Bolt in 4 link for 67-69 Camaros

[ehummelman]

OK, I have asked the folks over on corner-carvers.com to comment on your system. They concur with me that this thing may be good for drag cars (which seems to be your background) but will be absoulte junk for handling (i.e. everyone on this site). While I applaud your efforts to diversify your business into the PT world, I would suggest learning about suspension design and engineering first before selling people a system that has bling appeal but will not work for jack ****. Understand that my intention here is not to bash you, but to get people on here to educate themselves before they drop $3k on something that's not going to work. I, for one, am sick of seeing people push out all kinds of products that are not designed properly or based on solid engineering principles just so they can make a buck.
For those of you that want to follow along here is the link at corner-carvers. FYI, if you don't read that site, it is filled with extremely knowledgeable guys, and can back up their opinions with real tech, mathematics, FEA, etc.
http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums...ad.php?t=46156

[SRDzuess4u]

OK, I have asked the folks over on corner-carvers.com to comment on your system. They concur with me that this thing may be good for drag cars (which seems to be your background) but will be absoulte junk for handling (i.e. everyone on this site). While I applaud your efforts to diversify your business into the PT world, I would suggest learning about suspension design and engineering first before selling people a system that has bling appeal but will not work for jack ****. Understand that my intention here is not to bash you, but to get people on here to educate themselves before they drop $3k on something that's not going to work. I, for one, am sick of seeing people push out all kinds of products that are not designed properly or based on solid engineering principles just so they can make a buck.
For those of you that want to follow along here is the link at corner-carvers. FYI, if you don't read that site, it is filled with extremely knowledgeable guys, and can back up their opinions with real tech, mathematics, FEA, etc.
http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums...ad.php?t=46156

As far as my background, no it isnt drag racing...the company I rep for (SmithRace Craft) thats their background. Ive been around here since 03 under a different name. Have been involved with a few GT cars, and NASCAR truck seris in the past and generally enjoyed some of the members on this site.

My relationship with the company is strickly hobby/fun, I help them with designs and branching out. I dont get compensated, maybe if I needed a part or something I could get it free or deeply discounted.

As far as this system having bling...exsplain what you mean....I always thought bling was shiny chrome/billet this and that stuff...Im not sure what you mean by bling. I dont think Im really trying to push anyone around here to buy this set-up. Its just another option for some who may be interested in taking this route, be it a builder, someone leaning more to the drag racing side, or a back yard builder. If you read through the threads, I generally direct questions to the designers, with a phone number and names. The admin and members around here are all from different backgrounds and experinces, I know this and respect it and keep it in mind when trying to address questions, help or any orther matter.

That being said not EVERYONE here is building the same thing, nor does everyone have the same goals, hence the introduction to new parts and options. You maybe correct by saying its not the best set-up for road racing....again its not designed STRICKY for road racing. Im certain it would work fine for autocrossing and canyon driving. You can agree or disagree thats your right.

As far as anyone on this site buying ANY parts from SmithRace Craft...its their choice, it really doesnt matter that much in a sense...I ALWAYS encourage doing research and calling the designers themselves for all and any questions.

Im truly glad you want the members to be educated as I do. For the comment of the product not being worth jack****, Id have to say it does have worth and its place in certain arenas, but its your opinion.

I would have to agree with learning about THIS paticular 4 link, I didnt design it nor do I use it in any sanctioned road type racing, but then again like other reps, Im not making that statement either. Again this set up is in a few 900 to 1200 hp cars on the STRIP for a few years without any issues. Its also in been installed in by a few PT customers and builders, just dont have feedback YET, nor are they members on this site. Dont forget there are pleanty of people that own Camaros/Firebirds that are not members here. Thats why encourage the members here to call and ask the questions that I cant answer, strickly due to the fact i didnt design it...just trying to be honest

Thanks for your input and concern, hope I didnt lead someone down the wrong direction or make a false claim concerning this 4 link.

Bob Halt 623-326-8478

[SRDzuess4u]

Just some info,

RPM hotrods is building a Camaro using SmithRace Craft front end and the bolt in 4 link....I also read the link that was presented, correct me if Im wrong, but according to general discussion this set-up will do what it is designed for....drag racing and hard steet cornering/MAYBE some autocrossing....I hope Ive never come across as to state this set up is what you need to run all out on a road course.

