1st gen Camaro front shock Air Ride issue

[tazinhawaii]

I thought I'ld post this recommendation for people with first gen Camaro's/Nova's with an air ride system. Check you front shock mounts to ensure the welds aren't breaking. I don't remember if the installation instructions for the air ride recommended reinforcing the mounts or not, but I've had the welds for the passenger side mount break twice and the drivers side broke this past weekend. This is the mount on the subframe itself. i determined this mount wasn't designed to support the full weight of the car over time and does break. I re-welded them and added some gussets that will hopefully solve the problem. This may be applicable to other car as well that air ride uses the shock mount to support the weight of the car vice the spring perches as was originally designed.

Derrick

1969 Camaro, LS3, 4L80E, Air Ride Street Challenge, Baer Extreme Pro 6S disc brakes, 19" and 20" Rushforth wheels, Dana 60, a lot of custom pieces and still working on it.
Pictures located here : http://s330.photobucket.com/albums/l433/tazinhawaii/69%20Camaro/
2008 Charger SRT-8 SuperBee and 2008 Dodge RAM 2500, 6.7 Cummins and 2006 Cadillac SRX

[JRouche]

Good lookin out Derrick. Ill bet there are some guys that did just that. Put the shockwaves in the shock mounts. NOT the way to do it. And this goes for the front and rear. And not just air ride springs but coilovers.

Coilovers and air springs CAN NOT replace shocks in a car. Meaning you can not remove the shocks and coil springs and mount coilovers or shockwave type air springs in the same mounts that the shocks were in.

Shocks dont see near the loads that springs do. So the manufactures didnt make the mounts for shocks stout enough to take the loads of suspending the car.

And its good you pointed this out cause Im sure you are not the first person to try to do it. And Im sure there are prolly cars out there that are still on the roads like this.

And it goes for the rear coilover replacements as well. And really, prolly more important is the front. Some folks are putting in coilovers or air springs (shockwaves) and NOT redesigning the lower control arms. They see a nice place to put the eye of the bottom of the coilover right where the shock was. BIG NO NO!!!

Convenience should never overshadow safety. If it looks too simple, it just may be.

Sometimes we gotta pull our heads outta our rears. But when we just cant seem to get there, me myself included (many times) it helps to get an eye opener like what you have given.

Thanks for the post. It may seem simple to many folks. But some of us are so caught up in tunnel vision, or just not aware that we do things that shouldnt be done. Thats why its a good thing to check up with each other and bounce some ideas around. Good lookin out!!! JR




I thought I'ld post this recommendation for people with first gen Camaro's/Nova's with an air ride system. Check you front shock mounts to ensure the welds aren't breaking. I don't remember if the installation instructions for the air ride recommended reinforcing the mounts or not, but I've had the welds for the passenger side mount break twice and the drivers side broke this past weekend. This is the mount on the subframe itself. i determined this mount wasn't designed to support the full weight of the car over time and does break. I re-welded them and added some gussets that will hopefully solve the problem. This may be applicable to other car as well that air ride uses the shock mount to support the weight of the car vice the spring perches as was originally designed.

Derrick

[Richio1]

Do you have any pics to show what you are talking about? They could be helpful for some of the guys out there.

[tazinhawaii]

I will take some pics. But to JRouche's response, this is actually the way the air ride system is designed. I got the complete system from them and the directions say to mount them to the shock mounts in front (comes with a 4 bar setup in the rear). But as I found out, this will NOT work for too long. I think the gussets and new welds will now hold, but this was a severe design flaw in my opinion in this setup.

I'll post pics of what I did soon.

Derrick

1969 Camaro, LS3, 4L80E, Air Ride Street Challenge, Baer Extreme Pro 6S disc brakes, 19" and 20" Rushforth wheels, Dana 60, a lot of custom pieces and still working on it.
Pictures located here : http://s330.photobucket.com/albums/l433/tazinhawaii/69%20Camaro/
2008 Charger SRT-8 SuperBee and 2008 Dodge RAM 2500, 6.7 Cummins and 2006 Cadillac SRX

[Richio1]

Thanks Derrick. Pics would be great. I am installing the same setup on my 69 and will share the info with my builder so we can avoid this issues before it happens.
Has anyone else had this problem? I would have to think that Ridetech is aware of this by now...

