watts link

[ITLBTU]

Hey, My name isnt Tom, its John LOL .... JR

John, I like the looks of your watts link, as I am a low buck make it myself type of person... I am curious how your 4-link handles in the curves though. Isn't that more of a drag race set-up?

[JRouche]

John, I like the looks of your watts link, as I am a low buck make it myself type of person... I am curious how your 4-link handles in the curves though. Isn't that more of a drag race set-up?

Hi, thanks. Well, Ill let you know when I drive it LOL YUP.. After 15 years Im still making the car and not driving it. Life got in the way for about ten years. Marriage, new house, kids and job. Now that the job is outta the way I am ramping up the work on the car. Oh, the wife, house and kids are still here

Ok, back to the car. You are correct, the 4-link I bought from art morrison was designed for a 1/4 mile track. Or at the time a pro street car. This was back in 95 when I bought it. They still sell the exact same package. Its pretty solid. You can stuff a 1500hp mill in front of it and carry yer butt down the track without worrying about the rear end coming apart.

But that was back then and this is now. I never planned on using the car on the strip. I just needed the endless adjustability of the 4-link while I was building my car. In 95 there was no such thing as an aftermarket rear suspension for a 62 nova. So it was either build my own and that was outta the question, I dont have the skills, or purchase what was available. Art Morrison was there. They asked for all my needed numbers. Like ride height, tire and wheel size, and basically just what car it was going under. It fit like a glove. They had their numbers correct. And remember, its not just a bolt in 4-link. Its a full rear framework that was welded into the sheetmetal of the car.

Ok, I did drive the car, not much, just around my neighborhood. And just those small tours showed me the car wasnt gonna be good for me. Mainly, the super short pan hard bar. It allowed the rear axle housing to wander too much. Kinda scary actually. It felt like the entire rear end was coming out and off the body. Thats just how it felt, it prolly wasnt moving as much as I thought it was. But that was enough. So I looked long and hard to fit a longer pan hard bar under the car. The one I had was only 24" long. Way to short for street driving. Well, after a long look a proper 45" or longer bar wasnt gonna fit. So I decided on a watts link.

One other part of the problem was the location of the "coilovers". They were also set way inside, 24" apart and vertical. The reason? Because with the frame AM supplied I could use as wide of a tire that was made. The coilovers were placed in tight, close together. It was designed to use some very wide tires for the track or pro street. But now Im looking into pro touring. I needed some different performance from the suspension and not as much pro street but more pro touring, I wanted to turn corners.

So I ditched the coilovers and mounted some air springs. Mounted them so they would have more control over the end of the axle housing.

Then there was one more part of the original suspension. Prolly more of what you are asking about. The articulation of the arms within the mounts. The original suspension came with some very stout stainless steel poly rod ends. Problem? They didnt allow enough rotation of the axle housing. The ends were captured tightly within the frame tabs. And the poly would allow for about 3* of axle rotation. But would bind up after that. And so what I saw was the jamb nuts working their way free to allow for the needed rotation. No matter how tight the jamb nuts were. They would break loose and then I had a free control arm. NOT good. The rod ends would be free to rotate on their threads. No good.

So I replaced all the rod ends for spherical ends. Some nice QA1 rod ends with seals-it end caps.

I have a completely fluid rear end now. It will travel through over 6* of rear end rotation with no binding.

And back to your question. Is it suited for the street or turns on the track. YES.. The 4-link I have has very long arms compared to some of the bolt in systems you will see. Specially the upper arms. The spread (vertical distance) from the uppers to the lowers is huge, a plus. My rear seat is gone :( It was not needed anyway. So there isnt any twitchy-ness with a short arm 4-link (short upper arms). And because its a TRUE 4-link it has an endless amount of adjustments for the arms. Talk about too much adjustability to get you into trouble. A proper 4-link will do just that.. Whole nuther discussion....

Ok, here is an example.. A longish lower bar 4-link will have some decent qualities. But the upper bars are usually short (unless its a full four link). So from ride height, in a left hand turn the upper bars start pulling the axle housing dramatically. The shorter the upper bars the worse it is. So it pulls (outside tire) the tire in while the axle housing is going through its travel. You dont want the tire to be pulled forward or pushed back. You want it to stay constant within the vertical plane. But suspensions are on pivot points and they will rotate on those points. But the longer the arm is the less the opposite end of the link will rotate on that pivot. Larger circle (long arms) smaller fore and aft motion of the rear end.

Same thing with the front end. You want as long of a suspension arm as possible to reduce the amount of travel (in and out) that the other end of the arm will travel.

On a rear end its pretty easy to package a long lower arm. Torque arm or Truck arm suspension is a great reference.

But for packaging the upper arms usually fall short. Thats where a three link kinda shines. For packaging its easier to place one long bar in some cars then to place two long bars.

Oh, back to why short uppers have alot of influence. A short upper bar will pull the rear wheel and tire in, more dramatically than a long bar will. So say you are taking a tight left turn. The outside (right tire) will have more influence. In a strong left hand turn the short upper arm will pull the tire in to the front of the car faster and more of a distance than the same car and suspension with a long upper arm. As the rear compresses (right side) on a left hand turn the upper arm will pull the wheel and tire forward. That will cause understeer. Do I have it right? As the rear compresses on a left turn , the top of the outside arm on the right side rotates up and pulls the housing forward. Twisting the rear end counter clockwise as looked from above causing understeer in the left hand turn? Its late and my visual functions have left the house.


I think I have it correct. Its common for cars. Understeer. Short upper trailing arms cause alot of understeer.

Solly.. You asked about my suspension. If it will handle the curves. I think so. Ill let you know if I ever get to drive her ... Errrr. I am close. JR