How would be the best approach? I can do this for free, so if it helps I wanna do it. I'm not about to drop $300 for a brand new one just yet!

 

Bound to make it stronger, so why not?

JamesC

 

But it needs to be able to rotate a bit. When you turn, and the body rolls, the torque arm rotates a bit. I don't know how much of this is designed into torque arm, but I don't imagine that it would be great for you mount, if it kept trying to rotate in the mount. You notice with aftermarket TA's that there is the ability for the TA to rotate in the foward mount (be it a round bushing, or a spher bearing).

I'm not saying is a bad move, as I have not tried it, and I don't know exactly "how" the mount and TA handle the rotation in stock form. But, that is the downside that I can see.

I also image that with a poly TA mount, this issue would be magnified.

 

summit sells edelbrock torque arms for $175 thats not bad, its black powered coated and comes with a poly bushing. No offense but you are wasting your time. the amount of time youd spend on that is crazy, plus you cant really beef up where it bolts to the tranny or the rear end. there will be flaws.

 

I don't know what kind of fabbing Token had in mind, but if it's a simple box, I can't imagine that I'd be as strong as an after-market version--and there's no trouble there that I'm aware of. Shoot, my Edelbrock even provides a poly mount.

JamesC

 

My torque arm is totally stock, except for a poly bushing. The car lays down 1.5 60's, with a 1.54 being a best. I really can not justify modifying, or replacing mine just yet. I would think a TQ arm would need the extra strength in the area where it slides into the bushing. Since, that can not be boxed in that area, without some work, an aftermarket would be the way to go, IMO.

 

as for the edelbrock arm, Kandied's car broke one....pulling off the lift after install! - Do a search, you'll find the article.
- I'd agree that boxing it would probably help, but the front mount would be your weak point. I don't think it could hurt anything. - I would run a 1/2 or 3/4 pipe top and bottom, full length, with a gusset between. Easier than boxing, more strength. As for rotation, most aftermarket arms ain't gonna have it.....Small poly bushings don't twist much, if any.
- The biggest/best traction mod is still lca relocates, good shocks, good bushings everywhere, then lca's.

 

His was adjustable, IIRC. Edelbrock does make a non-adjustable, which is what I've been using for several years without difficulties.

 

I am not talking about the bushing twisted. Look at the design of say, the random tech arm, if you are going PROPERLY build a torque arm, it needs to have the ability to rotate, and have a sliding mechanism, other wise you bind the rear suspension, in some way.

 

i use an adjustable BMR torque arm, no problems at all. i have to admit its a much better design than edelbrock but id get edelbrock way before i use a stock one. You can flex it with bare hands, im all set with that

 

no, it wasnt.

it jsut wasnt properly welded.

 

I used some 2inch wide strips of flat stock sheeting - probably 1/2 in thick - cut to length and spaced about 4 inches apart and welded in between the inside top and bottom "lips" (I left out the "window slots"ias I thought perhaps that would get close too drivehshaft during movement)

I think about four or five strips in all - the last one was near the mount smaller end and that strip was cut to fit in the "triangle" open inside portion to box it

don't know if it improved things traction wise but strength wise - over the long span I think there might be a tendency to fold and flap under strain and this might be minimised by the supporting "gussets" that I installed

still going strong doing times in my sig

 

Is strength really an issue? How many broken factory torque arms have you seen?

I am just waying, we have seen time and time again, that a factory unaltered torque arm, will support 1.5 60' times, and we sure as heck don't see a lot of threads about broken factory torque arms. Now, moounts, and broken bolts, and what not are rather common, but boxing this does nothing for those parts.

 

I dont think it's because they break, but because they flex.


Even a mm of deflection at the front would be grossly magnified at the rear of the looong arm. All that equals less traction.

 

Would you so kindly prove that it equates to less traction? How about proving that this is flex in the diction we are talking about.

I already explain, the torque arm will twist a bit, it HAS to for the suspension to work right. Show me how much flex there is at what load, with the diction of force that we are talking about.

Do what you guys want to your cars, I could care less. But don't misinform people, by trying to spout facts, that you have no proof for. If you are so convinced of this flex of the torque arm. Show the facts. Have you compared the force it takes to make the factory arm flex 1mm, and compared that the durometer of the rubber, and let us now, which one of those is going to give us the largest change.

 

I have cracked a tailshaft housing on a transmmison just from drivetrain vibration...


...with that said- I do not for the life of me understand how anyone would want to retain that factory front TQarm mount on the tailshaft housing. Why on earth did GM not design the TQarm to be mounted to the chassis and not the tranny.

 

Here's the link--just to keep the facts straight:

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/afte...=Edelbrock+arm

JamesC

 

damn my memory must be going off.. i could have sworn he went with the non-adjustible...

in anycase, the weld still failed.

 

Damn beer!

JamesC

 

A massive GM conspiracy to sell more transmission mounts.

 

- that's what I'm talking about!!!

- I've said this before and I'll say it again, - On slicks, many people have done well with factory tq arms. It's much harder to make a street tire or small side-walled drag radial hook. I picked up almost 2 tenths in 60ft alone, 330 was better than 2. - Yes, factory, the mount has more give than the arm itself. The biggest gain with an aftermarket arm is probably the adjustability and the better mount. My car starts spinning with less than 6 down pinion angle.
- The BMR and many like it are built like a long ladder bar. The front poly mount is small(like 3/4 od) and is tie via 2 short tabs to another small poly bushing. - It isn't gonna twist much if any. I do see that for handling purposes more "twist" would be better/needed. - If you're on the cornering, any body roll must twist the arm or the mount.

 

That is why I wouldn't recomend a poly-bushing for that mount. You ARE going to bind the mount up with a poly bushing. you don't want to do that, it is going to wear it out faster, and put funky loads on things. I would get a spher bearing for that mount, period. No matter how you cut it, bind in any for is a bad thing.

 

Problem I had with spherical mounts was the drag radials, specifically, 17's. I'm sure it would have hooked on slicks, but I started with all rod ends. LCA's, and tq arm. With 17's the instant shock just spun tires worse. I built a set of box lca's with poly ends and my 60 got a bunch better. Then I built a poly front tq arm mount and it got better yet. - 315/35/17 - I have no sidewall and no tire squat. I have to hook it on contact patch alone. Trieing to "air down" and make them squat just allows the tire to cup in the middle, thus loosing patch.
- I'm sure that rod ends would be better for handling, but my car still corners as hard as I do. I have no ride quality issues for general daily driving.

 

just get a torque arm from a 6 speed 4th gen car. They look stronger since there are no holes in them.