch (I'm running spherical joints, Johnny Joints, and rubber) but I'd love to see it just so I'm armed with more product knowledge!

Troy

[Marcus SC&C]

796,I have to agree with Blown353. Poly in C4L suspension is generally not a good thing. If they`re in stock arms they`re not as bad because the arms have plenty of torsional flex. In solid box section arms they create non linear binding that can lead to really bad (and sudden!) handling traits like snap oversteer. We`ve found that a spherical bearing (Jonny joint,Edelbrock UCAs etc.) do in fact help. I don`t have any exhaustive engineering studys on it just a number of actual customer`s cars that no longer have the undesirable traits and drive much more predictably. There`s still a lot of room for improvement but at least they don`t scare you anymore. Don`t forget a rear swaybar. An A body with the parts you listed will understeer baddly without one. As for the tall BJs,yes they`re worth it (of course I`d say that,yeah I know). The difference in geometry and bumpsteer is really noticable though. Enough that you can drop down a bit on the size of the front swaybar. Don`t try and run them with stock UCAs though,you won`t be able to get enough shims in to get a decent performance alignment (or likely even stock specs). That`s why we sell them as a package with adj. UCAs! :) Oh and forget the GR2 shocks,they`re non performance units,little better than stock replacement. Don`t discount the importance of really good shocks. We`ve done cars with just our Stg.2 suspension,stock swaybars and 12way QA1 shocks that handled and drove amazingly well. Marcus

[dennis68]

I will stand corrected on the point that the bushings I was referring to were the off the shelf garbage from Energy, PST or any of the others. I am aware a few manufacturers are building bushings with very low durometer ratings. I don't know where to obtain such items but I do know that 95%+ of the guys are not running them. Those guys are the ones my rant is aimed.

BTW wise ass Yodi, I have been doing this professionally for 15 years, how about you? All I have been doing lately is taking the next the next step.

[yody]

:) wow 15 years! was that like back in the 60's? I heard people back then used to smoke a lot of stuff? that would explain things :) BTW what is "this"?

Zbugger; i was using replacment multi leaf springs dearched 3 inches, poly in back, rubber in front spring perch, stock, i think 3/4" rear sway bar with poly in the bushings, my point was that if i would of switched to all rubber my problems could of went away, i could of ditched the rear sway bar(which i did) but it was just an example of how putting poly in a basically stock rear suspension creates oversteer; snap oversteer. Obviously apples to oranges but the idea is still the same, that polyurehtna creates bind.

So how is a low durometer polyurethane differ from rubber besides that it lasts longer? I am guessing that the poly isn't bonded to the metal sleeve? letting it rotate better without binding?

[MrQuick]

Hey Dennis,
hows that rear suspension going? You oughta post some pictures up here and show some alternatives to rubber...I remember back in the day we use to drill and press nails into stock bushings to stiffin them up ...Zody, you idiot, 15 years is more like the 70's dumb asx! he he

[Paddington]

Actually 2005 - 15 is 1990 :)

you people seem to be even worse then me in maths lol

[wally8]

Yody,

They are bonded but like you said, they're more durable. Other than that I'm not sure what other advantages poly has over rubber.

Blown353,

I don't have a link but I'll look around a little. I haven't had the misfortune of having to put a Wissota mod on a track but I've been around them here and there and raced a C4L in a street stock for a couple years. I saw these bushings just this year at a swap meet about a month ago. I stopped and talked to the guys about them a little bit. We only had rubber bushings back when I was doing the street stock thing.


Wally

[dennis68]

Ask and ye shall receive...https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

[JoshStratton]

Sorry guys, but I have to ask a question. I am new to the suspension game. I don't have an A-body (79 TA), but I am curious. I read all of these posts and am a little confused. When do you WANT to use the poly bushings? I assume they are necessary on specific suspensions. I was planning on using the Hotchkis TVS Sport Suspension but the recent article in PHR about Project g makes me wonder if I am going with the wrong thing for my application...your typical PT car.

[dennis68]

On any suspension comonent that ONLY needs to rotate. The problem is when a component is required to articulate (operate on 2 planes at the same time). Leafs or front control arms would be fine although Teflon would be better.

