i guess my question is this..

if the a arms dont provide weight loss, and their main gain is how stiff they are over the stockers, then they're for all out handling, right?
but for all out handling, you want to go coil over.. so why does he even have the spring pocket version?

i donno, im still trying to see how it fits in everywhere.. people have used the stockers since the early 80s and they dont have them flex... the ones that do have them flex have such stiff, outright handling cars that they should be going coil over anyway..


for someone looking to upgrade their toy, i would think that springs, shocks, tires, strut mount plates, sway bars and bushings would all come way before it.. you would have to have a tweeked car already to even see any performance diff. and at that point, someone that into handling would want the coil over setup, right?

other then some road race series im not aware of, where you have to run a stock "style" suspension, im still not seeing the application for it.

 

I imagine he's offering them to people who want somthing that looks cool, like a tubular k-member, while also being safe enough to beat on.

 

This was one of my main concerns about converting over to a coil-over set-up, and I'm glad to see that this problem has been addressed. The bigger diameter springs are also a major plus (have you considered "barrel" wound springs?). Since I've got a drag race set-up, my big concern was the pounding condition experienced after coming down from a wheel stand. Will this set-up be able to use the stock style upper strut mounts, and what thickness/material are the reinforcing plates in your (Steve's) kit? I also would be interested in some lower rate springs for my specific application.

Looks good:





I'm also anxiously awaiting pictures of the new crossmember.

 

There is significant weight loss when going coilover.

A rod ended chromoly non-box arm weighs 17.5 lb...

...the stock one weighs 29lbs... (29-17.5)/29=

A 40% weight loss with a massive strength and rigidity increase.

They're for all-out handling, period!

 

shut up dude, honestly ur replys are starting to **** me off.

 

This is a tech site, im pretty sure no one cares if your pist about something. Its a legitimate question.

 

Um, Yes. SCCA A-Sedan, Touring, and Improved Touring for Road Racing, and for Autocross, F-Stock, G-Stock, and E-Street Prepared, to name a few.

 

vsixtoy, you mentioned that your STB was flexing in one of your previous posts. I was wondering what your thoughts were on the Edelbrock peice and if you think there might be a better option offered somewhere else.

I've heard the welds on the Edelbrock STB seem a bit shoddy, but I'd like to get an opinion from you also. I've learned a lot just reading some of your posts.

Thanks.

 

this isn't anything new that hasn't been out for our cars since the late 80's. spohn just offers it in a package deal now which saves alot of calling around and trial/error which is always good.

 

The thing is are the strut towers made to handle that weight and what is he making to reinforce them.

 

Yeah, but that's not really the answer to the question I asked. What I wanted to know was if the Edelbrock peice was a quality peice and if there are better STBs out there.

I'm sure there is only so much difference between two companies' STBs considering they both pretty much serve the same purpose. However, I still like to know what kind of product I am getting and what other options I have if the said product isn't of as good of quality that I want.

 

I was more or less just adding a comment i dont know about the edelbrock stb.

 

My apologies. :hail:

 

Should be fine on coming down, even tho I'd reccomend using some sort of a STB tho. Just to be on the safe side. Perferably one that is all soild and the mounting brackets welded to the cross tube of the STB. IMO That is the only way to go.

Yes ya can use the stock strut mounts, or the aluminum ones that Steve sells, basically you can use any strut mount you want as long as it can bolt to the retainer plate that was designed off the stock peice.

The plates are 1/4" 3/16" and 1/8" mild steel.

As for the rates I'm sure that Steve can get you what ever ya want..

Kat

 

Nate,

I think the edelbrock brace itself is a very strong piece, but the side mount brackets need to be boxed. I riggied a little jig device out of tooth picks crossed to measure if it was flexing and separating the cross hatch- SLow speed smooth roads it didn't move, But on bumpy roads it did slip and showed flexing towards the nose of the car. I attached a picture of the stagnant position (red) and the movement flex position (green).

