Hotchkis subframe and rear for 67 camaro

[Bullrider]

Hello,
I have a 67 camaro roller, and am swapping in a LS3/Tremec TR 6060 and I need to choose a subframe and rear end. Leaning towards Hotchkis with adjustable fox shocks, subframe connectors and Currie 9” rear end with 3:50 Posi Trac. Any opinions on this set up? I know this will drop the the car by 2”. I want to keep the weight down and want the RPM to be low on the highway. I know typical 9” rear ends are much heavier than the 10 bolt but I heard Currie’s are decent for weight and strong. I also know there are more advanced subframes with coil overs and infinite adjustability but I heard the Hotchkis package fits well and is a solid performer on the autocross. The shocks allow a comfortable ride but can be adjusted for the curves. Using Wilwood brakes- 6 piston front/4 piston rear. Any opinions on the Hotchkis subframe and fox shocks would be appreciated. Also, I can’t find anyone who provides a transmission crossmember for a TR6060—-may be easy enough for me to fabricate. Thanks.
Chris.

[dhutton]

That is just a stock subframe with stuff bolted onto it. Those handlebars will not work with an LS3.

Don

[Bullrider]

I know the AMD frames are very similar to stock but the suspension gets good remarks and the subframe connectors will work well with my build. Those handlebars should work with the LS3 as long as I make my own cross over bar. Still looking for comments on anyone who has used the Hotchkis set up.

[dhutton]

Holley LS accessory drive hits the handlebar uprights hard on both sides in addition to the cross bar.

What does the Hotchis setup do to address the steering geometry? ridetech Tru Turn makes more sense imho.

I have not seen a single person on the forums use that Hotchkis subframe. AMD subframe is a copy of the stock subframe as far as I know.

Don

[Z06vet]

I would rethink the rear gear ratio as well. I prefer 3.89 or 4.11. But I would think at the very least you'd want to use 3.70.

[MCB Matt]

Bullrider, I am happy to work with you on a suspension setup. We sell over 100 brands as well so we can cover just about anything you need from the LS swap, gauges, AC, sheetmetal, brakes and more.. Bumper to Bumper.

We deal in many suspension brands and we sell AMD as well. Send me a PM and we can get a plan in the works and get you some prices so we can see where your budget needs to be on this phase.

Thanks,
Matt

[ilikeike]

I definitely look at Speedtech , ridetech or DSE... for a complete sub before spending $6K + on a stock type one.

I have 3.50 gears with my 5 spd, wish I went 3.70. If I had a 6sp I'd go with even more gear. 3.89...

[MCB Matt]

I definitely look at Speedtech , ridetech or DSE... for a complete sub before spending $6K + on a stock type one.

I have 3.50 gears with my 5 spd, wish I went 3.70. If I had a 6sp I'd go with even more gear. 3.89...

Good advice, especially with the offers we have on DSE frames right now! Speedtech is a solid choice as well, we are happy to discuss the differences and price structure differences.
Matt

[Bullrider]

Z06vet, What are your rpm’s @60mph ? What size are your rear tires? Thanks.

[CSG]

Wow, I just looked that piece up! Cost the same as my full DSE sub from MCB...

[MCB Matt]

Wow, I just looked that piece up! Cost the same as my full DSE sub from MCB...

Yep, and no where near the performance and modern design!

[David Pozzi]

Most aftermarket subs will increase tire room by 2.5" per side. That's a lot of extra tire room and a First Gen needs it more than a second gen does. Tire room is the #1 reason to change the subframe.

[76TA]

I'd look to a DSE front sub and their sub frame connectors to be honest. Their sub frame connectors when installed correctly are second to none.

Like what was said above, you'll get more tire room and more adjustability with most other sub frames versus what you're planning. That was the selling point for me.

DSE's consumer support was also very helpful. Can't speak about alternatives.

[Bullrider]

Thanks for all the comments. Regarding the rear gear-the Tr6060 in a 2010 camaro has a 3.46 rear gear with a 28.8” tire. The tire I am looking at is 275/40-17 which is 25.7”. That is 10% shorter. I want a low rpm cruise speed at 65mph so a 3.50 rear is still a little short geared in my view. This will not be geared for 1/4 mile but more for canyon carving and cruising. Second is the Hotchkis set-up-I agree the subframe they choose is archaic. Their suspension components and subframe connectors are good and they do well at auto-cross events competing against those vendors listed above. I also like their adjustable Fox shocks and the whole package sits about 2” lower than stock and has removable shims to drop a little more if necessary. However, I am open to these other vendors, especially DSE and Speedtech. Downside to Hotchkis is the low-tech subframe and no transmission crossmember for the TR6060. I would have to make my own. I will take everyone’s advice and look more closely at the other vendors. Regarding subframe connectors, I did like the fact that I did not need to cut the floor to install their system.