[yody]

well techincally the front eye of the leaf spring does move laterally, and also absorbs a lot of the bumps so that is why hothckis and others only use a rubber in the front and poly in the rear eye. Dennis, I thought that the front control arms will move side to side if you let them, as in using rubber/poly? oh wait, i guess it doesnt' "need to articulate" so i guess that wouldnt' matter. oops

[796spdbu]

Well here goes,
First crashbox..I'm tring to be a " hard core suspension guy."But people are always quick to judge...Damn...
I do have the prerequisite popular hot rodding series with the mule.What did mark use in the malitude. it seems that he has built and A-body with some kinda c4l.didnt he??????He narrowed the rear rails.An I think he used some kind of after market system.But i m no hard core suspension guy..........damn...........
Marcus,thanks for the info.I'll be ordering soon,if i dont decide to sell the car after this post has ended.but thanks any way really do appreciate the info with out being crucified for wanting a good handling STREET CAR.
I dont get it are the non full tilt race car guys not allowed to post here,if that is the case maybe someone should start a web site called PRO-DAILYDRIVER.com.
I seen this happen to a guy that did a really nice job on his camaro sub frame and show off his handy work and got drille din the ground for it.gen
Gen3bu ill give you a call this week,try meeting up with you soon.but noiw it seems my 79 malibu is inferior so i guess i should burn in front of all the pro-touring guys .....be cause neither the car or my self are worthy of the ("hard core suspened" pro-touring..gods)
Sorry if this offends any one, but those who have offended me.I guess i'll pack my things and leave now,So much for trying to find likeminded freinds
There goes my trip for the piegon forge cruise,Oh well back to some thing better.

[dennis68]

Not be the site jerk but although Mark is a talented builder his work should not be considered the Bible of pro-touring. He builds his cars with the level of compromise he feels comfortable with. Every car he has built "could" handle better, brake better, accelerate better....not without compromise though. Be it MPG, ride comfort, NVH or packaging. His cars are nice and perform well but they are not the be all, end all of g-machines.

Got to have broad shoulders Greg, broad shoulders. You should stick around; we do have fun once in awhile. Of course your comments and questions are always welcome, it's the opinions that have already been disproved countless times by fact that get old.

[383blown]

Did any of his other questions get answered or did I just miss it?

[wally8]

Wow! 796spdbu, chill out dude..... Friends can share some heated opinions without getting too uptight can't they? Where's that group hug smiley?

Re read the posts. No one said it wasn't OK to not be a "hard core" guy. In fact, if you investigate the remarks about cc.com you'll see that most are trying to foster an environment that caters to both the experienced and inexperienced.

You asked for opinions on what you wanted to do. Well, you got them. I don't care if you just want a "good handling street" car or not, don't use off the shelf poly.

That's my opinion. My opinion is based on the fact that I'm a hard core suspension guy who has put at least 5 completely different rear suspension systems on the track and raced them. I've also driven more than my share of stock a-bodies on the street and formed some opinion from that experience as well.

Hopefully everything will be better for you today. Don't leave just yet, add a couple mils to that skin layer and hang around :-)

Heck, in a few months you too could be like Denny and go off on someone about their insane use of inferior bushings...... :-)

Wally

[796spdbu]

