Redline Chevelle...anyone?

[BADVELLE]

Does anyone have info on this car? I believe it was on the cover of PHR about 2 years ago. I tried to google it, but was not able to run down anything specific. I am looking for the wheel/backspacing they used. Thanks.

[Q ship]

This car was discussed a little here. I don't know if the wheel backspacing has ever been published, try PM'ing Denny for a copy of the article.

[BADVELLE]

Thanks Brian, I remember that post now, thanks again.

[zbugger]

From my memory it's similar to 2nd gen Camaro numbers. Front is 17x9.5, 5.5" bs. and rear is 17x11, 5.75"bs. If you want to use this on your own car, that should get you close. Some guys run 6" bs. Measure your own car though. Just because one person can run with those measurements doesn't necessarily mean you can too.

[dennis68]

Craig, I am running the same combo albeit quite a bit lower and it rubs pretty good during hard cornering. I am going with 285's instead of the 315's. I have the entire write-up if you need specifics.

[BADVELLE]

Craig, I am running the same combo albeit quite a bit lower and it rubs pretty good during hard cornering. I am going with 285's instead of the 315's. I have the entire write-up if you need specifics.

Dennis -
I would like the write-up, can you email it to me? Did you have to mini-tub your car? I was reading in one of the past PHR mag's about Stielow's build on the Malitude and he referred to the Redline Chevelle and mentioned that they did not have to mini-tub the car. I can see where this would rub under cornering and I was also considered about normal suspension travel. I have measured my '70 and I have not decided what to run yet, but am just keeping my options open. Thanks for the help.

[Conekiller13]

The 70 -72 has bigger wheel housings than the early cars. A 315 will fit fine with the proper back spacing. You also need to isolate the side to side movment of the rear though. Tubluar lowers with Delrin bushings and spherical bearings will keep the rear from shifting side to side under cornering and eleveaite rubbing issuses. With My package even though they are only 275's there is barely a finger width between the tire and the fender lip and I have no rubbing issuses under any conditions.

[BADVELLE]

The 70 -72 has bigger wheel housings than the early cars. A 315 will fit fine with the proper back spacing. You also need to isolate the side to side movment of the rear though. Tubluar lowers with Delrin bushings and spherical bearings will keep the rear from shifting side to side under cornering and eleveaite rubbing issuses. With My package even though they are only 275's there is barely a finger width between the tire and the fender lip and I have no rubbing issuses under any conditions.

Daniel -

What size wheel and backspacing are you running? Front and rear? Thanks for the input.

[Conekiller13]

Craig,

I'm running 17x9 on all four. Unfortunatly it's been so long since I put them on I've forgotten the exact back spacing. I think it's 4.75 but it might be 5 even. It's a standard offset that ROH offers. Contact Jeff at Group A wheels. They are the importer for ROH. http://www.groupawheels.com/

[dennis68]

Daniel, are you sure it will fit all cars and all suspension heights? I didn't think so. Like I stated previously, mine rubs during hard cornering. I am also several inches lower than the redline chevelle. 315's are over 1.5" wider than 275's plus the fact the sidewall will grow more on an 11" than on a 9.5" rim. If you barley fit a finger now how are tires 3/4" wider per side going to fit with no problem?

Shoot me your email Craig and I'll scan the article. It may have to come in several installments as it is a dozen pages or so.

[Conekiller13]

Daniel, are you sure it will fit all cars and all suspension heights? I didn't think so. Like I stated previously, mine rubs during hard cornering. I am also several inches lower than the redline chevelle. 315's are over 1.5" wider than 275's plus the fact the sidewall will grow more on an 11" than on a 9.5" rim. If you barley fit a finger now how are tires 3/4" wider per side going to fit with no problem?

Shoot me your email Craig and I'll scan the article. It may have to come in several installments as it is a dozen pages or so.

There is a good inch and half from the inside of the tire to the frame. A wider wheel and tire would of course require a differnt offset to bring that extra tire to inside and not the outside. On My car half of the sidewall sits inside the fenderwell at ride hieght with no load. Half a dozen track days and a couple dozen autocrosses and no rubbing, if Your conering harder I would say Your dragging sheet metal not rubbing tires.

[BADVELLE]

Daniel, are you sure it will fit all cars and all suspension heights? I didn't think so. Like I stated previously, mine rubs during hard cornering. I am also several inches lower than the redline chevelle. 315's are over 1.5" wider than 275's plus the fact the sidewall will grow more on an 11" than on a 9.5" rim. If you barley fit a finger now how are tires 3/4" wider per side going to fit with no problem?