[dhutton]

I will take some pics. But to JRouche's response, this is actually the way the air ride system is designed. I got the complete system from them and the directions say to mount them to the shock mounts in front (comes with a 4 bar setup in the rear). But as I found out, this will NOT work for too long. I think the gussets and new welds will now hold, but this was a severe design flaw in my opinion in this setup.

I'll post pics of what I did soon.

Derrick

Are you running these at the specified ride height or something lower? Do you have bumpstops?

It seems to me that if you are regularly bottoming out the shockwaves due to low ride height without bumpstops that it could cause/aggravate this issue.

[tazinhawaii]

The system was installed exactly per their instructions. No bottoming out. I think it was just the cyclic stresses on the welds as every bump and the weight of the car is supported completely by the upper shock mounts which weren't designed for that. I evenn have a lighter front end with the aluminum LS3. I am confident the 1/8" steel gussets I put in will help with this, but it is something I never thought about when i installed the system.

Derrick

1969 Camaro, LS3, 4L80E, Air Ride Street Challenge, Baer Extreme Pro 6S disc brakes, 19" and 20" Rushforth wheels, Dana 60, a lot of custom pieces and still working on it.
Pictures located here : http://s330.photobucket.com/albums/l433/tazinhawaii/69%20Camaro/
2008 Charger SRT-8 SuperBee and 2008 Dodge RAM 2500, 6.7 Cummins and 2006 Cadillac SRX

[JRouche]

I will take some pics. But to JRouche's response, this is actually the way the air ride system is designed. I got the complete system from them and the directions say to mount them to the shock mounts in front (comes with a 4 bar setup in the rear). But as I found out, this will NOT work for too long. I think the gussets and new welds will now hold, but this was a severe design flaw in my opinion in this setup.

I'll post pics of what I did soon.

Derrick

I have no doubt you installed them as directed. And I have a certain amount of respect for air ride and their knowledge of cars.

But if the directions have you mount the shockwaves to a stock shock mount then I would balk at that.

No way did the car manufacture design the shock mounts to support the entire weight of the car. And if in fact AR thinks it will be ok I have an issue with that.

But honestly, I think a call to them is in order. I always like to talk with the folks that made the parts and designed the system instead of getting alot of second hand info. There may be something missing in the entire ordeal.

Id be REALLY curious to hear what they say. And yes, love to see yer pics. JR

[bret]

I think that from the outside looking in, using the OEM upper shock mount is apparantly not a great idea.

However, if you look a bit closer, that mount is of healthy metal thickness with a lot of stamping contour in several different planes that adds inherent rigidity and makes it appropriate as a load bearing shock mount.

Why did yours break? Obviously since I have not seen it It will be hard to determine for sure, but there are a few possibilities.

When you are talking about a 40+ year old unit, it may have a history that you are completely unaware of ...previous accident damage, wheelstanding drag racing, rust, etc. The damage would be in the framerail itself, not neccessarily the stamped upper shock mount.
Another possibility would be a marginal weld seam between the upper shock mount and the frame. No robot weldors in 1968!

In reality, the only 2 times I have seen this kind of damage has been a case of previous accident and rust damage. There was one additional time where the builder had ground most of the weld away to smooth the framerail.
On Velocity [and many other of our similar vehicles with this style mount, we have used this mounting method for the last 14 years with no incident.

I am in NO way trying to minimize your experience. At this point you have done the correct thing and re-inforced the area...just re-welding that area would only cause future damage right next to it. Just trying to point out our logic for using this mounting style and our historical experience with it.

I would also like to see pictures if you can provide. Do a little investigation to see if there was previous damage or rust...that may tell us a lot as well. Thanks!

