Suspension / ChassisQuestions about your suspension? Need chassis advice?
Welcome to ThirdGen.org!
Welcome to ThirdGen.org.
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join the ThirdGen.org community today!
Originally posted by okfoz KEWL! I would like to know all the specifics, but I imagine we will get to them like:
did he move the gas tank?
Can you still remove the gas tank?
the little things...
John
I can tell you that the tank DIDN'T :rockon: have to move and the entire car is serviceable. There was an interesting deal with the torque arm though right now I can't remember waht the heck it was. I will figure it out and post that info with the pictures ASAP, maybe even Sat night.
Hello all. Here are the pics that I promised. The deal w/ the torque arm is that the Vette rear carrier has the mount on the opposite side as the F-Body. He just retrofitted a Random Technologies arm in there. I can get more specific pics as questions arise. These give the general idea though.
Sorry, but I can only post 1 at a time. Anyone know how to fix that?
__________________ 87 GTA
L98/T-56
Edelbrock Headers, Custom Exhaust w/ McCord Power Plate II
Bell Tech Lowering Spindles, Full Poly Bushings, Super Heavy Duty Front Springs, TDS Wonder Bar, Edelbrock Strut Tower Brace
Granatelli Rear Control Arms, Spohn LCA Relocation Brackets, Spohn Adjustable Panhard Rod
South Side Machine Subframe Connectors
It was quite a job to get it in there. The shop that did the bulk of the work had never done one before, and therefore it wa an exercise in try thi here and that there until it was perfect. Just so you all are aware the COMPLETE this conversion was somewhere around $5000.00 (not a typo). My brother has siad that it was well worth it though. The shock factor alone is quite impressive. Let me know if anyone has any questions about tis conversion.
__________________ 87 GTA
L98/T-56
Edelbrock Headers, Custom Exhaust w/ McCord Power Plate II
Bell Tech Lowering Spindles, Full Poly Bushings, Super Heavy Duty Front Springs, TDS Wonder Bar, Edelbrock Strut Tower Brace
Granatelli Rear Control Arms, Spohn LCA Relocation Brackets, Spohn Adjustable Panhard Rod
South Side Machine Subframe Connectors
Gee, I like the idea of what was done, but I am not crazy about the routing of the exhaust. I was hoping to keep it up high, (above the suspension.) it looks like You would loose some ground clearance. On most bumps it looks like it would be ok, but I wonder how much lower it is compared to the stock Pig...
Actually the exhaust has only drug once or twice. The diff is tucked up in the hole quite well, as you can see by it's proximity to the fuel tank. The exhaust is up further than the stock exhaust on the C4 Vette. It's tough to believe but his IROC is lowered about 3-3.5 inches. The only thing that drags on occasion according to my Bro is the air deflector and every now and then, the cross member that the touque arm bolts to (only on big speed bumps). I think that the stock cat in my 87 Trash Can was lower than any part of his exhaust system. A good performance exhaust shop can do some great things with exhaust tubing.
__________________ 87 GTA
L98/T-56
Edelbrock Headers, Custom Exhaust w/ McCord Power Plate II
Bell Tech Lowering Spindles, Full Poly Bushings, Super Heavy Duty Front Springs, TDS Wonder Bar, Edelbrock Strut Tower Brace
Granatelli Rear Control Arms, Spohn LCA Relocation Brackets, Spohn Adjustable Panhard Rod
South Side Machine Subframe Connectors
do you think that it would be possible to get the name and address of the shop that did this? mail it to me if you do not want to post it please.:lala:
Thats cool! But what would really be nice is some during the mod pics, like pics of what had to be reworked under the car, the upper mount looks pretty simple, but how front mounts for the stut bars would be fabbed up baffles me. Also what is stock track for the C4 rear, if it has to be modded just to get the track right this really would be a pain, also how is the ride height with the stock 'Vette spring, and how would you raise/lower the height to get the car to sit right. Well, guess its time to peek under my friends 'Vette.
I have not even start to work on it yet. Working too much lately. Hopely I will have a digital camera to get some picks in another week or so. I have been looking around for more parts to it. I got some crosss drilled and sloted rotors for it and new calipers with ceramic pads. I can't find any e-brake cables for it though. I am going to see if I can get the cables from another car with disc e-bakes to work.