IF your primary direction is road racing, then I would suggest SpeedTechs 3 link, or Lateral Dynamics had it down pretty good, but I dont think their around anymore, even HotRods to Hell had a rear set up that was or is more in the lines of handling.

Thanks for the link I will forward it to Josh and Kim over at SRC.

[James OLC]

I posted this over on CC so I thought it was worth posting here as well...

I've been debating posting this but as I sit here thinking about it - I really think that it needs to be said...

Two days ago you posted on Pro-Touring:

Can you comment on the very short top links? From the limited amount of reading I've done those seem very poorly designed. I know packaging was likely the culprit, but am curious what you think the effect of those will be on the performance of the system as a whole.
Thanks.

Then, the next morning, you posted on CC

I've been reading up on 4 links and 3 links trying to informally analyze the merits of the various aftermarket rear suspensions out there for these cars. There is a guy who just marketed this thing https://www.pro-touring.com/showthrea...-67-69-Camaros and I immediately raised my eyebrows at the upper links. Can you guys comment on whether or not this design is good/bad/totally ridiculous? I questioned the designer as to what he thought of the uppers being so short and he just responded that he has guys running it and they like it. I am guessing he has no idea what he's doing and would like to know exactly why, technically speaking.
Thanks.

And then this morning you posted on PT

OK, I have asked the folks over on corner-carvers.com to comment on your system. They concur with me that this thing may be good for drag cars (which seems to be your background) but will be absoulte junk for handling (i.e. everyone on this site). While I applaud your efforts to diversify your business into the PT world, I would suggest learning about suspension design and engineering first before selling people a system that has bling appeal but will not work for jack ****. Understand that my intention here is not to bash you, but to get people on here to educate themselves before they drop $3k on something that's not going to work. I, for one, am sick of seeing people push out all kinds of products that are not designed properly or based on solid engineering principles just so they can make a buck.
For those of you that want to follow along here is the link at corner-carvers. FYI, if you don't read that site, it is filled with extremely knowledgeable guys, and can back up their opinions with real tech, mathematics, FEA, etc.
http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums...ad.php?t=46156

weak sauce dude

I don't really appreciate having my (our) opinion solicited so that you can use it as justification for your opinion and then, when you want to "make your point" on the other forum you say "see... I asked these guys and they agree with me..."

Just weak IMHO

That being said, I don't disagree with the comments on the design, and I appreciate even less the backpedaling that the poster on PT is doing now.

[Damn True]

OK, I have asked the folks over on corner-carvers.com to comment on your system............Understand that my intention here is not to bash you,

But that is precisely what you've done.

Seriously uncool.

[ehummelman]

What's uncool is that a vendor is advertising a product that has serious design flaws and can be dangerous on anything but a straight line course. Are we under forum rules that prevent questioning a product like that? My first post was not a bash, it was a question about the design. The OP dodged the question and offered no tech whatsoever. So I went to a reliable source to confirm that my suspicions were correct on this product. It's a free country, anyone can advertise a product. But we should also be allowed to ask for technical explanations of why products may/may not work. If the vendor can't or won't answer they shouldn't be selling that product.
I also don't understand the backpeddling Bob is now doing. In several of the early posts he refers to SmithCraft as "our" company, implying that he is part of the company and as such is selling "his" product. Then he says he "reps" for them. Now he is saying he has no business relationship with them, does not get paid, and only deals with them as a hobby. He also says that he designs for them. Dude which is it? If you're designing products for them, I would call that a business relationship and as such you ought to know the product you're selling. Bob also goes full circle saying that it could be good for canyon driving & autocross, but again can't back that up with any tech. He also says that not everyone on this site wants their car to handle or carve corners. If anyone here is interested in drag racing and not handling around hard turns, I dont' get why you're here. By every definition of protouring I've read, it is about making old cars perform and handle like new ones.

This has clearly turned into a bad thread, I would encourage it to be locked or deleted. It is unfortunate that someone can't ask for technical explanations of a product being sold without getting everyone's panties in a bunch (including mine). Just as sad is a vendor who can't defend his product. If anyone wants to spend $3k and have snap oversteer on a fun canyon road and go off a cliff knock yourself out.

