Sway Bar Help???

[67w30]

My 67 442 has the B-body 12in disc brake conversion with Global West upper and lower control arms. What kinda sway bars would you use? I have 3/4 inch lowering Global West springs in front and 1 1/4 inch rear springs. I also have their rear control arms. I basically had a hotchkis springs and found the suspension to ride uneven. I currantly have a 1 1/4 front bar and no rear bar, What to do?

[David Pozzi]

You have almost a complete Global West system. Why not get their antiroll bars too? It's better than mix and match.

[67w30]

well they say not to run a front bar that is bigger than 1 1/8 and that the 1 1/4 bar is too big. thought that was kinda a stretch, because of that little bit 1/8. The other thing is they said, with thier springs a rear sway bar is not nessicary, do you believe that? With all my cars, the first thing I do is install boxed rear arms and a sway bar. Plus the originator of this B-body spindle swap was a company out of CA called HO performance and they used 1 3/8 bars front and rear. I have their Hot Rod aritcal called Knuckle Sandwich back in the early ninties that my father performed on his 67 olds and it works great to this day!!! What do you think

[shizzy]

I have heard a few times that if you are running stiff springs that big sway bars are not needed. on a stock springed and rubber bushed suspension you will see great improvement but not so on a stiffened up ride.

On my 72 Cutlass Supreme I have Hotchkiss springs all around with poly bushings up front. No sway bar in the rear and the stock 7/8"(?) in the front. the car handles amazing and is very neutral. just a slight amount of oversteer. Im not convinced I need any more sway bar. In fact the only reason I would add one to the rear would be to aid in traction from a dead stop.

[70bird]

well they say not to run a front bar that is bigger than 1 1/8 and that the 1 1/4 bar is too big. thought that was kinda a stretch, because of that little bit 1/8. The other thing is they said, with thier springs a rear sway bar is not nessicary, do you believe that? With all my cars, the first thing I do is install boxed rear arms and a sway bar. Plus the originator of this B-body spindle swap was a company out of CA called HO performance and they used 1 3/8 bars front and rear. I have their Hot Rod aritcal called Knuckle Sandwich back in the early ninties that my father performed on his 67 olds and it works great to this day!!! What do you think

I am surprised to hear that GW recommends a front bar that small. Some stock 2nd gens use a 1 1/4 bar from the factory, and are lighter than your car.

My understanding of setting up a street suspension will include some compromises in ultimate cornering for ride quality. Typicaly, choosing the max spring rate you can tolerate on the street, and tuning the transient handling characteristics with the sway bars (and shocks). If the car exhibits understeer now, you will need a rear bar of some size to correct it. Some people prefer a bit of understeer as you can control the attitude of the car with the throttle, and it will not be quite as "twitchy" when setting up for a corner. Of course, tire choice will determine your final tune.

On my 2nd. gen, I use GW cat. 2 springs. They also did not recommend a rear bar for this, and I must say the car is pretty neutral in the limited seat time I have with it now. We'll see when I get it on the track this spring.

[David Pozzi]

well they say not to run a front bar that is bigger than 1 1/8 and that the 1 1/4 bar is too big. thought that was kinda a stretch, because of that little bit 1/8. The other thing is they said, with thier springs a rear sway bar is not nessicary, do you believe that? With all my cars, the first thing I do is install boxed rear arms and a sway bar. Plus the originator of this B-body spindle swap was a company out of CA called HO performance and they used 1 3/8 bars front and rear. I have their Hot Rod aritcal called Knuckle Sandwich back in the early ninties that my father performed on his 67 olds and it works great to this day!!! What do you think

1/8" IS a big deal in bar rate, probably more than double the rate.

Did the HO suspension use stiffer springs? Stiffer springs won't need as much bar rate.

I'm kinda surprised GW wouldn't want to use a rear bar! If your front bar is a solid bar, then look for something to match it on the rear. Who's bar is the front bar? Maybe that company makes a matching rear?
David

[Ranaexcavating]

1/8" IS a big deal in bar rate, probably more than double the rate.

Did the HO suspension use stiffer springs? Stiffer springs won't need as much bar rate.

I'm kinda surprised GW wouldn't want to use a rear bar! If your front bar is a solid bar, then look for something to match it on the rear. Who's bar is the front bar? Maybe that company makes a matching rear?
David

David

Here is the statement on the GW site... It references the F-Body but not the A.
Sway Bars:(Front and Rear)

Sway bars should always be considered a suspension tuning devise, not the suspension. It is easy to over sway bar a Camaro or Firebird. Especially now when the concept today is bigger is always better. This statement is not true. To big of a front bar makes the car ridged and dance over bumps creating a understeering condition. Too much rear sway bar creates oversteer and reduces the amount of power being put down on the pavement during corner exit. In fact we rarely recommend a rear sway bar on these particular cars. The following chart provides available sway bar sizes, however, talking to one of our technician before ordering might be advisable. For example several variables exist regarding the rear suspension: tire size, horsepower, and rear spring rates are just some of the variables that influence whether or not to use a rear sway bar.

[David Pozzi]

I see what they are getting at. I guess it all depends on how rough the bumps are and what the effective rates of the bars are. A lot can be lost from soft mounting bushings.

Our 73 Camaro needs a rear bar, we tried it without one and it was terrible. My 67 Camaro needed one too. All the later model Camaros use fairly hefty front and rear bars. A first gen Camaro has front bar arms that are half as long as later/other models, so you can't go much larger than 1" to 1 1'8" or the bar WILL be too stiff.
David

[Norm Peterson]

well they say not to run a front bar that is bigger than 1 1/8 and that the 1 1/4 bar is too big. thought that was kinda a stretch, because of that little bit 1/8. The other thing is they said, with thier springs a rear sway bar is not nessicary, do you believe that?

I did find that the 1.125" bar recommendation is made relative to the use of their springs and the negative roll system. If you only look at the front suspension, it does make some sense to limit how much roll stiffness you build in to it, since the higher RC is already drawing more of the LLTD forward.

But the front suspension does not work in a vacuum, and the avoidance of a rear bar sounds more like somebody's personal approach to tuning. It may be better in some cases to follow that path. For example, a low CG height car with stiff springs (think conventionally sprung Cup cars, not BBSS cars or the COT). But this is not a universal solution, and I don't think it's nearly as applicable to a relatively tall and at best moderately sprung street-legal car.

There is some merit in keeping the sta-bar stiffness from getting way out of hand relative to the spring stiffnesses and their contribution to roll stiffness. But that's only one consideration, and I highly doubt that the 52% increase in bar stiffness that comes when you swap out that 1.125" bar for a 1.25" bar crosses any make-or-break point. In fact, moving up from a 1.125" front bar to a 1.25" front bar and adding an 0.875" rear bar (LCA attached) leaves you with just about the same TLLTD balance and is essentially what GM did for the F41 Sport Suspension package on the '78 - '87 A/G bodies vs the base suspension. The payoff is about 20% less roll per lateral g and the associated benefits in reduced camber loss and roll steer.

It could be that the intent is to actively not control roll as tightly as possible. Roll itself is viewed by some as providing a subconscious warning to the driver. Whether that's necessary or even useful in a car that's being modified for the specific goal of improved cornering potential is a separate question.


Norm

[67w30]

Great Reads!!! Learned Alot!!! You guys are true professionals!!!
I am gonna run the 1.25 bar just to get round the block for the first couple days. I will use a stock 7/8in rear bar instead of over powering it with bars that are too big. Thanks Guys!!!