just to add some info. i was surfing the web last year sometime and ran up on a third gen independant rear. the only weird thing about it was the brakes were in the center to at the hubs. but it was like 2000 so i said nevermind. my 2 cents
Nick
__________________ 1992 Chev Camaro RS 25 Anniversary
HOLLEY STEALTH RAM ON A 383 STROKER with ALUMINUM HEADS
Crane Cam HI-6 ignition Box w/L-92 coil, 8mm Accel spiral core plugs, some dress up stuff, 10 bolt 3.73 zexel torsen w/the ultimate cover, Kumho 711, Dyno max header cat back and UltraFlow Muffler w/ 3 1/2 tips, B&M Console MegaShifter, Spohn torque arm w/driveshaft loop Spohn LCA, Spohn LCA relocation brackets, Spohn Panhard
New track times
R/T .905
60ft 1.973
MPH 80.63
ET 8.438
That sounds like a Jaguar rear suspension. They used it on the XKE, XJS and older XJ6s. The brakes were inboard and they had a hard time colling them. They also run 4 shocks on the rear suspension. It actaully is a good design and is pretty compact.
I came across 3 Jaguar rear end assemblies, all complete with inboard dual pin disc brake setups/ and stock coilovers- A little rusty but $450 each. That would be nice to tinker with if my car were not finished. Anyone interested call S&W Towing in Hawthrone, Calif. They have them sitting in the back of the lot collecting dust.
Air Ride (i think) makes a kit for air bags suspension on a chevy s10 that convert the rear into IRS. The thing that made it interesting was that no cutting or modification to the rear, it was all bolt on.
Originally posted by REZN8R A note on 1st gen cars. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the 1st & 2nd gen F-body's had a body and a frame. The 3rd & 4th gen have a unibody. Therefore it would be easier to put a IRS setup on a 1st or 2nd gen. Right?
could have sworn my 71 camaro was unibody just like the thirdgen was
Originally posted by soulbounder I know Comp. Engr. used to make rear frame rails that would extend off of our existing rails simulating a full frame in the rear. You could weld a crossmember between them to give the IRS a mounting place.
Here's a pic for those who need something visual.
too bad the diff wasn't a little longer
one way mazda dealt with the crossmember mounting was to have a long snout on the diff like such
didn't cause problems with mounting of the gas tank and such
maybe though there is a way to adapt something to mount the cross member forward a little more though and have it reach back to the diff.... though don't try it unless you know being I'm just assuming and this isn't something I knwo too well just trying to throw an idea out there if nothing elese
Originally posted by AFrikinGoodTime Sorry to burst your bubble but this example is not BUMPSTEER, It is simply LOSS OF TRACTION. Panhard bars do not create bump steer either. In their range of motion they only cause tranfer of weight.
Bumpsteer is only caused by a bump in the road changing the angle of attack of a front wheel by shorting or lenghtening the geomety of the tierod causing the tire to change the path intended by the steering wheel.The car is steered differently than intended by the dip or bump in the road and should not be interpeted that by hitting a bump with a tire and skipping off is bumpsteer, merely loss of traction.
The reason why IRS works better on uneven surfaces is beause the bump is only absorbed by one rear tire causing only one tire to lose traction. On a solid axle, both tires are affected by the bump. Solid axles work better on smooth surfaces than IRS because of less deflection of working components ( less moving parts or pivot points) and camber can not be flexed or changed by cornering forces. That is why we don't need a rear spreader bar (a.k.a. strut brace, etc.)
the last part I am wondering about even on smooth surface.
my question is with turning on smooth surface I'm sure the camber change (relative to ground) would change on a live axle car being that the axle prolly would lean a little as well.
with an IRS car as the wheel is pushed up it will gain a little more camber to help keep it level on the outside wheel but the inside wheel might even gain a little possitive camber to help keep it flat
again might be wrong and if so please correct me and let me know
Originally posted by okfoz THat would help on our balance by getting more weight in the rear.
ON A SIDE NOTE:, interesting fact, the Vette was not the original car to have a front engine, rear trans from GM. Back in the 60's there was a little Pontiac, that was built on the same platform I think as the Skylark (cant remember the name). It used that setup and the rear suspension of the Corvair...
John
think it was lambo or something had a messed up configuration where the motor sat between the wheels connected to the transmission that went towords the front of the car and then had like a driveshaft or something like that that drove the rear wheels
don't remember the details but cool interesting design
ok so c4 irs install has been confirmed, what about C5? C6?
C5 wrecks are fairly reasonable at 5-10k for something with salvageable enginer/trans/suspension and all the other bits.
anyone know if the trans/IRS is drastically improved in the c6 compared to c5? or is the c6 just a slightly improved c5, as i head back at its debut
old thread, but
the c5 and c6 use a rear mounted trans and a torque tube, so unless you swap everything, i think it would be a difficult project. the c4's still had the trans on the engine which is why its better suited for this swap.
I've toyed with the idea of doing this with a future car, but there is a lot more involved that just making the rear fit, like tuning the suspension.