Say the firewall is 90* from the framerails heading towards the nose of the car, They are somewhat flexing closing that angle to more like 89* when the front wheel deflect off of road bumps. Its minor, but it is flexing. I plan to box these brackets and permanatly weld them to the strut towers in the near future. I have so much stuff on my plate right now, I am struggling to get a free day to install my front brake setup as it is- work has been busy, but thats a good thing leading up to the holidays

Dean

 

I got the same question as Spdfrk1990. I wanna know how the strut towers are gonna be able to handle all that stress. Sure those plates will evenly distribute the load directly around the top of the strut, but I'm more worried about the construction of the strut towers themselves. I mean, if they flex with the stock spring/strut setup (with a 3 point STB no less) whats gonna happen when you also ask them to support the springs as well? I imagine they would flex even more. For those of you that plan to use these coilovers, how do you plan to deal with this issue? I'm sure some welding needs to be done, the member german-motorsport comes to mind ...

 

thats my point.

for there to be a significant weight loss, you HAVE to go coilover.
go look at the weights of the stock style, spring perch non-coilover a arms im refering to.

i honestly dont care. i dont even know you. im looking for a answer to my question... to summerize the question, its "why?"

cool.. btw you wont be legal in Fstock with them.. or any other "stock" AutoX class... but they would be legal in F-modified... same with the coilovers though.

i donno about any of the club racing rules though... cant afford it.





anyway, this is what this whole "debate" or disagreement or whatever comes down to... i want to know why, and no one seems to have a solid answer. contrary to what you guys would like to think, i dont have a problem with spohn.. but i dont see the point, so im asking the question.
if no one can/will answer it, fine.

 

Thanx for the reply, Kat. I've already got a roll cage with 1 5/8" chromoly bars coming through the firewall welded directly to the top of the strut towers, and I'm also planning on installing a front motor plate (going to attach between the strut towers/frame rails), so a STB in my case would be redundant. Besides, there's no room for one with my 10-71 supercharger in the way.

Yep, I believe it was Art Morrison that "pioneered" the front coil-over conversion for our cars many years ago. Aren't these the ones you use(d)?

For those concerned about the strut towers being able to handle the weight, notice the design similarities of our cars and other production vehicles that have coil-over struts - not much difference. While it is true that they weren't originally intended for this, they still had to be designed stout enough to handle pot holes, washboard roads, etc, without failing, and these shock loads are directly transferred to the strut towers. Also keep in mind that the production spring pockets have to hold roughly 50%(??) more weight (versus the coil-over design), due to the leverage effect of the lower control arm and where the spring is located on it, so everything has to be much more robust. With the reinforcing plates installed, I don't think the strength of the strut tower should be a concern.

 

Are you planning on offering a coilover kit WITHOUT ROD ENDS?

 

I assume you mean the rear coil over kit. Yes you can get rear shocks with poly bushings instead of the rod ends. Or if ya mean the front end, here ya go http://www.spohn.net/product.cfm?productid=1495


CrazyHawaiian

Friend of mine TTA850 rode arround for two years with his 89 TGTA that runs 10's with the PA K coil over kit on his car. Anyone here knows how they have all the weight resting right on the strut mount. All he had to do was reinforce the strut mount from where it was bending due to the spring bottoming out on it. Once he did that it was fine. WIth Steve' setup I dont think that there is going to be much of an issue with "flexing" of the strut tower. There is a top plate on the tower that is kind thick and formed for some strength, then what would be the inner fender, then 1/4" plate, then the 3/16" plate and then the 1/8" spring locating plate.

You'll have 3/4" or so of metal under that strut tower supporting the spring and the weight of the car. Like said earlier in this post, I'm getting the kit as soon as we're finished with it. My car + Philly roads should be a good test for it.

Dean what I meant by the STB flexing is not front to back or side to side, its up and down. The bracket ya show still has a piviot point there where I would think that when you go over a bump in the road it is going to let the tower rise up a lil bit. Not that it does all "that" much. No I dont have anything to back it. Just got to thinking about it one day at work when Steve was making the STB's for the 4th gens.

