Enter your username:
Do you want to login or register?
  • Forgot your password?

    Login / Register




    Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
    Results 21 to 33 of 33

    Hybrid View

    1. #1
      Join Date
      Oct 2004
      Location
      IL/TN
      Posts
      908
      Country Flag: United States
      well I guess it is not clear to some but what I see is sds asking to "discuss" a product and his next post is the start of how bad the product is and apparently knows everything about it and how Schwartz is apparently deceiving customers, that is what I see.
      But again did ANYONE talk to the manufacturer to correct issues.

      https://www.protouringf-body.com "doing what they say can't be done"


    2. #2
      Quote Originally Posted by 79T/Aman View Post
      well I guess it is not clear to some but what I see is sds asking to "discuss" a product and his next post is the start of how bad the product is and apparently knows everything about it and how Schwartz is apparently deceiving customers, that is what I see.
      But again did ANYONE talk to the manufacturer to correct issues.
      Who said anything about Schwartz deceiving customers??

    3. #3
      Join Date
      Oct 2004
      Location
      IL/TN
      Posts
      908
      Country Flag: United States
      well you need to REALY read and UNDERSTAND what has been posted in ALL posts.
      So who's going to answer the question I'm asking for the third time, has ANYONE contacted the manufacturer to solve the issues? instead of this around about thread about all the problems
      https://www.protouringf-body.com "doing what they say can't be done"

    4. #4
      Join Date
      Nov 2008
      Location
      So. Cal.
      Posts
      1,240
      Country Flag: United States
      It doesnt look that bad to me. no not the ride height, that is too high. Im talking about the rear suspension. There is room on the lower bar mounts to stuff the rear end up there a lil, the pic I saw showed two additional mounting holes below the current situation. Im talking about winfield69's car. And the upper mounts are really high, dont know why, clearance issues maybe. If they were drilled for adjustment by the builder you could gain some lowering room, if there was not a clearance issue. But it looks like they didnt provide for adjustment on the uppers, only the lowers. Hmmm, odd.. You cant change the lowers without consideration of the uppers. Dont know what the uppers would look like if the lowers were at their lowest mounting point?? From the sound of it the uppers are already pointed up to the front alot, not so good.

      And as far as the self promoting deal. I dont see it. What??? Just regular car guys giving input. Most car guys are troubleshooters by nature. Why?? Well, cause cars have problems, all our cars. So we just like to help a guy out with possible ideas. Thats what its ALL about here. And with that, trailer it over here, we can fix it up any way you want. Simple stuff. JR

    5. #5
      Quote Originally Posted by 79T/Aman View Post
      well you need to REALY read and UNDERSTAND what has been posted in ALL posts.
      So who's going to answer the question I'm asking for the third time, has ANYONE contacted the manufacturer to solve the issues? instead of this around about thread about all the problems
      1. http://www.yourdictionary.com/discuss
      dis·cuss (di skus)

      transitive verb
      1. Obsolete to disperse; dispel
      2. to talk or write about; take up in conversation or in a discourse; consider and argue the pros and cons of
      I think that is what we have been doing in this thread. no bashing, no name calling, I guess you really need to understand the deinition of "discuss"....


      2. I do believe Scott contacted the manufacturer, and was pretty much told it is what it is ( Scott can fill in the blanks if he wishes ) Scott was too far into the project from a dollar standpoint to replace it with someone else's chassis. Which is what I suggested we even briefly discussed putting a IRS in the car.

      3. Self promoting ????? All I did was link to a pic. that showed what we ended up doing to resolve the issue of the low crossmember..

    6. #6
      Sorry SDS I didnt mean to hijack the thread. ......

    7. #7
      Join Date
      Apr 2009
      Posts
      327
      Quote Originally Posted by American Race Components View Post
      Sorry SDS I didnt mean to hijack the thread. ......
      everyone is welcome to express there opinion, i will continue to voice my opinion and thoughts as i progress, since I started this thread I have uncovered more details regarding this subject, FYI Muscleup has contacted me and I am pleased with there response.

