SFC comparison thread
#102
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Aloha, Oregon
Posts: 1,132
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
6 Posts
Car: '91 Camaro Z28, '85 Camaro Z28
Engine: LB9, LB9
Transmission: T5, 700r4
Axle/Gears: Eaton 3.73 Posi, 3.23 Posi
Re: SFC comparison thread
The inners are the only bolt-ion versions made & I've never heard that the ground clearance is reduced to bad that even your extreme lowering would be an issue.
My question for you is this though, and please don't take it wrong. Where did you come up with your 3.5"-4" lowering measurement?
I had a part car with zero front springs in it at all (roller parts car) with only the struts supporting the front end so it was completely as low as possible. Now while my old pics are gone that showed the measurement of it from the ground, I don't recall it being that low, or MAYBE almost that low but with zero ride so it woulda been solid & only the tire sidewalls to act as suspension/springs.
My question for you is this though, and please don't take it wrong. Where did you come up with your 3.5"-4" lowering measurement?
I had a part car with zero front springs in it at all (roller parts car) with only the struts supporting the front end so it was completely as low as possible. Now while my old pics are gone that showed the measurement of it from the ground, I don't recall it being that low, or MAYBE almost that low but with zero ride so it woulda been solid & only the tire sidewalls to act as suspension/springs.
I got that measurement with before and after measurements at the fender lip. And BTW, the before measurements were within .25" of three other stock height cars that I've personally measured as well. Did your parts car still have the bump stops? If so, that'll hold the car up about 1.5". And yes, I barely have any suspension travel at the moment until I modify a few things.
Last edited by DBLTKE; 02-29-2012 at 02:49 PM.
#103
Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Holland, MI
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1982 Firebird
Engine: 2.8 N/A
Transmission: Manual 4 Speed
Re: SFC comparison thread
EDIT: Nevermind, found it.
I did have one other question though. For those running inner and outter sets what have you used? Id like to go all bolt on. I was originally going with S&W because my friend has them but the place he got them from wont have a set for a while i guess. Any suggestions would be great.
The comp engineering ones are outer, right? Would that be a good combo with the alston inners?
Thanks
I did have one other question though. For those running inner and outter sets what have you used? Id like to go all bolt on. I was originally going with S&W because my friend has them but the place he got them from wont have a set for a while i guess. Any suggestions would be great.
The comp engineering ones are outer, right? Would that be a good combo with the alston inners?
Thanks
Last edited by Adrenaline1; 03-10-2012 at 11:01 PM.
#104
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: CT
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1988 Camaro IROC-Z
Engine: 5.7tpi l98
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: BW 9Bolt 2.77
Re: SFC comparison thread
Just got my Alston SFC's in the mail. Less than 20 lbs together which is nice. When i tilt them side to side i hear little noises though, almost as if there is sand or something inside, that normal? Any one else notice that? Its seems really minor though and they seem solid. Cant wait to get them on the car. Just having the body shop check the body and chassis and they're going on, cant wait. Thanks for all the info you all gave me on the subject, apreciate it.
#105
Supreme Member
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,924
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
9 Posts
Car: 84 camaro, 88 trans am, 98 camaro
Engine: Modded , stock, LSX modded
Transmission: 700r4, 700r4, t-56
Axle/Gears: 327, 308, 373
Re: SFC comparison thread
its weld slag... its normal to hear some rolling around. On most closed peaces. .. unless thy blast before they coat and some sand got in a spot that wasn't fully welded
Last edited by FueledSoul; 03-13-2012 at 08:39 AM.
#106
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Pocono Mountains, PA
Posts: 773
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1987 Firebird, Dad bought it new
Engine: 5.7L Vortec w/ LT4 Hot cam
Transmission: 700r4 transgo shiftkit 2600 stall
Axle/Gears: 3.42 '02 SS 6 spd rear
Re: SFC comparison thread
thank you guys for using this thread and keeping it alive, i am watching, but i dont want to give an opinion or answer questions because i dont feel im am experienced enough to do so, hopefully others will answer your questions, and it seems like they are, i started this thread because i had questions, and everyone has been a great help so far, thank you to all
#107
Supreme Member
iTrader: (9)
Re: SFC comparison thread
thank you guys for using this thread and keeping it alive, i am watching, but i dont want to give an opinion or answer questions because i dont feel im am experienced enough to do so, hopefully others will answer your questions, and it seems like they are, i started this thread because i had questions, and everyone has been a great help so far, thank you to all
#108
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Pocono Mountains, PA
Posts: 773
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1987 Firebird, Dad bought it new
Engine: 5.7L Vortec w/ LT4 Hot cam
Transmission: 700r4 transgo shiftkit 2600 stall
Axle/Gears: 3.42 '02 SS 6 spd rear
Re: SFC comparison thread
definately will i missed that myself, thanks maro
ok done
if anyone else finds something that i forgot to include in the first post, please let me know and i will edit it in, would be nice to have most of the pertinent information easily accessible in the first post, thank you all
ok done
if anyone else finds something that i forgot to include in the first post, please let me know and i will edit it in, would be nice to have most of the pertinent information easily accessible in the first post, thank you all
Last edited by FlippindaBird; 03-21-2012 at 10:26 AM.