I knew that when i put up my post it was like putting my head out on the chopping block.I just took a little offense to... it is ok to not be a hard core guy.Well I'm trying.Iwas always told that,the only dumb questions are the ones that dont get asked.Yes,it is ok to have a heated debt over suspension and other posts on this site,I understand that.What really got to me was the fact that every one wants to tell me the problem with the poly,cool i get it,poly is for the guys that dont visit this web site,who go to jegs and spend countless pay checks and get crap suspension and bushings.But i still do not have my answers.I have seen the edelbrock and heim joint rear links in this post.I dont know if that is the way to go.some one asked fro that person to show there suspension,and they did.Again what do i use for the front if poly sucks there to,some one said not to use jonnie joints but the edelbrock uca look close to jonnie joints,if heims work on lca why cant i (i changed from poly axle, jj frame lca)use jj frame side and axle side and do the same for the uppers.If a-bodys c4l dont work is it because both the upper and lower c/a's are trianglulated,and if so what if i would built a cross member and run the lca's parrellel to to each other.i know mark does good things for the cars he builds,I dont really think of him as a god of pro-touring,but he does have me thinking.He has built some pretty bad azz cars though.What did he use for the malitude rear. I cant find my issue of phr that covered it.Is there an alternative suspension besides the hth truck arms or corvette.I have seen AFCO has some lower control arms that use heim joints in place of bushings,has any one seen these.As far as shock go i have realized that the gr-2s are not the best chioce for the car,Ill look into the qa1's I have them on my 95'camaro in the coil over setup,both front and rear have been set up with coilovers. I think i will use marcus' upper control arms with tall joints.What about a steering box,that one has yet to be touched... maybe wrong place :offtopic: What should be done about the hotchkis f/r suspension on my 79'malibu,or are they just as bad?This car is real close to being done and will be of the get tuned by a fellow board member,GEN3BU,but if it needs changed i should start on it too.Can we please not get into the poly debt,we all know no how bad it seems except maybe the guy who seem to have a real good point about the round track bushings.I dont know where to get them so ill looking for the next best thing.There really is no real budget for this car, I just want the best handling and road manners for the money i will be spending.If that means $2500.00 so be it.I just want to do as much of the fabrication on it as possible,with no real exotic stuff.If i dont pull 1-g through the switchbacks then fine.I'm going to build one of them next year.Right know i have the two things....First one is a car that i bought that sat in a barn for 15 years that runns ok but needs the suspension re worked and i thought i could add a little performnace to it for not a mass amount of money(see my first post) thrown at it.Second i want to be driving and old muscle car this summer since I will be doing the full dse mods to my 72'nova this summer and fall.That my plans for the chevelle.Nothing to trick just some thing that works that i wont have to change if i build a thumper engine later.Thanks to any one who will help.

[Q ship]

Wow! 796, PLEASE don't take this the wrong way, but that last post is very difficult to read. You are asking a lot of questions all at once, and it's hard to follow where you want to go.

All I can do here is explain where I am in my project and how I got here, and that starts back in '94. I was looking for new front a-arm bushings for my '71 Camaro, and I wanted better handling than stock. I read in Hot Rod that editor Jeff Smith was using Global West Del-A-Lums in his Chevelle and was very happy with them. I also knew that the Poly bushings at that time squeaked after being used for a while. So I went with the GW bushings and was very happy with them. Remember, the front a-arm bushings only rotate around one axis, so the stiffness of the material used is not a drawback in this application.

Fast forward to now, and I have a boxy Caprice that uses the C4L rear suspension, that is used in the Chevelles/G-body's also. I swapped the front arms that had been salvaged from the Camaro on, and expect to be satisfied with them. I had no experience with the rear suspension though, so I followed the advice that I found on an Impalla SS forum. So right now I have GW rear lower arms, stock upper arms, and a stock swaybar. Some of the guys there think the hot setup is poly bushings everywhere, and a 1 1/2" rear swaybar! Bind city!!

Now that I've been here and paid attention to the input on the C4L, I realze that the GW lower arms are not what I want to end up with, as the stiffness of the bushing material used will not allow the rear to move freely through it's range of motion. So I am looking at Dennys rear suspension with great interest, but what I'd really like to end up with is a 3 link setup. I just have to decide the cost/benefit tradeoff.

I guess my point is that there's not one bushing material that's right for all applications. Some guys are running all poly suspensions, and they're happy with them, but they won't acknowledge that they could probably do better. I think these are the guys that Denny has butted heads with!! But it comes down to what will you be happy with, and what it will take to satisfy your needs.

Keep your mind open to all the opinions and choose the options that make the most sense to you! I'll shut up now.... :slap:

[yody]

hey dennis, would it be easier to put a three link in an el camino since there is no back seat compared to most cars? Just cut the bed up, and slap a toneau cover over it? what are you waiting for?? what are your plans?

[wally8]

796spdbu,

I've seen the AFCO arms you referred too (for the fronts, right?). You can get them at randysracemart.com . There is also a UMP version that is a little cheaper but not as heavy duty. Poly is probably OK for the front but they will squeak and they still bind (in my experience anyway).