[ehummelman]

I posted this over on CC so I thought it was worth posting here as well...

I've been debating posting this but as I sit here thinking about it - I really think that it needs to be said...

Two days ago you posted on Pro-Touring:


Then, the next morning, you posted on CC


And then this morning you posted on PT


weak sauce dude

I don't really appreciate having my (our) opinion solicited so that you can use it as justification for your opinion and then, when you want to "make your point" on the other forum you say "see... I asked these guys and they agree with me..."

Just weak IMHO

That being said, I don't disagree with the comments on the design, and I appreciate even less the backpedaling that the poster on PT is doing now.

I answered on CC, so I'll answer here as well for those who are sick of going back and forth. You misunderstood my intentions. I saw a product that based on my limited knowledge looked suspect and I asked politely for technical feedback or explanation. I got nothing. Since I am not an expert, and the advertiser gave me nothing, I asked the same question on CC. I got the tech I was seeking and introduced it here so that others could make educated decisions on a $3000 product that is being touted as good for the people who frequent this site. You are entitled to your opinion, but I don't see where that is weak.

[SRDzuess4u]

What's uncool is that a vendor is advertising a product that has serious design flaws and can be dangerous on anything but a straight line course. Are we under forum rules that prevent questioning a product like that? My first post was not a bash, it was a question about the design. The OP dodged the question and offered no tech whatsoever. So I went to a reliable source to confirm that my suspicions were correct on this product. It's a free country, anyone can advertise a product. But we should also be allowed to ask for technical explanations of why products may/may not work. If the vendor can't or won't answer they shouldn't be selling that product.
I also don't understand the backpeddling Bob is now doing. In several of the early posts he refers to SmithCraft as "our" company, implying that he is part of the company and as such is selling "his" product. Then he says he "reps" for them. Now he is saying he has no business relationship with them, does not get paid, and only deals with them as a hobby. He also says that he designs for them. Dude which is it? If you're designing products for them, I would call that a business relationship and as such you ought to know the product you're selling. Bob also goes full circle saying that it could be good for canyon driving & autocross, but again can't back that up with any tech. He also says that not everyone on this site wants their car to handle or carve corners. If anyone here is interested in drag racing and not handling around hard turns, I dont' get why you're here. By every definition of protouring I've read, it is about making old cars perform and handle like new ones.

This has clearly turned into a bad thread, I would encourage it to be locked or deleted. It is unfortunate that someone can't ask for technical explanations of a product being sold without getting everyone's panties in a bunch (including mine). Just as sad is a vendor who can't defend his product. If anyone wants to spend $3k and have snap oversteer on a fun canyon road and go off a cliff knock yourself out.

Your first question was what I thought of the short upper link, it wasnt about the design as a whole. I answered the best I could with out trying to sound stand offish, and could tell you knew the answer already. So for anyone reading our discussion, they could research, call the designers themselvs and make a clear idea as to what their objective for their project is.

When you state if a vendor cant or wont answer a technical question they shouldnt be selling a product, I agree, but you asked what I thought. If it was directed as a TECH question and not a set up/hunting question, I would have been glad to call Josh or Kim and get that answer for you.

I had refer to the comapny and using "we and our" simply making it easier. The intent wasnt to convince members here that its my company or I had stake in it somehow. Introducing a company as a rep, using the "them or they" in intros and descriptions just didnt sound right to me. Again no intent to mislead anyone, hell Ive even went as far as to talk to a few long time members off line and give them the story, as to how Im affilated with the company. My apologiees goes out to all if your offended or feel like you have been lied to, no my intent.

I do have a relationship with SmithRace craft, as of now its for the passion and fun and being involved, and yes I help design and have come up with a few ideas with and for them. With that being said, Im also listening to members on sevral sites on ways to improve or change items for the market. Theres no need for me to set up some type of compensation at this point, it makes no sense for SRC to do that yet. We are taking it slow....with the hopes of growing another market. If it hits a certain point then we will discuss compensation. If it fails less is lost all around, and bridges saved.

