Enter your username:
Do you want to login or register?
  • Forgot your password?

    Login / Register




    Results 1 to 17 of 17
    1. #1
      Join Date
      Sep 2004
      Location
      Maryland
      Posts
      11

      Newbie here. Qa1 coilover or Hotchkis springs w/gas shocks?

      Hey everyone. Newbie here need help with some questions. I have a '72 Nova that I'm trying to fix up. I have an opportunity to buy a brand new set up QA1's coilover gmp14 for a decent price or buy the Hotchkis springs and a set of koni/kyb gas shocks. My question is. What's better for the type of driving that I'm going to do and the most bang for the buck. I'm going to be mostly driving as a daily driver/cruiser with some fun curve driving once in a while. I'm also looking to get the hotchkis front sway bar and their rear leaf springs. The motor is a 350 small block with aluminum heads. I'm going to be running 17x8 rims all the way around the car. So, what kind of ride quality would I expect from the coilover or from the hotchkis for that matter. Also, I'm looking into doing the Guldstrand mod and maybe using Global West's offset shaft. Can anyone help me get pointed in the right direction. Is this a good set up? Any opinion would be greatly appreciated.



      Thanks


    2. #2
      Join Date
      Mar 2005
      Location
      Severn, MD
      Posts
      405
      I have a 75 Camaro with Hotchkis front and rear springs, KYB shocks, 16 inch wheels. Using the car for street it corners great and rides very nice. I was expecting a stiff / hard ride but it's not.

      Since you have aluminum heads, you may need to trim the front springs. I have Alum. heads, fiberglass hood, battery in the trunk, so I had to cut off a full coil.
      Mike

      1975 Camaro
      C5 Corvette

    3. #3
      Join Date
      Sep 2002
      Location
      San Jose, CA
      Posts
      1,793
      Use the Hotchkis springs and matched shocks (labeled Hotchkis, but actually custom valved Bilstien )... excellent setup for street use.

      QA1 is a poor design and the shocks are not very dependable
      1971 Camaro, 383 stroker ~500HP,M21 Trans with lightened flywheel. All Sorts of Auto-x Goodness in the Suspension. 12" Brakes ->SOLD

      But ask me about my 2004 STi Auto-x car...

      Just call me Brett

    4. #4
      Join Date
      Jan 2005
      Location
      Mantorville, MN
      Posts
      835
      Country Flag: United States
      Quote Originally Posted by Lowend
      QA1 is a poor design and the shocks are not very dependable
      Please elaborate, I was planning to send them some of my money within the next week.

    5. #5
      Join Date
      Sep 2002
      Location
      San Jose, CA
      Posts
      1,793
      The QA1 shocks are not true gas charged cartrages, but rather a tube with a gas bag inside of it. They don't hold up very well over time, and I know more than one person who has put them on shock aborber "dyno" (measures rate bound and rebound) only to find them very inconsistant.
      Not to mention they are a PITA to adjust ride height.

      I like the idea, but the QA1's just aren't very well executed.
      1971 Camaro, 383 stroker ~500HP,M21 Trans with lightened flywheel. All Sorts of Auto-x Goodness in the Suspension. 12" Brakes ->SOLD

      But ask me about my 2004 STi Auto-x car...

      Just call me Brett

    6. #6
      Join Date
      Sep 2004
      Location
      Maryland
      Posts
      11
      Thanks guys. I've decided to go with the Hotchkis springs. Now I need to decide what shock to put with it. If I should go with the hotchkis sells or kyb or edelbrock ias or someone else. Any suggestions.

      Also, I've looking around and I've seen people say that ploy bushings are not good for your car. I was going to get the pst poly frontend kit. Should I still get it.

    7. #7
      Join Date
      Oct 2004
      Location
      Edmonton, Alberta, CANADA
      Posts
      516
      Pick up the latest copy of PHR... and look at the g/28 story... a great read. (It is on a camaro though... not a nova, but should be similar principles)
      Look at the performance increase they are getting with kyb shocks and new springs. GREAT bang for the buck!