For the rear you can just use a swedged tube of the proper length with heims for your rear LCA's and then use rubber uppers. You can get a rubber bushing that is like a rod end and will thread into a swedged tube as well (speedway or randys). The uppers that Denny has are pretty cool units too but more money than what I just listed.

I think the problem here is a lack of understanding of your question. Your thread heading was: "Is this OK for the street". Everyone should have just said "yes" and left it at that. We all assume that you're in here because you're looking for better handling. Maybe that's not what you're after. The stock setup is fine for the street if that's all you want just leave it alone and use whatever you have.

If you want the bestest, easiest bolt on setup possible for the street without getting too fancy then my opinion is to do what Denny has on his pickup truck (Ouch, that really hurt to have to say that :-) )


Wally

[dennis68]

Be patient grasshopper. 3-link updates will be coming soon, as will new spindle updates.

That had to hurt Wally. :bicycle:

[yody]

yeah, you have no excuse for that stock suspension!

[dennis68]

[Hangs head shame and walks away/] Sorry.




It will still run circles around the blue Firechiken.

[yody]

you better hope so! if not you are NEVER going to hear the end of it!! Boy did i hijack this post!

[796spdbu]

To start over,thanks to every one who has replied ive used all the constructive critisism to make my decisions from.Here goes...I'm going to fabricate the upper and lower rear links from swedged or straight tubing(I dont think the tubing has an effect)I'm going to use rubber joints like the ones mark used in the mule.Thanks WALLY for the web site.Since the rubber will not bind near as badly as the poly,I'm guessing I can run a rear sway bar,probably one from hotchkis to match the front.As cheap as sway bars seem,I'm goint to try suspension techniques bars as well as some others ive seen.They all seem to have differnt ones,from soild to hollow from 7/8"to 1".As you all have said in one form or another its trial and error.That takes care of the rear.For the front im going to use marcus' upper control arm kit.Lower control arms are going to either ump or the afco,they seem to be close to the same design.I think i can take the poly back to jegs.Just wondering denny how does or did your rear work that you posted pics of.I went to the local part store to look at steering boxs,I found that my 72'chevelle has the same box as a 79'camaro z-28.Now i think ill try an agr box.Well that about wraps up all my long and drawn out questions.Thanks to any and all of those who replied.

[wally8]

Glad to see you finally got to where you wanted to be :-)

Sounds pretty good. I might go with stiffer rear springs instead of a rear sway bar but that's just me.

You'll like the swedged tubes. They give you the size you need without having to weld in a threaded insert. You'll also like the front lower LCA's. Both are fine but the AFCO's are a little nicer piece overall.


Wally

[796spdbu]

thanks wally
Iwanted to see what dennis had to say about the rear sway bar thing,i had seen that he didnt have one.wondered how it worked.Ive heard both sides of this and dont know which way to go.I think ill try your way and go for stiffer rear springs, do you have any speck or company names.Ill try and get the swedge tubes they do sound easier than the welding that i do to moaast of the rear bars that i build.You seem to know a thing or two about the round track and these cars.I appreicate all the help you have given.Ill be under the car this weekend i hope.In your experience with these cars what shocks did you use.Well i had better stop my self im asking a lot of questions again....sorry.thanks again for your help.

[dennis68]

There are only 2 ways to go...either heavy springs and little bar or light springs and heavy bar. I prefer to tune with the sta-bar and run heavy springs. I currently run no bars at all in the front or rear. If I had to do it over I would have run slightly less spring and a small bar...probably will later.

Speedway, AFCO, Black Magic, and many other all offer pigtail springs, 11", for the rear of the "A" and "G" bodies. They will lower the rear a little and can be had in rates at 25lbs increments from 100-250lbs. I would start with 150lbs and see how it responds.

[Norm Peterson]

I haven't read all 19 pages of this topic that came off my printer yet, but this sort of jumped out . . .


