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

    Login / Register




    Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
    Results 21 to 27 of 27
    1. #21
      Join Date
      Jun 2010
      Location
      Arroyo Grande, Ca
      Posts
      389
      Thanks Ron the car handles great around town, on-ramps etc....I am auto-crossing at RTTCII so I will see what happens there. it just doesn't look right but they designed it.... it is a night and day difference. maybe its the spindles I don't know.

      I will be looking at cars there and asking questions

    2. #22
      Join Date
      Oct 2010
      Location
      kansas city Missouri
      Posts
      53
      Country Flag: United States
      i'm no expert on suspension geometry but: if the upper and lower "a" arms travel the same distance in the same amount of time (must due to the spindle connection), and the upper radius is smaller than the lower (like our cars), doesn't the upper "a" arm win any battle for camber gain (assuming the upper is set up to provide only -gain in bump)?
      if the lower bj is above the pivot point, the tall spindle is causing too much drop and sepearation between the upper an lower arms. if you have only .5" of travel to bump, you have no suspension. you need more loaded spring height and/or a higher inch/pound rating spring (IMHO). maybe a spring spacer would help??????

    3. #23
      Join Date
      Jun 2010
      Location
      Arroyo Grande, Ca
      Posts
      389
      I put 450's in and too low now 550's and this is what I have....I guess 650 would be next but 650's it might ride very harsh, Ive read guys using 650's in a BB powered car but in a SB not sure.

    4. #24
      Join Date
      Mar 2010
      Location
      AZ
      Posts
      801
      Country Flag: United States
      You might want to double check the free height of your 550LB\in springs, it is possible I suppose that you simply were sent a set of springs that are too short.
      Robert R.
      1988 S10 blazer 5.0L SBC 700R4 body off build.
      1991 S10 Blazer 4.3L too low daily.
      1975 Cutlass Salon currenlty 350/th350
      Stupidity should be painful.

    5. #25
      Join Date
      Oct 2010
      Location
      kansas city Missouri
      Posts
      53
      Country Flag: United States
      There are only two ways to get the lower ball joint below the pivot point: 1> raise the pivot point (not practical).
      2> more loaded spring height (either with taller springs or added spacers).


      A taller spindle would require a taller spring to drop the lower arm (IMHO)



    6. #26
      Join Date
      Jan 2010
      Location
      Elk River, MN
      Posts
      676
      If you're running out of travel on your shocks, you don't need stiffer springs, you need springs with a longer free-height. The softer the spring, the more free-height you'll need. Have you ever had this thing across a set of scales?

      -matt

    7. #27
      Join Date
      Jun 2010
      Location
      Arroyo Grande, Ca
      Posts
      389
      Quote Originally Posted by clancj View Post
      There are only two ways to get the lower ball joint below the pivot point: 1> raise the pivot point (not practical).
      2> more loaded spring height (either with taller springs or added spacers).


      A taller spindle would require a taller spring to drop the lower arm (IMHO)
      QA1 has 1.0 inch spacers only not longer conical springs, Blake at Speed tech wants pictures so he can see whats going on. but thanks i do think if i put the spacers this might help, Blake did say that the ATS are a 7/8 drop so all this and lower a-arm pocket mounts may have added up to this problem.

    Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2



    Advertise on Pro-Touring.com