Vette Brakes Mono-Spring front-end kit?

[Boyd]

While looking for tubular UCA's , I came across this.....http://www.vbandp.com/detail.aspx?ID=516 ...I've never heard or seen this before, and there isn't much of a description. Can anyone elaborate on the function and theory behind it? It appears that the mono leaf attatches to the LCA's, but how do you package it under the car? Does the leaf take the place of a sway-bar?

[79T/Aman]

two brackets need to be installed (cutting needed) and the spring mouts transversaly through the lower cross member, the stock sway bar loction does not change

[ZZ430]

Yeah, I've had it on my 70 for several years now, it works great.

Adjustable ride height and spring rate are two features. I'm also using their UCA's, front and rear sway bars, and rear composite springs.

One shot of the front:

[Boyd]

thanks for the pic ZZ. Now it makes sense.

[MoeBawlz]

how is the spring rate adjustable?

[rohrt]

It sounds pretty cool. Whats the down side? Whats the story with your inner tie rods?

[Mean 69]

We just pulled this setup off of our 70 project car. I can't speak to the leaf, or performance, as the car was a basket case when we got it. The leaf looks fine, and while I have no experieince at all with composite leafs, I have heard that they can be prone to trouble. Sounds like folks are having good experience with these though.

I will say, however, that the control arms are scary looking. I am not sure that I have seen worse welds on a commercially available product, they seem to have held up on this particular car, and I have no clue what vintage this particular kit is, but it is far less than awe inspiring. I'd take a look at this before installing, my guess is that the quality must have improved (I hope!!!).

Mark

[ZZ430]

how is the spring rate adjustable?

Inside each bracket that gets bolted on, is a block that sandwiches the spring in between poly cushions, and has a greasable "pivot".

There are 3 holes in the bracket for either moving the block out on the spring (increases rate), or inboard which lessens it. Mine is in the center (medium) position.

It sounds pretty cool. Whats the down side? Whats the story with your inner tie rods?

Most of the negative feedback that I see written, is the harsh ride. I guess I'm used to it, and I have actually driven the car from coast to coast on all kinds of roads with no problems.

Of course I've heard about the rear springs snapping, but under extreme conditions is my guess. VBP recommends no more than "400 HP at the rear wheels" . I would imagine a dead hook with slicks wouldn't be nice to them. I'm using a TH350 with a relatively mild converter, so I'm not worried.

The inner tie rods are normally "bent" like that on a 70 Camaro. (is that what you mean?) Those are Moog pieces.

The thing about this setup is handling. Skipad readings with shaved tires are "said" to yield upwards of 1G.

Personally, I mostly drive it to shows with the occasional canyon carve.

[WS6]

all second gens have their inner tie rods like that. i just replaced my 79s rods with new peices. unfortunately the price on the inner oens is rediculous because of those bends.

VBP has been around a while and they have a lot of good stuff. ive looked into thier conversions, but just felt the cost and changes needed were not worth it. im no expert though. its also not easy to find anyone that has done this conversion to get some outside opinions on just how good it is.

Don, did you do this conversion yourself? rear too? what are your thoughts on it as far as it working and cost? did you have a modified stock suspension before you did the conversion?

T/Aman what are your thoughts? your building second gen suspensions, i figure youve got to have an educated opinion on this?

thanks

[ZZ430]

Don, did you do this conversion yourself? rear too? what are your thoughts on it as far as it working and cost? did you have a modified stock suspension before you did the conversion?
thanks

Trey, yeah, I did all the work myself, starting with just the rear springs way back in 1989. Drove it that way with stock front suspension until 1996, and then did the front. Obviously, after using it for 9 years, I pretty much have no complaints

One thing about the mods needed to the subframe however, is it will never go back to stock because of the material removed....doesn't leave a lot around the front LCA bolt holes. It's permanent on this car.

The kit includes a paper template to use for marking the areas to be cut with a Sazall, (or plasma cutter) but I made mine out of heavier stuff. The cutting is probably the hardest part. It took me a full month to do the conversion, sitting on my garage floor. (Couldn't tie up our shop hoist for that long) Of course there were other things to do (Domino effect) lol.

I spent a lot of time on it, making it the best it can be. I also did the alignment myself. One thing about their UCA's is they have a lot more "built in" caster, and I was able to get +4.5 out of it.

The costs have risen sharply since I did mine, as I recall I dropped about $1700 total on the front and rear.

[jeffandre]

I have the same setup as Don, bought in stages at around the same time too. I just installed Del-a-lum bushings in the upper and lower control arms. I was using the inner bolt location for a softer ride, but now that the poly bushings are gone I may be able to move it out a bit. I'll have to experiment with that. The front spring brackets are also welded to my frame. I coated my rear springs with rubberized undercoating to minimize the potential of rocks and other small debris from cutting into the material. The front spring will have the visible portions wrapped in rubber tape.

Besides ride height and stiffness adjustability I really like the fact that the control arm design has allowed me to put 19x10's with 7.25" bs and still keep the tire edge 1" inside the outer edge of the fender lip. My stock arms (and from the looks of them most other aftermarket arms as well) were bulbous and I would never have been able to fit the wheels I have without having them stick out some.