[tazinhawaii]

Thanks. I'm waiting for the wife and kids to come back from visiting friends for the week since they have the camera. I can say that there was no frame damage and the frame wasn't rusty at all other than light surface rust before I cleaned it up. After the passenger side weld broke the first time I checked the drivers side and the weld look perfect (for a stock weld), so I didn't do anything with it. I re-welded the passenger side. Then about 3 months later the passenger side broke again. I figured it was a poor weld job that I did before so I re-welded it and decided to add some gussets. I inspected the drivers side then too and it still looked good. No cracking of the weld. Then just so happens the very next day, the drivers side broke. Now they are both welded and gusseted. This isn't a daily driver but I do drive it about 50-100 miles a week back and forth to work on new england roads. After the driver's side broke is when I put the trend together and realized that the upper shock mount wasn't really meant to support the weight of the car.

Since I couldn't remember the kit I had, I have the full street challenge kit which included everything. I did check the instructions and it does direct installing the front shocks exactly like I had them.

Just to remind everyone, I love the air ride system in general, and every time something has gone wrong (2 rear shocks broke) ride tech has been the BEST vendor I have dealt with in the past 20 years of building hot rods. This was just something I wanted to let people who have the air ride system installed on a factory frame designed like the Camaro and Nova's should keep an eye on this. It was embarrassing having my baby loaded onto a flatbed to be towed home because of this... Especially leaving the car dealership I just bought a Cadillac from... :doh:

Derrick

1969 Camaro, LS3, 4L80E, Air Ride Street Challenge, Baer Extreme Pro 6S disc brakes, 19" and 20" Rushforth wheels, Dana 60, a lot of custom pieces and still working on it.
Pictures located here : http://s330.photobucket.com/albums/l433/tazinhawaii/69%20Camaro/
2008 Charger SRT-8 SuperBee and 2008 Dodge RAM 2500, 6.7 Cummins and 2006 Cadillac SRX

[JRouche]

So Bret, you are saying that is the install you guys like? You have guys bolting shockwaves (its just like a coilover) to shock mounts with no addition modifications?

If so I have a major issue with that. Kinda like trying to make a system work as a bolt in so it will sell. Instead of looking at it correctly.

The cars, any of them, coming off the production line did NOT have the tabs for the shocks designed to support the weight of the car, none of them did.

The loads for the shocks are ten fold LESS than the loads for a spring mount. Like a coilover or a shockwave.

If your position is it will be ok then I have a problem.

Shockwaves are NOT shocks. They are car suspending springs.

Gm, Ford, or Chrysler did not weld shock mounts to take the loads of suspension springs. Plain and simple.

If anyone here thinks so then they are gonna have a problem. They will have breakage.

I installed some shockwaves. But I did some significant welding and modifications thinking that was part of the entire process.

I didnt once think that the shockwaves would be a direct bolt up in place of shocks. I looked at it like I was putting in coilovers. And beefed up the mounts accordingly.

I dont know, I may be over thinking this. Im a big time fan of air ride's products. But Im also a fan of all the guys modifying their cars. Im just trying to help out and give some info. Hate to see a guy on the side of the road. JR




I think that from the outside looking in, using the OEM upper shock mount is apparantly not a great idea.

However, if you look a bit closer, that mount is of healthy metal thickness with a lot of stamping contour in several different planes that adds inherent rigidity and makes it appropriate as a load bearing shock mount.

Why did yours break? Obviously since I have not seen it It will be hard to determine for sure, but there are a few possibilities.

When you are talking about a 40+ year old unit, it may have a history that you are completely unaware of ...previous accident damage, wheelstanding drag racing, rust, etc. The damage would be in the framerail itself, not neccessarily the stamped upper shock mount.
Another possibility would be a marginal weld seam between the upper shock mount and the frame. No robot weldors in 1968!

In reality, the only 2 times I have seen this kind of damage has been a case of previous accident and rust damage. There was one additional time where the builder had ground most of the weld away to smooth the framerail.
On Velocity [and many other of our similar vehicles with this style mount, we have used this mounting method for the last 14 years with no incident.

