To GULSTRAND OR NOT TO GULSTRAND??

[67steve]

Hello Experts,

I know this topic has been discussed in length on this forum because i just spent 5 hours reading previous posts. Some say the Guldstrand MOD is only necessary if I will be cornering the car hard. What is considered hard?? I know alot depends on the application. Mine is a street application. But I would like the car to handle as good as posible. I talked with **** at Guldstrand and he told me the MOD would be alot of help for the wide wheels I was planning on putting on the car. **** also told me that Tubular A arms were not necessary and would not buy me much. He also said they were not much lighter and in some cases not as strong as stock. I also talked with one of the tech's at Global West about the MOD and he kind of sounded as if he was not that familiar with the MOD, even know GW's website states that there A arms work with the MOD.? Anyway this was my plan for the suspension and wheel/tire combo for my 67 Camaro: Global West upper and Lower control arms, QA1 coilovers, sway bar, 17 or 18" X 9 or 9.5" with a 265 or 275 for the rear, 17" X 8 with a 245 for the front. Does anyone see a problem with this set up? Will the Guldstrand MOD be beneficial for my application. Will there need to be any trimming to the A arm mounts with this tire wheel combo or will just re drilling the a arm locations be sufficient. Any other info on this set up or do you think I am way off track?

Dazed and Confused

Steve M

Future 1967 RS Camoro, 540 cu. in. Rat motor, Tremec TKO 600, Ford 9" Rear, Baer 4 wheel discs, lots of other goodies

[baz67]

Steve, do the Guldstrand mod. You will not regret it. The gain in get in the geometry is worth it. Unless you like the bling of the tubular lowers you do not need them. The GW uppers will add caster.

When doing the Guldstrand mod with GW arms I would not move the holes back, just down. Moving the holes back adds caster. The GW uppers give you more caster then you can use. So if you move the holes back and do the Guldstrand mod you will have a huge shim stack to get the caster to where you want it.

[68Formula]

Verify with a tech (not the one you talked to before), but I think the GW arms will work with the G-MOD without grinding mounts.

Personally, I don't care for the fit of my 275s on a 9.5" on my '68. I noticed witness marks that I'm getting contact on the inside of the wheel well and yet the outside is already into the lip at least a 1/4". I haven't had a chance yet to see if the marks were there before I redid the suspension and put the new rims/tires on it. In static position I have some clearance. I'd be surprised though if the old 14s with a worn suspension were that close to rub. My quarters are original and bondo-free so I can't get myself to roll the lips. Luckily my rear suspension sits a little high for now, and is very stiff so it probably won't actually ever hit. If I go to disc brakes supposedly it will push it farther out still. Somehow there are lots of people getting away with it though. Maybe they roll the lips or a little rubbing doesn't bother them? I think a 255 at least on my car would have been a better choice.

[68Formula]

Verify with a tech (not the one you talked to before), but I think the GW arms will work with the G-MOD without grinding mounts.

Personally, I don't care for the fit of my 275s on a 9.5" on my '68. I noticed witness marks that I'm getting contact on the inside of the wheel well and yet the outside is already into the lip at least a 1/4". I haven't had a chance yet to see if the marks were there before I redid the suspension and put the new rims/tires on it. In static position I have some clearance. I'd be surprised though if the old 14s with a worn suspension were that close to rub. My quarters are original and bondo-free so I can't get myself to roll the lips. Luckily my rear suspension sits a little high for now, and is very stiff so it probably won't actually ever hit. If I go to disc brakes supposedly it will push it farther out still. Somehow there are lots of people getting away with it though. Maybe they roll the lips or a little rubbing doesn't bother them? I think a 255 at least on my car would have been a better choice.

[CarlC]

If you are considering the ATS tall spindle then do not perform the G-mod. If using the stock spindle, then yes, do the mod. There's really no drawback to peforming the G-mod besides not being able to go back to stock.

[David Pozzi]

Tubular upper arms don't weigh less than stock arms, they do allow around +5 deg positive caster which helps keep the wheels flat when you turn the wheels sharply.

[Matt@RFR]

Tubular upper arms don't weigh less than stock arms,

You might have to revise that statement pretty soon David.

[wendell]

Guldstrand suggested to do the mod and told you that tubular A-arms are a waste of money. Your response was to buy tubular A-arms and ask the internet if you should do the mod. If you're not going to listen to Guldstand who are you going to listen to? Your only other options are random strangers on the internet and people trying to sell you stuff. D.G. knows more about racing first gens than the collective knowlege on this site. I've seen his cars and they work.

[Boulder69]

Um, I think he is just considering this combo, hence the request for advice. He seems to be getting as much feedback as possible before making an investment in time and money to upgrade his ride. I don't really see why he deserves a .

My $.02 is that by the time you factor in the cost of solid bushings, new shafts and ball joints, the tubular uppers begin to look a little less expensive. The G-Mod obviously works well, but I went with DSE uppers with ATS tall spindles and stock lowers. This should give me better geometry for the type of driving I plan on using the car for. At least that's what I've been told by many folks more knowledeable than I. Plus, I don't have to worry about 37+ year spindle/bearing technology when I finally get to beat on it.