    8. #8
      Join Date
      Sep 2004
      Location
      Maryland
      Posts
      11
      Yeah, I have that copy of PHR Piet. I saw that. But my 72' nova has the same frontend as the 1st gen camaro's. I'm looking into that setup too. Thanks Piet

    9. #9
      Join Date
      Sep 2002
      Location
      San Jose, CA
      Posts
      1,793
      Stay away from KYB, the shocks are valved very poorly for Camaro's
      Use the Hothckis shocks - the springrates and dampening is already matched
      1971 Camaro, 383 stroker ~500HP,M21 Trans with lightened flywheel. All Sorts of Auto-x Goodness in the Suspension. 12" Brakes ->SOLD

      But ask me about my 2004 STi Auto-x car...

      Just call me Brett

    10. #10
      Join Date
      Oct 2004
      Location
      Edmonton, Alberta, CANADA
      Posts
      516
      Lowend.... do you have a post on your "Too much suspension to list"?

    11. #11
      Join Date
      Sep 2002
      Location
      San Jose, CA
      Posts
      1,793
      Ha - not really... I can list some of the stuff here:
      550# front springs with Bilstien/Hotchkis shocks
      Del-A-Lum a-arm bushings
      B-Body Spindes and brakes
      160# rear springs with relocated mounts for more anti-dive
      Solid body mounts
      VSE 1.31" Front swaybar (solid case hardened steel with Hiem jointed endlinks)
      VSE 1" Rear Swaybar

      geeze from there I kinda lose track
      1971 Camaro, 383 stroker ~500HP,M21 Trans with lightened flywheel. All Sorts of Auto-x Goodness in the Suspension. 12" Brakes ->SOLD

      But ask me about my 2004 STi Auto-x car...

      Just call me Brett

    12. #12
      Join Date
      Oct 2004
      Location
      Edmonton, Alberta, CANADA
      Posts
      516
      with relocated mounts for more anti-dive
      relocated.... where?

    13. #13
      Join Date
      Mar 2002
      Location
      Redwood City, CA
      Posts
      1,895,413,640
      Country Flag: United States
      Check my web page. www.cardomain.com/id/zbugger

      Go to page three and scroll down. I had my mounts prepped in the same way, but I'm using the stock holes at the moment. I'll be changing them later so I can really see the effect.
      Allen Ortega
      Meanstreets Performance Fabrication

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

      Vegetarians are the reason for global warming

    14. #14
      Join Date
      Oct 2004
      Location
      Edmonton, Alberta, CANADA
      Posts
      516
      the stock holes are the lower holes... correct?

    15. #15
      Join Date
      Sep 2002
      Location
      San Jose, CA
      Posts
      1,793
      The spring is relocated about 3/4" higher up or closer to the floorpan.
      1971 Camaro, 383 stroker ~500HP,M21 Trans with lightened flywheel. All Sorts of Auto-x Goodness in the Suspension. 12" Brakes ->SOLD

      But ask me about my 2004 STi Auto-x car...

      Just call me Brett

    16. #16
      Join Date
      Mar 2002
      Location
      Redwood City, CA
      Posts
      1,895,413,640
      Country Flag: United States
      Yes, the stock ones are the lower.

      Lowend, like these?

      Allen Ortega
      Meanstreets Performance Fabrication

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

      Vegetarians are the reason for global warming

    17. #17
      Join Date
      Sep 2002
      Location
      San Jose, CA
      Posts
      1,793
      yep -
      1971 Camaro, 383 stroker ~500HP,M21 Trans with lightened flywheel. All Sorts of Auto-x Goodness in the Suspension. 12" Brakes ->SOLD

      But ask me about my 2004 STi Auto-x car...

      Just call me Brett




    Advertise on Pro-Touring.com