I am in NO way trying to minimize your experience. At this point you have done the correct thing and re-inforced the area...just re-welding that area would only cause future damage right next to it. Just trying to point out our logic for using this mounting style and our historical experience with it.

I would also like to see pictures if you can provide. Do a little investigation to see if there was previous damage or rust...that may tell us a lot as well. Thanks!

[bret]

Let me say that my comments are not directed at the players already participating in this conversation, but to the dozens who are lurking on the sidelines.

My position comes from the fact that I have 10 cars here at the shop with this ShockWave mounting configuration:

68 Camaro [Velocity]
62 Impala
70 GSX
70 Nova SS
66 Chevelle [our war pig track car]
70 Chevelle [big block car]
88 Monte Carlo [driven every day to work since 2004]
66 Impala
61 Impala
63 Impala

At this point I think it is fair to say that these cars do not sit around. Beyond that, it would also be fair to say that they are driven hard...some VERY hard...and for 10's of thousands of miles. We have not seen a failure...we just haven't. I've heard of 2 [now 3] unexplained incidents since 1996. I don't have an exact count right now, but we have ShockWaves on the front of around 16,000 vehicles.

Given the choice between using the OEM upper shock mount that already exists and has proven to be a durable, reliable method [with the obvious exceptions noted above] and having thousands of customers try to affect modifications for which they are likely not equipped...I think the appropriate solution for most people is to use the oem upper mount as we direct.

IF you wish to change or improve on this method, I think that this is a great deal. We can provide any mounting style on the top of the ShockWave that you would prefer to use...eye mount, stud mount, or trunnion.

I also think that it is a good idea to keep an eye on every area of the car, especially areas that are of concern to you for whatever reason. Just good common sense.

There is ALWAYS a better solution lurking somewhere, no matter what engineering problem you are talking about. It is very possible that someone will come up with one that we have not considered...we could potentially incorporate it into the design. Let's take a look at them!

[JRouche]

Yeah, you know what? I stepped out of bounds.

I shouldn't be making any comments about a manufactures product. I DONT have the skills and DONT have any track record. I do have some loose opinions. And sometimes vent those here and elsewhere. Not a good idea.

Again, I'll say I really like what ART is doing. My opinions are not even meant to diminish what they are doing.

But.... It may sound like it so I have to clarify where I am coming from. What I say is completely my own unsubstantiated opinion, and for most folks its easy to see.

But for those that may consider it remember, its just an opinion from one guy. Without any factual standpoint. I say that more importantly for the original poster (tazinhawaii) and for any lurkers.

Take what a member of a forum has to say as just opinion, not as fact. Unless he or she has the data and background to substantiate what he is saying. I for one dont. What I say and write here is all opinion. And thats all, nothing more.

Listen to the folks with time and proven testing behind them. There is a wealth of knowledge to be gained. JR

[CapSS92]

I gotta throw in my .02. I've seen the Shockwaves do this on two trucks. One was a Ford Expedition (2001 I think) and the other was a 2002 Yukon. Both had front shockwaves and were driven lots of miles. It took a while but both trucks had issues with the upper mounts. The Ford literally ripped the upper mounts out of the frame. I had to weld and reinforce the mounts. The Yukon didn't break but it bent the crap out of the upper mount. Took some heat to bend them back down. Not the best solution but it's what the customer wanted. I think the Shockwaves are great on lighter vehicles though. Just my experiences...

[tazinhawaii]

I finally got some photos of the shock mounts. They have been repaired and gussetted and the frame powder coated. Here are a couple pics. The welds closest to the camera are the ones that broke where the upper mount welds to the frame.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2010/09/928z-1.jpg

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2010/09/928dd-1.jpg

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2010/09/928bb-1.jpg

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2010/09/928ee-1.jpg

It turns out there were some racks forming in the spring perch area too. All repaired/reinforced now.

Derrick