Shoot me your email Craig and I'll scan the article. It may have to come in several installments as it is a dozen pages or so.

Dennis -

I sent my email to you, thanks again.

[dennis68]

Yes, however you are running 275's correct? 315's will take every bit of that 1.5" of clearence you have and I gaurantee if you are running a C4L you are moving the axle more than 1/4" during OT events.

[USAZR1]

Maybe it's your particular car or wheel backspacing,Dennis. I've seen lots of 68-72 A-Bodies run 315's on the rear w/o clearance problems. KAA's 70 SS El Camino has 17x11 ZR-1 wheels with 315's mounted and that thing is a slotcar. 5.75" backspacing is not enough for a 17x11 rim as 6" is a zero offset. KAA is running either 6.25" or 6.375".

On my former 68 El Camino,I tried some 18x10 OZ Monte Carlos & BFG 295/35/18 tires that came off my 85 Corvette and there was still lots of room left. If I had known then what I know now,that car would have had 315's on it back in 98.

I will concede the point that what works on the street won't necessarily work on the track. KAA's car has been on the track,though.

[Conekiller13]

Yes, however you are running 275's correct? 315's will take every bit of that 1.5" of clearence you have and I gaurantee if you are running a C4L you are moving the axle more than 1/4" during OT events.

Dennis, whats a C4L? I'm running Global West's TBC-4 lower control arms.

[dennis68]

Converging 4 link (OE arrangement)

Clint, Ive seen KAA's ride. I guess I haven't made it clear enough that the 315's work fine at stock or slightly lowered but once the fender drops below the rim line tire clearence changes quite a bit. I was only pointing out that they will fit UNLESS there has been drastic ride height changes. I have rolled and beat the hell out of the fender to create mini flares. I run 3/8" clearence on the inside and less than 1/4" on the outside.

[TonyL]

i did turn up this blurb from the write up.
Off wth the old and on with the new: Swapping from the stock A-body spindle to a GM B-Body spindle(from the mid -'70s up) is a bolt-on deal with the right kit. Notice that the new B-body spindle is 3 inches taller (from ball joint to ball joint) than the one we're replacing, repositioning the upper ball joint and creating a negative camber curve(tipping the tire in) to apply a full footprint of the tire when compressed. There's a slight bump steer disadvantage, but one that's only exposed in extremely lowered vehicles. This 13-inch Baer Track braking system (PN C4GA101555HN) is specifically designed to use the Hotchkis tubular A-arm, and the system srrives pre-assembled on the appropriated B-body spindles(Baer offers a similar sytem for stock, two piece A-body spindles as well). The obviously longer steering arm slows down turning response, so we recommend upgrading your steering box to a 12:1 ratio at some point. THIS SPINDLE ALSO WIDENS THE TRACK BY 3/8 - INCH PER SIDE, SO YOU'LL HAVE TO MAKE CONSIDERATIONS IN WHEEL OFFSET.

[dennis68]

Yep, fronts are no problem, this is a rear application. Thanks for the input however.

[Steve Chryssos]

On the Redline Oil Chevelle, they had the luxury of taking the car directly to Budnik and sticking it. (That's some wacky SoCal lingo for measuring wheel specs.) The custom rear may also play into the equation. One thing I know, that's an 11,000 mile original car.

So I'm sure that they did not hack wheelwells and such. So with some careful measurement (or in their case the right connections) 315's should fit.

[dennis68]

OK, one for time. My wheel backspace is about as "nailed" as possible, I suppose you could move the center ¼” in the hoop but not without going to a high end 3-piece wheel. All I know is “A” bodies, a 315 will fit with no problem (68-72 applications) until you lower to the point that you are starting to tuck the tire. The Redline Chevelle does not have any of the rear tire tucked. Anyone close enough to make the drive is more than welcome to come out for a road test and I'll show what it takes to get tire rub.

As stated previously I have gone to great lengths to make these fit and tuck, ain't happening. A 285 may work; I haven't had one on there yet.

I am not discouraging anyone from trying, just encouraging that you try and get a tester wheel and junk tires before a big investment. I have never seen a 315 tucked into a stock A body wheel well, if there is one, by all means I'd love to see it. This is what a "tucked" 315 on an 11" wheel looks like....yes, it rubs at about .7 g's

Should we move this to the wheel/tire section?