That's what I like about this forum, folks USUALLY are very helpful, and I get a variety of opinions that I can use to make a final decision. Good luck with your project Steve.

[David Pozzi]

You might have to revise that statement pretty soon David.

Sounds like something is in the works! ;)

Here are stock upper and lower A arm weights complete with shaft and balljoint.
lower A frame 11 lbs
upper A frame 10 lbs

[wendell]

The LD guys are always up to something... David, how's the camaro coming. sorry I haven't been intouch.

[David Pozzi]

Zero progress on Camaro stuff. I was sure I'd be in the middle of working on one of them by now. :(
I decided to do a major cleanup of my shop. I'm making room for a lift which I've needed for a long time. Hopefully once better organized, I'll be able to work more productively. My tow vehicle needs some work, and there is one more race for the Lola this year.

[67steve]

Steve, do the Guldstrand mod. You will not regret it. The gain in get in the geometry is worth it. Unless you like the bling of the tubular lowers you do not need them. The GW uppers will add caster.

When doing the Guldstrand mod with GW arms I would not move the holes back, just down. Moving the holes back adds caster. The GW uppers give you more caster then you can use. So if you move the holes back and do the Guldstrand mod you will have a huge shim stack to get the caster to where you want it.

Brian,

Thank you for the info. Is there a template for the version of the mod you are suggesting? Will I need to grind off any of the mount for the mod, or just simply drill new holes? Will I be able to return the A arms to there stock location if I wanted to.

Thanks for the advice,

SteveM

[67steve]

Verify with a tech (not the one you talked to before), but I think the GW arms will work with the G-MOD without grinding mounts.

Personally, I don't care for the fit of my 275s on a 9.5" on my '68. I noticed witness marks that I'm getting contact on the inside of the wheel well and yet the outside is already into the lip at least a 1/4". I haven't had a chance yet to see if the marks were there before I redid the suspension and put the new rims/tires on it. In static position I have some clearance. I'd be surprised though if the old 14s with a worn suspension were that close to rub. My quarters are original and bondo-free so I can't get myself to roll the lips. Luckily my rear suspension sits a little high for now, and is very stiff so it probably won't actually ever hit. If I go to disc brakes supposedly it will push it farther out still. Somehow there are lots of people getting away with it though. Maybe they roll the lips or a little rubbing doesn't bother them? A 265 might be a better choice, but do search there are very few choices for hp tires in that size either for 17s or 18s. I think a 255 at least on my car would have been a better choice.

Right On Mike thanks for the advice. I think I will be a little bit more conservative on my tires to be safe. I don't want to ruin my freshly painted fender wells or tires.

Thanks,

SteveM

[chicane67]

If you are considering the ATS tall spindle then do not perform the G-mod. If using the stock spindle, then yes, do the mod. There's really no drawback to peforming the G-mod besides not being able to go back to stock.

There is however, a 'stock height' ATS AFX spindle, for use with the Dickiepoo G-Mod.

[67steve]

If you are considering the ATS tall spindle then do not perform the G-mod. If using the stock spindle, then yes, do the mod. There's really no drawback to peforming the G-mod besides not being able to go back to stock.

Thanks for the information Carl. I will check out the ATS spindles. I was under the impression that if you did the mod you could return to the stock A arm mounting location. Odviously I misunderstood. What happens to the stock mounting holes?

Thank You,
Steve M

[baz67]

Brian,

Thank you for the info. Is there a template for the version of the mod you are suggesting? Will I need to grind off any of the mount for the mod, or just simply drill new holes? Will I be able to return the A arms to there stock location if I wanted to.

Thanks for the advice,

SteveM

There is not template, but you can modify the one that is on Guldstrands site to work. I cannot remember if you will need to grind a little on the mount. You could do what David Pozzi did when he did the mod on his car. He cut the entire mount off and trimmed to size and then re welded it to the subframe. That way it is you will not hit the ears. Once you drive your car with the mod you will not want to go back to stock.

[67steve]

Guldstrand suggested to do the mod and told you that tubular A-arms are a waste of money. Your response was to buy tubular A-arms and ask the internet if you should do the mod. If you're not going to listen to Guldstand who are you going to listen to? Your only other options are random strangers on the internet and people trying to sell you stuff. D.G. knows more about racing first gens than the collective knowlege on this site. I've seen his cars and they work.

First of all I am new to this forum and don't want to make enemies right off the bat, but I havent bought anything yet my frame is stripped and I am in a planning stage. I am ATTEMPTING to gather as much knowledge as possible from every source possible. There seems to be SOME very helpful and intelligent individuals on this site that know alot more than I do. You should read the thread a little better before you post such a ignorant statement next time.

[CarlC]

If the G-mod is performed and stock arms used then the mount must be trimmed to allow for A-arm clearance. This trimming removes the stock mounting holes.

If the G-mod is performed using aftermarket tubular arms then the mount will likely not need trimming, hence allowing for a return to the stock mounting location.

If the mount is cut off the subframe and re-welded back into place to replicate the G-mod then there is no going back to the stock location.

I forgot about the stock-height ATS spindle.

[67steve]

Thanks for the clarification Carl. What is the advantage of the ATS AFX spindle?

Thanks,

SteveM