. . . Since the rubber will not bind near as badly as the poly, . . . I think i can take the poly back to jegs.As a blanket statement, I'm not a fan of poly in a C4L rear suspension, but there is at least one sort of "middle ground" bushing possibility that may be more to your liking than anything mentioned so far. Would you be interested in a solution that gives more accurate fore/aft axle end location with an amount of bind that's only slightly greater than with the OE rubber bushings? Let's just say that it's possible to soften up the 'bind' direction stiffnesses of a rear poly bushing without throwing away all of the stiffnesses in the 'good' directions.

One possible 'downside' is some requirement for occasional inspection of the poly (the frequency of which may also be tied to how much power you're making and actually using).

I've been running my '79 Malibu with this approach for several years now, including 3 seasons of auto-x. Mid/upper 300's net HP & torque, as a matter of related information.

Some year I'll actually NOT leave the task of preparing my taxes until the last weekend . . .

Norm

[796spdbu]

Thanks for the info.is there a reason that you do not currently have either bar in your car.With 150 lb. springs what bar sie is good for the rear?Thanks again

[796spdbu]

Norm let me know more about what you are thinking.I'm open for sugestions as i to have a 79 malibu that i have the full hotchkis suspension in.I have yet to drive the 79 bu but if it sucks from the start ill sale all the stuff and replace as needed.Thanks

[Norm Peterson]

Norm let me know more about what you are thinking.You have PM

[Marcus SC&C]

796spdbu,I just kinda skimmed the last page or so but I`ll give you my take on some of your questions at least. Rubber`s not necessarly a bad thing but if you`re gonna use it you might want to try Moog "Problem Solver" bushings (assuming they make them for A body). They`re higher durometer rubber (harder),similar to what GM used in the 1LE Camaros and such. If you`re using stock LCAs I`d use those. For the top, Edelbrock`s adj. arms with the greasable spherical bearings would really nice. I see even Dennis is using them now. :) For your use I`d put Mood PS bushings in the upper,rear side location as well rather than the poly that comes (on one end) with the Edelbrock arms. I`ve used these UCAs (even with the poly on one end) to fix nasty snap oversteer issues on several A bodys. These would be a big help on your Bu also. For the BU Edelbrock just came out with LCAs with the spherical greasable joints in one end. They`re technically for F body so they don`t have swaybars mounts,they`ll have to be welded on but the arms will bolt right in. You`re going to want to get rid of some of the car`s understeer,stiffer spring/bars up front and raising the RC will all induce a litle more. I`d go stiffer than 150lbs/in out back. Moog 5413 are 167lb/in and should drop the car a tiny big (unless it`s sagged to begin with) or as Dennis said Hypercoil and many others make a great assortment of stock car springs that`ll drop right in. I`d shoot for 175lbs/in. with those. You will be wanting a rear swaybar for this application. Since the configuration on A and G body cars makes the bars relatively ineffective 1" is not a big bar at all and will make the car feel a lot more balanced and eager in the corners. For front spring rate I`d shoot for around 600lbs/in and a 1" bar (with the SC&C Stg.2). BTW don`t be intimidated by all the tech here. As much as I love all the theory and such (and I do!) it`s just as much about selecting a well balanced combination, tweaking it until it works the way YOU want it to and putting some hard miles on it so you can drive it to it`s full potential. Marcus

[796spdbu]

Finally
Between you and norm,I'm finally going to order parts next week.Marcus what all does the stage two kit contain.Can i order those bushings from you.Thanks for the input. :worship:

[Dirtpoor]

Thanks for the heads up on the bushings unfortunatly it comes a little too late I have already installed boxed arms with poly bushings on my c4L setup. I haven't pushed it hard in a corner yet but, I can see why it would act exactly as many of you say it will. I will probably change them out right after I have to replace a quarter panel. LOL

[Norm Peterson]

All is not lost. It's not too late to mod some of the bind out of those poly pieces. But you do have to remove the LCA's from the car (but not the bushings from the LCA's) to do it anywhere near properly. If it's also the UCA bushings, I haven't looked at what they might require yet (but might with a little prompting).

PM or e-mail me if you're interested in specifics.

Norm

[69 Custom S Vert]

I'm a little late to the party but UMI performance has rear upper and lower control arms for an A-Body with double spherical teflon bearings. Ohh, they are also double adjustable. The price is very reasonable ($450).