#109
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Pocono Mountains, PA
Posts: 773
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1987 Firebird, Dad bought it new
Engine: 5.7L Vortec w/ LT4 Hot cam
Transmission: 700r4 transgo shiftkit 2600 stall
Axle/Gears: 3.42 '02 SS 6 spd rear
Re: SFC comparison thread
looks like UMI and Alston, would be the lightest combo, untill we have confirmed weights for the others anyway
#111
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Pocono Mountains, PA
Posts: 773
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1987 Firebird, Dad bought it new
Engine: 5.7L Vortec w/ LT4 Hot cam
Transmission: 700r4 transgo shiftkit 2600 stall
Axle/Gears: 3.42 '02 SS 6 spd rear
Re: SFC comparison thread
spohn says theirs weigh 44lbs... umi 36 :/
#112
Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Holland, MI
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1982 Firebird
Engine: 2.8 N/A
Transmission: Manual 4 Speed
Re: SFC comparison thread
So ill be ordering some Alston and some Jegs SFC soon if all goes well. Is there anything i may need to worry about as far as installation?
#115
Supreme Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Car: GTA
Engine: 350 TPI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: Aussie 9-bolt/3.27 posi
Re: SFC comparison thread
Spohn, UMI, MAC & Alston are the only SFC sets I have weights for on my Excel Weights chart.
#116
Junior Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: PA
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 92 Rs
Engine: Ls1
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 10 bolt 3.73
Re: SFC comparison thread
Im not sure were the 44lb number came from for the sphon sfcs, but i just weight mine that i received in the mail today and they are 26lbs. Just an update for anyone reading.
-Zoe
-Zoe
#120
Junior Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: PA
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 92 Rs
Engine: Ls1
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 10 bolt 3.73
Re: SFC comparison thread
Honestly I'm not sure if they did or not, it is very possible. but yea i saw that 44lb figure, and went and weighed mine instantly because i had remembered seeing the shipping weight on the box was 28lbs.
#121
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Pocono Mountains, PA
Posts: 773
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1987 Firebird, Dad bought it new
Engine: 5.7L Vortec w/ LT4 Hot cam
Transmission: 700r4 transgo shiftkit 2600 stall
Axle/Gears: 3.42 '02 SS 6 spd rear
Re: SFC comparison thread
i edited the weight of the Spohns to reflect the 26lb finding, thank you, i did get that weight from Spohns website ...
if the alstons and the spohns can work together... 41lbs
if the alstons and the spohns can work together... 41lbs
#123
Junior Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: PA
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 92 Rs
Engine: Ls1
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 10 bolt 3.73
Re: SFC comparison thread
-Zoe
#124
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Pocono Mountains, PA
Posts: 773
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1987 Firebird, Dad bought it new
Engine: 5.7L Vortec w/ LT4 Hot cam
Transmission: 700r4 transgo shiftkit 2600 stall
Axle/Gears: 3.42 '02 SS 6 spd rear
Re: SFC comparison thread
nice i believe thats the pair im going with as well
#125
Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Holland, MI
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1982 Firebird
Engine: 2.8 N/A
Transmission: Manual 4 Speed
Re: SFC comparison thread
Is there anywhere to buy Alstons besides Alstons website? They arent and havnt been in stock for a while now.
#126
Supreme Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Car: GTA
Engine: 350 TPI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: Aussie 9-bolt/3.27 posi
Re: SFC comparison thread
Last edited by BlackenedBird; 05-20-2012 at 05:50 PM.
#129
Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Toronto, ON.
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1984 Camaro Z/28
Engine: 350 SBC
Transmission: T-5
Re: SFC comparison thread
It appears everyone is really obsessed with the weight/price ratio. and evaluating bang-for-buck that way. but really, if a set thats twice as heavy is 3 or 4 times as rigid, wouldn't that be a better set to have? it would be interesting to start a collective effort to gather some data/specs on the sets. I'm sure any of the reputable companies engineers have performed tests on their sets.
What about the various alloys the companies use for their beams? or welding/manufacturing processes? also, the debate of square vs round tubing is interesting as well. ultimately the tied subframe is trying to resist a torque in a plane, a geometry which can't really resist it well even if it were filled solid (hence rollbars). But if we consider the two designs (square/round) the square tubing is better are resisting a bending moment than the circular one, and the circular one is better at resisting a torque along its axis. It seems like a compromise really, maybe the perfect sfc's would have some square and some round tubing. I wish i could shed some more light on it, perhaps someone else can. in the mean time i'm going to do some research on it. Nodal patterns have very good torsional resistance, but are impractical for a subframe.