Kat

 

Thanks Dean! I appreciate it.

One more question: I'm not looking to build an all-out handling car or a high HP machine. Just a moderately peppy street car that is fun to drive daily. Do you think this flex problem that you have noticed is necessary to fix for someone like me, or is it just one of those minor details that probably won't matter except to the diehard car enthusiast? I'm leaning towards the latter because you mentioned "Its minor, but it is flexing."

I'm also planning on welding in Spohn's SFCs along with adding a steering brace.

Thanks again.

 

I wasn't talking about the a arms, but thanks for the link anways. I was talking about the shocks themselves, which have rod ends, as shown in the pics steve posted.

 

Hey Kat, will the upper reinforcing plates interfere with where I have my roll cage bars welded on top of the strut towers? Here's a pic of the left side (right side looks the same):

 

No, the plates go on the underside, not on top.

Steve

 

The QA1 shocks I can get in poly or spherical. Most of the other shocks only come spherical, most coil over shocks have the spherical mounts (not a bad thing). The spherical ends are installed with snap rings, you can pop them right out and replace them (pretty cheaply too). The QA1 shocks have a teflon/kevlar lined spherical bearing just like the rod ends we use, they don't make noise if that's what you're worried about.

Steve

 

The strut tower is plenty strong for coil overs, with the reinforcing plates spreading the load evenly across the entire tower, it's not an issue. The strut mount is definitely not made to carry a coil over.

Steve

 

Dude, I agree with you 100%. If you're main goal is weight loss, you have to go coil over. You can't lose much weight staying with the stock spring set up, not doing it safely anyway.

That option is for the corner carvers who do not want coil overs, due to budget, personal preference, or whatever. The advantages have been discussed before. If there was no need or market for them, I wouldn't bother making them. There are a lot of people who wanted that set up, they kept asking me to do it, and I did it. Most of the a-arms I've sold this week were with spring boxes.

You may not agree, or think it would benefit you, but others do, and as you've said before yourself, everyone has their own "thing". I offer the options, the consumer decides his preference.

You say people don't "need" coil overs on all four corners. You're right. These cars don't "need" any aftermarket parts to have fun with them. But there are MANY people out there with these cars who are building them in to hardcore street, road course, and drag race cars. They want the ability to go to that level, we offer that option for those who want/need it.

I don't come on here and say if you don't have this stuff, your car will suck, I know that's not the case at all. It's options for the VAST variety of things being done with these cars. The thirdgen is the next "69 Camaro". They're cheap, and a damn good platform to build on.

Just because you and Dean and other all have different set ups and preferences, it doesn't mean that ANY of you are wrong. You build the car the way you want it to be, and that's the way this hobby should be!

Peace out, and I hope everyone has a great X-Mas!

Steve

 

Merry Christmas Steve
and thanks for making the parts you do.

 

well steve might i say thanks first of all, your work is appreciated here, although your prices are high i pay them becuase you simply have the best stuff on the market, i am very pleased with the adj torque arm even though i still cant figure out how to properly adjust it... its nice

i will look forward to your future products, and upgrading my shot stock suspension when i get more money of course

 

MCMike, Beautiful job on the cage work. I am going to somewhat duplicate that caging section with just a plate against the firewall then down to the strutmount like the section you have shown of your full cage. Wife won't let me cage this car for safety- She doesn't want to climb over a cage evertime she gets into it- I can't blame her but I worry about her safety in it.

That brace will at least firm up the chassis flex alittle more- nice job and thanks for the idea.

 

Here's a mocked shot on how I can do this while retaining creature comforts. The fire wall plate would consist of two plates. A threaded plate weled to the firewall, then the second welded to the tube brace that will bolt to the first plate weled to the firewall- this allows future removal for blowerfan access.


