Suspension Analyzer

[novanutcase]

Anyone here in the SoCal/Los Angeles area willing to let me "borrow" there suspensionanalyzer program? If not what is a good but not to expensive one. I want to try and put a C-5 suspension under my '66 Nova.

[astroracer]

IF... you are just using a stock suspension, the analyser program is really not necessary. The problem you will have is fitting the wide track Corvette suspension under your Nova. The Corvette track width is generally 62" while your Nova is around 58". You may be able to circumvent this with wheel backspacing instead of modifying the suspension.
Narrowing the suspension without a total redesign is not an option in my book.
Mark

[novanutcase]

Ah C'mon....there must be SOME way of doing it........Here is someone that is doing it now.....

http://www.lateral-g.net/members/sinjem/


Art Morrison had a narrowed C-5 for early model 'vettes with a 57 1/2" hub to hub track width. Won't this work? If not this is why I need a suspension analyzer(Astroracer?) I will be doing a full frame for the car so I can choose any attach point I want which should make it a little easier to make this work. Astroracer do you think you could help me out here?

[astroracer]

[quote=novanutcase]Ah C'mon....there must be SOME way of doing it........Here is someone that is doing it now.....quote]

That's just it, bud... ANYONE can do it that has some good fabrication skills but the qualifier is doing it CORRECTLY...
I have looked at Sinjems front end work before and it is absolutely beautiful but, what you can't see, is if any geometry changes were made. Narrowing the suspension is fine as long as the inner steering pivots are moved accordingly.
Bumpsteer is a HUGE issue when doing any suspension work. I spent a lot of time getting the Bad Ast suspension to work with a C5 R&P. Narrowing a stock C5 and leaving the inner steering pivots alone will generate a ton of bump... To do this correctly you will need a redesigned rack and even then I will guarantee the Upper and Lower Control Arm inner pivots will need reworking also.
The Suspension Analyser program is very good. I did all of the Bad Ast design in the 9 day demo with a LOT of help from Saltracer. I did end up buying the program though and I use it quite often. The thing you have to realize though is the program is NOT user friendly. It does not tell you what a good suspension design is. All it does is spit out data. Using the program effectively requires a thorough knowledge of suspension design AND what it takes to develope a good design. Using the canned Corvette suspension as a jump off point can be done to give you an idea of what works and what doesn't. Matching or bettering the Corvette output data is a good goal and gives you some direction for your redesign.
Try the 9 day demo, it's free, and see what you think. Changing the Corvette points is relatively easy so do that and see what you end up with.
Sorry for the book...
Mark

[silver69camaro]

Sure you can do it. It isn't easy. Like Mark said, you can't just narrow up the stock C5 attach points and be good to go.

When I narrowed ours to 57.5, I definetely did not just narrow it up and use a narrower rack. WAAAAYYYYYY more to it than that. Both our wide and narrow C5 suspensions differ from stock for some minor improvements, and to correct problems you can run into when narrowing (roller center migration came to mind, it's been a while). In the end, both our narrow and wide C5 stuff came out better than stock.

Something that caught my eye too:
"I will be doing a full frame for the car so I can choose any attach point I want"

You need to look at the entire package. When I design a suspension, I go from the outside in. Meaning, wheels, hub, knuckle, ball joint, control arm, and all the way in. You need to make sure you provide enough room for headers and engine accessories when it's all done. You can easily come up with a suspension that is killer, but useless because it just isn't practical. Engineering 101: Design something that can actually be built!

If you do decide to purchase a program, go for it. Make sure you add another $100 for Milliken's book to comprehend and double check the data. Two programs that I recommend are WinGEO (not user friendly) and SusProg3D. Both do the same thing, but the later is easier to use...however, you'll find the data wont come out to be the same between the two programs, and that's why you need to double check. Milliken's book will also help you design a suspension that performs well in all areas. RC migration, camber curve, bumpsteer (not just static, what's it doing when coming out of a corner while on the throttle?), wheel rates, roll rates, on and on. Phew.

Anyway, in the end it can be extremely rewarding. The best compliment I've heard was "It's like driving my Porsche, only rides better."

[novanutcase]

Astro/Mark - No worries on the length of your post. In fact, I enjoy a good read as long as it has good info and yours was one of those! Apparently, Sinjem told me that he had Wayne Due setup the geometry on the front end when he was bending Doug the frame. I spoke to Wayne about this and he told me that he had consulted Art Morrison on this to get the right specs. I would imagine that if Art Morrison had a hand in the geometry it will handle nothing short of superb. I went and saw Dougs car and we talked a while about the can of worms I am about to embark on but I just have a real good feeling about this and I really think that if I go for it I will end up with a really great car! You know what they say, Nothing Ventured Nothing Gained!

Silver69/Matt - Yes, I am aware that it isn't that easy and this is why I want to go deeper rather than just buy a Chassisworks clip and a 9" rear end and be done with it. As far as the full frame, You guys will probably be the ones doing it so you all get to figure out all that stuff! I just wanted to see if it is possible and how much work it would be to do it. I already have an idea as to the components I would like to include and, again, I am aware that all of these things are important as the design needs to be approached as a sum of its parts and this is what I will be discussing with your design team when I get to that stage. I guess, in a nutshell, my question would be if it is worth it to pursue this or just be safe and go the tried and true route?