Anyways, I think a proper comparison here would ultimately be to rate it based on Torsional-rigidity-increase/(weight*price). that is, if we can round up the data.
What about the various alloys the companies use for their beams? or welding/manufacturing processes? also, the debate of square vs round tubing is interesting as well. ultimately the tied subframe is trying to resist a torque in a plane, a geometry which can't really resist it well even if it were filled solid (hence rollbars). But if we consider the two designs (square/round) the square tubing is better are resisting a bending moment than the circular one, and the circular one is better at resisting a torque along its axis. It seems like a compromise really, maybe the perfect sfc's would have some square and some round tubing. I wish i could shed some more light on it, perhaps someone else can. in the mean time i'm going to do some research on it. Nodal patterns have very good torsional resistance, but are impractical for a subframe.
Anyways, I think a proper comparison here would ultimately be to rate it based on Torsional-rigidity-increase/(weight*price). that is, if we can round up the data.
#131
Junior Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: PA
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 92 Rs
Engine: Ls1
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 10 bolt 3.73
Re: SFC comparison thread
It appears everyone is really obsessed with the weight/price ratio. and evaluating bang-for-buck that way. but really, if a set thats twice as heavy is 3 or 4 times as rigid, wouldn't that be a better set to have? it would be interesting to start a collective effort to gather some data/specs on the sets. I'm sure any of the reputable companies engineers have performed tests on their sets.
What about the various alloys the companies use for their beams? or welding/manufacturing processes? also, the debate of square vs round tubing is interesting as well. ultimately the tied subframe is trying to resist a torque in a plane, a geometry which can't really resist it well even if it were filled solid (hence rollbars). But if we consider the two designs (square/round) the square tubing is better are resisting a bending moment than the circular one, and the circular one is better at resisting a torque along its axis. It seems like a compromise really, maybe the perfect sfc's would have some square and some round tubing. I wish i could shed some more light on it, perhaps someone else can. in the mean time i'm going to do some research on it. Nodal patterns have very good torsional resistance, but are impractical for a subframe.
Anyways, I think a proper comparison here would ultimately be to rate it based on Torsional-rigidity-increase/(weight*price). that is, if we can round up the data.
What about the various alloys the companies use for their beams? or welding/manufacturing processes? also, the debate of square vs round tubing is interesting as well. ultimately the tied subframe is trying to resist a torque in a plane, a geometry which can't really resist it well even if it were filled solid (hence rollbars). But if we consider the two designs (square/round) the square tubing is better are resisting a bending moment than the circular one, and the circular one is better at resisting a torque along its axis. It seems like a compromise really, maybe the perfect sfc's would have some square and some round tubing. I wish i could shed some more light on it, perhaps someone else can. in the mean time i'm going to do some research on it. Nodal patterns have very good torsional resistance, but are impractical for a subframe.
Anyways, I think a proper comparison here would ultimately be to rate it based on Torsional-rigidity-increase/(weight*price). that is, if we can round up the data.
Personally I am attempting to piece my car together (not just sfc wise) using information from these forums as well as personal experience using the lightest yet still most structurally sound pieces available, and still taking into account how the pieces will work with one another to make the suspension function properly. Personally i went with sphons round tube design sfc, being as it was the lightest full length connector that welds along the pinch weld, being as the increases chassis rigidity as well. In the future i plan on adding a set of alstons to the inner rails, i feel that being as i am building a Road Course car the extra 19lbs low down is worth the subframes being properly tied together to increase rigidity in a high g cornering situation.
But, in my opinion S&Ws design is superior to EVERY other "single setup" out there. It is bolt in, so welding in after first bolting it in will be a breeze. It also connects the front and rear subframes together AND the outer pinch weld near the doors. It also proves a mounting point for there torque arm. But.. it has a lot of exhaust clearance issues with many peoples set-ups (including mine) unless you are at a point to redo the exhaust after install. But opinions aside, I would love to see some structural analysis data (not limited to sfc) so some of us can take the information and built our cars to their full potential using best components from each company.
-Zoe
#132
Supreme Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: NWOhioToledoArea
Posts: 8,113
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
5 Posts
Car: 86-FireBird
Engine: -MPFI
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3:42
Re: SFC comparison thread
AKA its a short cut for more profit, not for the best fit or performance.
SFC like Alstons, are not cheap and easy, many slight bends in different direction so they mold to the body like a pro built piece should be done.
#133
Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1991 Camaro RS/1989 Formula
Engine: 5.0 L03 V8
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.73
Re: SFC comparison thread
Can you install outer and inner SFC's or do you have to choose one or the other?