I never said not everyone here wants their car to handle or carve corners, I know they do...but their are members and hobbiest that want to perform well in road or strip conditions...obviously THIS paticular 4 link leans more to the strip side of things.

As far as why Im here, Ive been here for 7 years and for most of the reasons everyone else is here and on other sites. For the parts and designs that WE or THEY at SRC, some will lend well to the members here and their objectives, others may not. If you dont get why or anyone else that doesnt fall into your defined purpose of this is here....you may want to revisit what the sport/hobby is all about as a WHOLE.

Until now I have never heard a member ask or state something of that nature.

To the rest of the members, sorry for all the drama, if this 4 link is not for you dont buy it...its that simple.

Thanks Bob Halt 623-326-8478

[SRDzuess4u]

I answered on CC, so I'll answer here as well for those who are sick of going back and forth. You misunderstood my intentions. I saw a product that based on my limited knowledge looked suspect and I asked politely for technical feedback or explanation. I got nothing. Since I am not an expert, and the advertiser gave me nothing, I asked the same question on CC. I got the tech I was seeking and introduced it here so that others could make educated decisions on a $3000 product that is being touted as good for the people who frequent this site. You are entitled to your opinion, but I don't see where that is weak.

Truly,

your intentions are GOOD...but it may be the way some things were stated or even mis-stated. Maybe, if you would have regergatated what James and Damm True and any other info you gathered, into your own words...may have been better taken.

The link was the biggest mistake, and again you didnt ask me for a technical answer, you asked me what I thought...not being knit picky, just saying.

Again, I think your intentions are good, as my intentions are. Im not here trying to convince anyone you need to buy these parts or this 4 link, the photos of the parts alone provoke thought and question and hope ideas and improvments in the sport.

Thanks Bob

[ehummelman]

I would have liked to see you be more transparent about your business, their business, whose product is whose, etc. The two recent posts you have made about new products give the impression that they are in some part your product or you have a financial interest in advertising them here. Being vague or cloudy leads to skepticism and mistrust. You're right, I had a feeling that the 4 link was not a corner carving design. I asked you to back it up, which you couldn't. That lead me to even more distrust of anything you advertise.

I may have broken some unwritten internet law by linking the other thread, apparently it pissed off some people. The point there, as I have said, was to point others to a source of technical discussion about this product and suspension design in general. No one has to seek out that information if they're not interested.

I think you know I wanted a technical explanation. What else could I be asking?

My bottom line is that this is not the first time you have come on here pimping a product that may/may not be yours (design or manufacture). I personally don't like that unless it's clear who you are in relation to those companies and why you are doing it. Second, and perhaps even more importantly, if you're going to be pimping products you ought to know how/why they work and what the limitations are.

In my opinion, you have failed to do either.

Beyond that, we can go on and on in a nonproductive pissing match but I would prefer not to.

Respectfully, you can have the last word and then I think this thread has gone far enough into a downward spiral.

[Damn True]

Here's the issue; First of all, you were disingenuous with your intent when gathering opinion on CC.com. If you'd been honest about it and said,

"This looks hinkey to me, but I don't know why. I'd like to offer a substantive criticism of the design, can you assist?"

We'd have less of a problem with it.

For that matter, if you'd done the legwork yourself (perhaps spending a little time in a Steve Smith book) to figure out why the system is less than ideal and offered a substantive criticism that would have been fine. You didn't do that, you did this:

OK, I have asked the folks over on corner-carvers.com to comment on your system. They concur with me that this thing may be good for drag cars (which seems to be your background) but will be absoulte junk for handling (i.e. everyone on this site). While I applaud your efforts to diversify your business into the PT world, I would suggest learning about suspension design and engineering first before selling people a system that has bling appeal but will not work for jack ****.

Understand that my intention here is not to bash you, but..... to get people on here to educate themselves before they drop $3k on something that's not going to work.

I, for one, am sick of seeing people push out all kinds of products that are not designed properly or based on solid engineering principles just so they can make a buck.
For those of you that want to follow along here is the link at corner-carvers. FYI, if you don't read that site, it is filled with extremely knowledgeable guys, and can back up their opinions with real tech, mathematics, FEA, etc.

FWIW, if you need to go to another website to track down opinions to support you own guesses, I'm wondering if you are the right person to question "solid engineering principals"?