Steve? You're the guy- I know your plate is full

 

Thanks for the comp, vsixtoy. Unfortunately for the right side, I opted to adios the blower motor, mainly since I don't use it much (if at all). While I could have went around it, I wanted to maintain a straight length of tube from the cage to the strut tower, to mirror what I have on the left side.

 

Here's another roll cage construction pic of the area from the inside:

 

That is the ideal and ultimate bracing for these cars. But yes its not feesable for creature comforts on a daily driver. Very nice job.

I have added to what I may do it it will fit properly and unbolt.

 

I think i will be doing the same but im smoothing off the firewall without the heater box on the pass side.

 

im sorry i may have missed it but how much actually can these coil overs lower the car from a stock stance. 1,2,3,4,5 inches?

 

How about a optional tower brace for the rear shock towers. To tie them together from inside the car. It could be made as a bolt in unit. Of course it would be for those that chose to run without a backseat.

 

Nice! I just got them yesterday , very trick. So far I have :
Tubular k-member for LS1 swap
Rear T56 crossmember and Spohn TQ Arm
Spohn boxed spring mount tubular A-arms
Koni "Yellow" Specials front struts /rear shocks
Lakewood LCAs
TDS steering brace aka"Wonderbar"
MAC subframe connectors
Energy Suspension master poly bushing kit.
Energy Suspension rear poly transmission mount
Prothane poly motor mounts
IROC-Z quick ratio steering box
IROC-Z springs
IROC-Z front and rear swaybars
At this point all I need to get are the strut tower brace and the panhard bars plus the Baer bearclaw front and rear disc brakes (crossdrilled , slotted , and zincwashed, of course) and I'm set!

 

I'd add spohn subframes to the list, and come to your senses and go with a pieced together C5 setup on the front brakes, and slightly upgraded factory style PBR's on the rear, you'll end up with a better setup for less money.

 

im sorry i may have missed it but how much actually can these coil overs lower the car from a stock stance. 1,2,3,4,5 inches?

 

Z28racer , point me to some websites , cheaper for better performance ? I always like that idea!

 

Depends on the spring size that you order. If ya get a 8" spring I'm sure you can lower it to a point where it is pointless.

Kat

 

sweet yea that makes sense

 

Never thought about this...but it is a very good idea, as these cars need all the help with chassis stiffening they can get.

I second this..we need one

 

Ummm, yes and no. Cadillac has a unique chassis (E=Eldorado; K=Deville/Seville; D=CTS/STS {05 and newer}) that is not duplicated on any other GM line. Even the Olds Aurora that had similar features and used a version of the Northstar engine was a different chassis (G-body--and yes GM reuses these body designations for those of you who had Monte Carlos and Buick GNX cars). Also, Caddie uses a lot more electronic controls on its suspension pieces including suspension control modules, real-time damping, auto-level controls, etc. The very basics of how the suspensions work may be similar, but almost none of the other GM cars use the same methods for how those suspension pieces are controlled. Corvette does use a version of the magnetic ride control. In short, how Cadillac achieves those plush rides (although the new CTS is an entirely different animal in this respect) is not due solely to increased sprung weight from vehicle "bloat."

Just an additional thought as I reread this. We might be having a confusion as to what is meant by the Term "chassis." If so, then perhaps read my post with a grain of salt.

 

this basically sums it up and has been the main point those of us with coilovers for years on here have been saying. until now Art morrison was the only one offering this upper brace that is needed for the coilovers, thanks for a second option steve. always good to have options.

maybe some of you will stop asking if the strut tower is strong enough now.



i didn't have any problems with strut mounts until i changed over to the hunter motorsport mount. i definately had to add the upper support plate once i put those mounts on.

 

What's wrong with the HMS mounts? I thought I heard someting about metal fatigue, and maybe about steel ones being made???? Steve???

 

EXACTLY and thank you, i too beleive in all that and i care about my car soo much , not saying anyone here doesnt care about their car, that i dont mind if somethin doesnt weigh as less as another part, as long as its STRONGER and hey these do weigh less than factory, not much but they do...