[David Pozzi]

Thanks for all the comments. Regarding the rear gear-the Tr6060 in a 2010 camaro has a 3.46 rear gear with a 28.8” tire. The tire I am looking at is 275/40-17 which is 25.7”. That is 10% shorter. I want a low rpm cruise speed at 65mph so a 3.50 rear is still a little short geared in my view. This will not be geared for 1/4 mile but more for canyon carving and cruising. Second is the Hotchkis set-up-I agree the subframe they choose is archaic. Their suspension components and subframe connectors are good and they do well at auto-cross events competing against those vendors listed above. I also like their adjustable Fox shocks and the whole package sits about 2” lower than stock and has removable shims to drop a little more if necessary. However, I am open to these other vendors, especially DSE and Speedtech. Downside to Hotchkis is the low-tech subframe and no transmission crossmember for the TR6060. I would have to make my own. I will take everyone’s advice and look more closely at the other vendors. Regarding subframe connectors, I did like the fact that I did not need to cut the floor to install their system.

are you sure about the trans ratios?
I found this: "1st-3.01, 2nd-2.07, 3rd-1.43, 4th-1.00, 5th-0.84, 6th-0.57" I don't see a 3.46 first listed for 2010.

Below would be your speeds per rpm using the above ratios. Ignore where it says "T56 Magnum Wide ratio" I threw your numbers in an existing spreadsheet

[Bullrider]

are you sure about the trans ratios?
I found this: "1st-3.01, 2nd-2.07, 3rd-1.43, 4th-1.00, 5th-0.84, 6th-0.57" I don't see a 3.46 first listed for 2010.

Below would be your speeds per rpm using the above ratios. Ignore where it says "T56 Magnum Wide ratio" I threw your numbers in an existing spreadsheet

David, thanks for the spreadsheet-that is exactly what I was looking for. I think the 3.50 would work well according to your calculations. (A 3.46 should be the rear gear on a 2010). My C6 Z06 hits over 60mph in 1st and is spinning around 1350 at 60mph and I love that gearing. Your spreadsheet shows a nice low rpm when cruising at 60 and is still short enough for power delivery due to my smaller tires. I will need more information on weights but with the aluminum motor, aluminum wheels, and custom subframe, I should be below 3200 lbs. I have always leaned towards taller gearing. Just my own opinion. Love my tall gearing on my Z06 when we road race. (This LS3 will be around 450hp vs over 530 in my Z with headers/etc)

[c4racer2]

So I have a 2016 Camaro SS and I've always felt the rear gearing is a bit lazy for the motor - it's a pretty good match, it just feels long to me.
I was thinking it should be pretty good with 3.73 gearing and the latest Tremec ratios 2.66 first. I hadn't considered the tire was so tall. But it is.
I was surprised when I saw that 28" spec above so I checked and mine has 275-35-18 which is similar at 27.7" tall. 2" taller than the tires going on my 71, which is getting a T56 Magnum close ratio (also 2.66 first and same 1-4 ratios as a 2016 Camaro). So that's about 7-8% shorter in my case. Good to know.
I am planning on using a 3.70 gear.

In my case the major difference is the motor in the 71 makes more power and tq - although not by a huge margin. Maybe +60 on both.
But it's a much fatter torque curve especially down low and mid range with a 406 carb motor. I'll need to play with numbers some more - but I still think 3.70 is the right gear for this car and a 3.90 would just be too short.

[Bullrider]

Question regarding other suspension choices—I do like DSE-how hard is it to install their Quadralink rear end in a 67 camaro? How much modification and cutting needs to be done? Is it easy to route the exhaust? Can a person with average welding skills install this system? How do you square it or align it with the body? Just want some opinions on how difficult it was to install from other owners. Thanks!

[2yellow69]

I hadn't considered the tire was so tall. But it is.
I was surprised when I saw that 28" spec above so I checked and mine has 275-35-18 which is similar at 27.7" tall. 2" taller than the tires going on my 71, which is getting a T56 Magnum close ratio

Not to say you are wrong, but.....
A 275/35/18 is only 25.7" tall. I know this because I have been researching tires for months now. I settled on a 275/40/18 which is about an inch taller.

[c4racer2]

Not to say you are wrong, but.....
A 275/35/18 is only 25.7" tall. I know this because I have been researching tires for months now. I settled on a 275/40/18 which is about an inch taller.

Oh mistyped that - I meant my 2016 Camaro has a 275-35-20 which is 27.7" tall. I just put 275-35-18 on the front of my 71 which is probably why I typed that.
My only point - I was surprised the 2016 has 2" taller tires than the ones going on my 71. I am used to 26.x" tires, but almost 28" seems rather tall to me.