Second issue is your attitude toward a member and vendor on this site. IMO the vendor is not misrepresenting the product. This is certainly not the first offering of a bolt-in suspension system that is not optimized purely for cornering performance. Shinning a light on shortcomings of a product is one thing, as is questioning the design or offering suggestions for improvement. However, insulting the vendor and impugning their integrity is entirely different, completely classless and IMO wholly unacceptable.

If you'd like to have a substantive discussion of the product I would encourage you to do so as such discussions are of value.

[SRDzuess4u]

I would have liked to see you be more transparent about your business, their business, whose product is whose, etc. The two recent posts you have made about new products give the impression that they are in some part your product or you have a financial interest in advertising them here. Being vague or cloudy leads to skepticism and mistrust. You're right, I had a feeling that the 4 link was not a corner carving design. I asked you to back it up, which you couldn't. That lead me to even more distrust of anything you advertise.

I may have broken some unwritten internet law by linking the other thread, apparently it pissed off some people. The point there, as I have said, was to point others to a source of technical discussion about this product and suspension design in general. No one has to seek out that information if they're not interested.

I think you know I wanted a technical explanation. What else could I be asking?

My bottom line is that this is not the first time you have come on here pimping a product that may/may not be yours (design or manufacture). I personally don't like that unless it's clear who you are in relation to those companies and why you are doing it. Second, and perhaps even more importantly, if you're going to be pimping products you ought to know how/why they work and what the limitations are.

In my opinion, you have failed to do either.

Beyond that, we can go on and on in a nonproductive pissing match but I would prefer not to.

Respectfully, you can have the last word and then I think this thread has gone far enough into a downward spiral.

Fair enough,

I understand what your perspective is and fully respect your intent.

Pimping a product, I guess so.....from my perspective was more so excited to show something different from a company not known for PT type parts.....and of course their great customer service over the years.

knowing my relationship with any said company, I have no problem exsplaining the story...problem is its not time and viewing approprite for most of the threads, more of a PM/phone call type subject.....I may have explained it once to a few admin so they were aware of it, and a couple of members who were truly curious. Ill have to go back through the threads to see.

Again I can see where you would think I have a financial stake in it, but I dont....were taking it slow.

I dont need the last word, just like to say hope theres no hard feelings and Ill try and be transparent in future postings.

Thanks Bob Halt 623-326-8478

[MrQuick]

fresh meat trying to move up aye. LOL Would have been classier to actually call Bob and the guys at SRD to voice your concerns than use it as a self centered attempt at greatness. Us CC guys are keen to it. We all have to work together, enough of these witch hunts.
Its a start, it needs work and i'm sure they will improve on the design to go from a drag part to a better articulating system.

Shoot me an email Bob, I have a few ideas.

[Bryce]

Here is a suspension similar to Smith Race Craft that was designed for handling. It uses a short upper arm. http://www.heidts.com/6769_camaro_bo...e_package.html

If SRC offered a more adjustable panhard bar height and a softer and/or adjustable sway bar it would be more accepted here.

Also What is the A/S and IC of this setup? You could also show how these change during suspension travel including pinion angle change.

Also show the change in housing angle during roll conditions.

Send me the pick up points and I can run it through my program or move the actual suspension around and take pictures.

[SRDzuess4u]

Vince, Bryce

again thanks for the oppourtunitiy to help get these parts refined. Bryce, I know a few months ago you mentioned MAYBE testing the strength of the contol arms and I appreciate the offer. If it ever comes about again let me know.

This is how I how remember the site, members giving input, advice and ideas to help develop and grow better equipment and parts...thats how this sport/hobby/site grew as big as it did. And I wonder how many buisnesses in this industry were spawned from the same process.

Anyway starting to sound corny...lol.

Well Im off with my gaurd unit (just to be clear, i dont own it Im just a acting member helping secure the country) to shoot,train and blow stuff up in the wildernes.

Vince Ill be in contact, always interested to see what you have to say, Bryce same deal Im hoping the SRC will be keen to the idea of running this thing through the program.....freakin awsome.

Move along theres nothing to see here.

[Bill Howell]

With that, I will close this one. OP will not be around to answer questions and no need to continue this conversation.