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

    Login / Register



    Results 1 to 10 of 10
    1. #1
      Join Date
      Aug 2004
      Location
      Flint, MI
      Posts
      59

      Pro Touring rear suspension

      I have been spending a lot of time in the suspension forum trying to decide what to do with my 69 Camaro. I gather the 3 link is very popular for the road coarse, the four link is very popular for straight line drive ability, is there something that would be a compromise that could give you the best of both worlds? Is it the truck arm kit from HTH? I am having a very difficult time deciding because there is no where to test drive these options.



    2. #2
      Join Date
      Oct 2003
      Location
      Arvada, Co
      Posts
      2,119
      Country Flag: United States

      Rear susp.

      Next69, Do you plan on installing this your self? How comfortable are you with your fabricating skills? Or are you going to have someone install it for you? Have you search the old forum? There are many really good recent thread reguarding the three link and HTH system. With a little more information we can better answer you questions.

      The HTH is only one way to do a first gen and it may not be the best for you. The three link is the way to go for most now. It can give you the better of all of the comprimises that can be achieved in the first gen platform.

      Here are a few thread to read:http://p067.ezboard.com/fprotouringg...cID=1295.topic and http://p067.ezboard.com/fprotouringg...cID=1433.topic

      Brian

      Brian

    3. #3
      dennis68 Guest
      4-link, great for straight-line performance, 3-link great for everything, HTH (truck arm) good all around suspension. Please note the good/great differences in designs. You could run a 3-link in every arena of motor sports and be just as competitive as the next guy. There is no compromise to running a 3-link on the street, it will handle great.

    4. #4
      Join Date
      Aug 2004
      Location
      Flint, MI
      Posts
      59
      Yes I would be installing it myself, but I was leening towards the HTH kit just because it is a kit, I have noticed a great deal of interest for the 3 link on this site but I am in the same boat as most of the other guys my fab skills are good enough for the project but from the design aspect I feel much more comfortable buying a pre engineered solution. I have seen posts about the 3 link kit that will be coming out in a few months I will have to look at that when it is released.

    5. #5
      Join Date
      Aug 2004
      Location
      Albany, NY
      Posts
      44
      I went with a triangulated 4-bar setup. It is suited for straight line and handling. Real clean setup and eliminates a panhard bar.
      62' Chevy 2; AME 2" x 4" chassis with C5 front end, Triangulated 4 bar rear, Ford 9" Rear, 427 cu Twin Turbo LS1, Custom T56 Tranny OUT! 4L80E now going in!, BIG STUFF 3 DFI, Sheet metal intake

      www.lateral-g.net/tanner

      99' C5 w/ 420 cu motor, 538 RWHP/515 RWFT
      02' Denali P/U with Quad Steer

    6. #6
      Join Date
      Aug 2004
      Location
      Flint, MI
      Posts
      59

      Triangulated 4 bar

      Novacane,

      Did you completely fab that yourself or did you buy a kit and weld it together? It looks very impressive but keep in mind my design background is nill. Thanks for yet another option. :rolleyes5

    7. #7
      Join Date
      Jun 2002
      Location
      Oregon
      Posts
      1,387
      Country Flag: United States
      The Triangulated 4-bar is a great suspension but REMEMBER you MUST use a TUBULAR frame/frame rails...the stock camaro 'top hat' frame rails wont hold up to the lateral load that is applied by the upper bars....this is exactly why I went with a standard 4-bar w/ panhard bar.

      Novacane, that looks sweet and is a great platform for your project!!
      Tony

    8. #8
      Join Date
      Aug 2004
      Location
      Albany, NY
      Posts
      44
      WOW! Forgot I posted on this thread!

      My chassis was built by Art Morrison. They setup the suspension based upon my requested criteria such as ride height and tire sizes.

      arw68 is correct with respect to load capacity. those upper bars are not only handling front to rear loads but also side to side. If you where tto stiffen those attachment points with a cage you could probably make it work!

      You Camaro guys have tons of options!
      62' Chevy 2; AME 2" x 4" chassis with C5 front end, Triangulated 4 bar rear, Ford 9" Rear, 427 cu Twin Turbo LS1, Custom T56 Tranny OUT! 4L80E now going in!, BIG STUFF 3 DFI, Sheet metal intake

      www.lateral-g.net/tanner

      99' C5 w/ 420 cu motor, 538 RWHP/515 RWFT
      02' Denali P/U with Quad Steer

    9. #9
      Join Date
      May 2002
      Location
      Northern California
      Posts
      10,715
      Country Flag: Bosnia Herzegovina

      looks good

      Hey NC I like your mock up rims...315's? im working on my friends 67' Nova and we opted for the 3 link.The rear rail were badly tweeked due to its early drag race days.So they are being replaced. Heres a couple pictures of the x member and upper link mount. Your right alot more options with f bodies. and hey check you posts once and awhile, guys need the info please!
      MrQuick ΜΟΛ'ΩΝ ΛΑΒ'Ε

      https://www.pro-touring.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=4&dateline=1323422564
      Follow us on Facebook

    10. #10
      Join Date
      Sep 2004
      Location
      Central NJ
      Posts
      54
      New guy here, ressurecting this thread from the dead

      Novacane, that setup looks fantastic! Does it allow you to retain the rear seat?





    Advertise on Pro-Touring.com