#136
On Probation
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Northern Utah
Posts: 6,319
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
17 Posts
Car: seeking '90.5-'92 'bird hardtop
Engine: several
Transmission: none
Axle/Gears: none
Re: SFC comparison thread
I had that problem last month. Alstons are history, but Mac Performance still offers the inners: No, can't link after all, they've dramatically changed the website, and apparently, the offerings. I'll go try the link I had.
#137
On Probation
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Northern Utah
Posts: 6,319
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
17 Posts
Car: seeking '90.5-'92 'bird hardtop
Engine: several
Transmission: none
Axle/Gears: none
Re: SFC comparison thread
Link isn't working for me, it's in this thread: https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/susp...ow-alston.html Let us know if it works for you.
#138
Supreme Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: GO PACK GO
Posts: 4,211
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 83Z28 HO
Engine: Magnacharged Dart Little M 408
Transmission: G Force 5 speed
Axle/Gears: Moser 9" w/Detroit Trutrac
Re: SFC comparison thread
Kind of curious about installing both inner and outer SFC's....is there some kind of advantage to that? Does one not stiffen up the chassis enough, so the other is required?? For the extra weight you're adding there must be some benefit.
#140
On Probation
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Northern Utah
Posts: 6,319
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
17 Posts
Car: seeking '90.5-'92 'bird hardtop
Engine: several
Transmission: none
Axle/Gears: none
Re: SFC comparison thread
I think I've seen no more than 3 threads about having both, but now it seems there are no more inners on the market, we'll have to do our own. From what I've read, and my own past experience, I'm sold that both is best. In my case, I'm doing a Comp. Eng. full roll-cage in my t-top, so I figure CE's 3111 outers would give the easiest compatibility.
#142
Supreme Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Car: GTA
Engine: 350 TPI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: Aussie 9-bolt/3.27 posi
Re: SFC comparison thread
#143
On Probation
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Northern Utah
Posts: 6,319
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
17 Posts
Car: seeking '90.5-'92 'bird hardtop
Engine: several
Transmission: none
Axle/Gears: none
Re: SFC comparison thread
Nice! And thanks! But why the heck are these half again the cost of the MACs? I find that extremely angering, trying to take advantage like that. Still thinking fab my own. Wouldn't cost even a fourth as much.
#144
Supreme Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: NWOhioToledoArea
Posts: 8,113
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
5 Posts
Car: 86-FireBird
Engine: -MPFI
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3:42
Re: SFC comparison thread
you get them cheaper direct from alston, then a 2nd party who will remove the bolt kits that come with with from alston free and charge you extra for it.
https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/post...09-post20.html
https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/post...09-post20.html
#145
Supreme Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Car: GTA
Engine: 350 TPI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: Aussie 9-bolt/3.27 posi
Re: SFC comparison thread
you get them cheaper direct from alston, then a 2nd party who will remove the bolt kits that come with with from alston free and charge you extra for it.
https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/post...09-post20.html
https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/post...09-post20.html
#146
Supreme Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: NWOhioToledoArea
Posts: 8,113
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
5 Posts
Car: 86-FireBird
Engine: -MPFI
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3:42
Re: SFC comparison thread
yea they are the highest prices and charge extra for the bolts that come wit htem free from alston, I used dougherbert
#147
Supreme Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Car: GTA
Engine: 350 TPI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: Aussie 9-bolt/3.27 posi
Re: SFC comparison thread
You misunderstood. Your link was the SAME PRICE as what I paid for the Alstons from TDS so no....They aren't higher, yet you made it sound as if your link was cheaper. But it isn't.
#148
Supreme Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Car: GTA
Engine: 350 TPI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: Aussie 9-bolt/3.27 posi
Re: SFC comparison thread
And no, they do not charge extra. Same price if you use the bolts or cheaper if you don't My receipt has 2 separate lines. 1 for the SFCs & 1 for the bolts. Add them together & they equal the price on your link.
#149
Re: SFC comparison thread
I personally would never waste my time with inners.
Here is my old car with just Spohn round tube outer perimeter style SFC's with them MOST IMPORTANTLY increment welded along the span to the rocker panels both inside and outside every 6" along the length (1"-1 1/4" welds).
The car would teeter totter on a curb it was so rigid. It would not do this prior to the sfc install- SPohns eliminated most of the chassis twist- inners will NOT do that. You want more? box the chassis with a cage.
Here is my old car with just Spohn round tube outer perimeter style SFC's with them MOST IMPORTANTLY increment welded along the span to the rocker panels both inside and outside every 6" along the length (1"-1 1/4" welds).
The car would teeter totter on a curb it was so rigid. It would not do this prior to the sfc install- SPohns eliminated most of the chassis twist- inners will NOT do that. You want more? box the chassis with a cage.