[ProdigyCustoms]

I did a full install article on it. I will dig it up and scan it. Had it in my first "G machine" in 93, It rode a bit stiff but did pull some numbers. Absolutly horrible at the dragstrip though, by design, there is NO stored energy in the front springs that do not exist, in fact, you cannot pick up the front end if you want to. No transfer means no traction. but these are G Machines right!

[Damn True]

Interested in more information about those composite rear springs.

[vintageracer]

We broke 8 fiberglass Vette Brakes rear springs on a 63 vintage race Corvette. VB replaced everyone of them free of charge. The fiberglass spring DOES NOT like high horsepower. It does work extremely well and is consistent up until time of failure. Spring failure does get your attention.

The fastest car, not just Corvette, that runs in group 6 in Historic Sportscar Racing (HSR) is Steve Collins 66 vette. He runs this transverse front spring setup and a fiberglass rear spring setup. The transverse front fiberglass spring setup was originally designed and first available from VB in 1989 for the Corvette. I purchased one of the first kits and have run this setup for 15 years on my wife's 1967 Corvette convertible. It does ride harsh in the front end with poly bushings. For street use and ocassionaly track use I would now use rubber or Del-A-Lum bushings. This suspension package is VERY adjustable.

Shocks absorbers are absolutely the KEY TO THIS SETUP! If you buy this suspension package, purchase the specfic shocks recommended by Vette Brakes for your suspension. Vette Brakes brand/recommended shocks are specifically calibrated for the fiberglass springs. The car will drive POORLY with any other brand/type of shock absorber. How do I know? This was one of the main issues with the original kits. VB recommended KYB's in 1989 which are just awful for this suspension. Way to much compression and absolutely NO rebound. VB soon realized this and now have correctly specified shocks with proper compression and rebound for the fiberglass springs. A simple shock absorber change made the Corvette go from "bouncing" in the rearend to extremely stable. Do not try to use your own shocks unless you have a shocks abosorber dynomometer to test shocks as you will be disappointed big time with this suspension package without the proper shocks.

This system can make a car handle at or over 1 G! If handling is on your plate this "may" be an excellent and cost effective system for your car. You will spend just as much or more money piecing together a Hotchkis or Global West suspension package. In fact, the Vette Brakes system is probably less money. To "me", horsepower is not that big and issue as I have found from racing that horsepower does help but give me brakes and handling everytime over horsepower as we are not drag racers here! Therefore I would not worry too much about the spring breakage issue for a street or occasional track time car.

[Damn True]

Wow, great background info. Thanks!

In your estimation, how much horsepower is "too much" horsepower for these rear springs?

Are these springs the same/similar to the composite springs offered by Hyperco?

[vintageracer]

Too much horsepower? 500HP. Remember, the rear suspension in which we broke the single rear transverse fiberglass Corvette spring was in a RACE CAR. Hard in the corners, hard out of the corners under extreme loading and unloading conditions. The transmission was a Jericho and sometimes a Muncie. The clutch was only used for starting and stopping, not shifting between gears. This was far more severe than anything you will do with a car that is streetable. I have never seen a front transverse spring break. Also remember the difference in spring rates between the front and rear springs. The rear has MUCH less rate. MANY Corvettes are autocrossed and roadraced with fiberglass springs. Old Corvettes all the way the the new C6 Corvette.

I would be amazed if you EVER broke a fiberglass spring on a car that is built as a true "Pro-Touring" car used as most folks on this board intend to use their cars.

I know nothing about the "Hyperco" springs and therefore have no opinion. My experience is only with the Corvette transverse springs. I cannot comment on the rear "leaf" fiberglass springs for a Camaro rearend.

Vette Brakes makes fine products so I would expect the rear leaf fiberglass springs to perform well. The front Camaro transverse spring set up is just like the Corvette so my experience with Corvette front setup should be no different on the Camaro.

[79T/Aman]

WS6 I helped a friend back in 92 we put on the transverse front set up on a 79 ws6 4 speed car it made the front stiff ( not a bad thing) the car handled great, we also instaled the rear springs but those delaminated after 3 runs at the drag strip (with sticky M/Ts) and a 4 speed all in all a nice set up but I just questioned the strength of the control arms at the time but from what I hear they hold up well, the set up was a bargain back then now you can build a nice front end for less than 1/2 with conventional springs but if cost is no object by all means, the only thing I would say is that I feel our upper arms are a much better deal all around and they can be used with the VB transvers kit with no problems

[Boyd]

... the only thing I would say is that I feel our upper arms are a much better deal all around and they can be used with the VB transvers kit with no problems

........I guess since I started the thread it's not exactly jacking, but 79T/Aman - are the UCA's listed on your web-site for drag-racing or can I use them in a performance suspension build. I've been lookin' for the best price for UCA's and so far Heidt's has a pair for $399. Your price beats theirs all to heck, but it appears they're for going straight only.....?

[79T/Aman]

our comp arms are for touring/road racing the others listed as pro-street are more for drag and street, the comp arms have 5* built in castor and the pro-street do not

[Boyd]

That's awesome. PM sent.