    8. #8
      Join Date
      May 2009
      Posts
      35
      Quote Originally Posted by 79T/Aman View Post
      well you need to REALY read and UNDERSTAND what has been posted in ALL posts.
      So who's going to answer the question I'm asking for the third time, has ANYONE contacted the manufacturer to solve the issues? instead of this around about thread about all the problems
      I purchased my chassis from Schwartz, not knowing he was only marketing someone else's chassis. I did contact Schwartz about the chassis issues numerous times. I got a little advice at the beginning. A couple months ago I really pushed about some of the more serious issues, and I was told that the chassis was designed and manufactured by MuscleUp and to contact them if I had issues. That was the first time Jeff ever indicated that the chassis design and fab came from outside.

      I have contacted MuscleUp about a couple issues since then and have been pleased with their response.
      1967 Camaro RS-SS, Full Frame Chassis, LS7, T56 (wife's car)
      1967 Camaro RS-SS Indy 500 Pace Car (my first car)
      1955 Chevy Nomad, Newman Car Creations Chassis, LS1, T56 (work in progress)
      1995 Suburban 4x4, '05 Cummins, 6 sp, Dana 60 front axle (tow vehicle)
      1993 Mongoose Mountain Bike (daily driver)

    9. #9
      Join Date
      Oct 2004
      Location
      IL/TN
      Posts
      908
      Country Flag: United States
      Thank you Winfield69, this is the helpful type of info needed from the start and have no issues with you or your post only with SDS that started a thread to "discuss" but in reality wanted to point out all the bad points about the frame and how Schwartz doesn't know anything about the frame, this may be the case but the original post was to talk about MuscleUp.

      And one thing to SDS please don't give this board a gramar lesson, I'll point out to your last post "there opinion" ???!!! you mean "their opinion" an thank you for making my point about this thread you started as a "dicussion" but as YOU stated in your last post "MY OPINION AND THOUGHTS" issues are NEVER resolved with opinions, only facts and how to solve the issues.
      https://www.protouringf-body.com "doing what they say can't be done"

    10. #10
      Join Date
      Apr 2009
      Posts
      327
      Quote Originally Posted by 79T/Aman View Post
      Thank you Winfield69, this is the helpful type of info needed from the start and have no issues with you or your post only with SDS that started a thread to "discuss" but in reality wanted to point out all the bad points about the frame and how Schwartz doesn't know anything about the frame, this may be the case but the original post was to talk about MuscleUp.

      And one thing to SDS please don't give this board a gramar lesson, I'll point out to your last post "there opinion" ???!!! you mean "their opinion" an thank you for making my point about this thread you started as a "dicussion" but as YOU stated in your last post "MY OPINION AND THOUGHTS" issues are NEVER resolved with opinions, only facts and how to solve the issues.
      You obviously have a bone to pick with this subject since you have resorted to petty fault finding and minor spelling errors. No one here has stated anything to get so worked up about. As I see it we are all just trying to work out our problems and solve them, and occasionally vent our frustrations with some issues. Have a nice day.

    11. #11
      Join Date
      May 2009
      Posts
      35
      Since I was accused of having a Camaro that looked like a 4x4 a couple weeks ago, I did some more work on the ride height over the last week. It is not a very good picture from the side, but it is the best I could do in my workshop on a Sunday night. I also included a shot of the clearance underneath with a can for reference.

      I've already scraped bottom on a steep drive and a nasty bump, so I need to be careful. I might still raise the front to give me another 1/2" clearance.
      Attached Images Attached Images    
      1967 Camaro RS-SS, Full Frame Chassis, LS7, T56 (wife's car)
      1967 Camaro RS-SS Indy 500 Pace Car (my first car)
      1955 Chevy Nomad, Newman Car Creations Chassis, LS1, T56 (work in progress)
      1995 Suburban 4x4, '05 Cummins, 6 sp, Dana 60 front axle (tow vehicle)
      1993 Mongoose Mountain Bike (daily driver)

    Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2



    Advertise on Pro-Touring.com