Cross member sub frame?
Thread Starter
Senior Member



Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 570
Likes: 69
From: TEXAS
Car: 1987 IROC-Z
Engine: 6.2L
Transmission: Stage III T56
Axle/Gears: 3.73
Cross member sub frame?
I had doubles on my 01 car. For my 84 Z28 Im trying to find some really good and strong subframes. Ive never heard of the cross member subframe. Anyone have any comments about them as far as how good or bad they are? I want to run some true dual mufflers and dont want subframes getting in the way
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 830
Likes: 0
From: Kansas
Car: 85 camaro sport coupe
Engine: 2.8 MFI
Transmission: v6 700R4 wish it was a 5spd Stick
Axle/Gears: Stock non posi 3.42s
no the subframes go from the sides of the trans tunnel to the front bumper and from the rear seat bucket to the rear bumper. there are 2 cross members that i am aware of and 1 holds the engine/front suspention in place and the second holds the trans.
What i assume you are talking about are SFC's Sub Frame Connectors they as there name states go between the 2 sets of sub frames and connect them(simple ain't it?). there are 2 types that i am aware of for third gens 1 type runs along the rocker pannel and are tucked up into that channel, they keep ground clearance but i dont think that they are as strong as the second style which Direcly connects the ends of the 2 sub frames together like the alstons do an example of the rocker pannel ones are the spohn ones. the main reson i can see why the rocker style would be better is they wont create ground clearance problems on lowered cars.
What i assume you are talking about are SFC's Sub Frame Connectors they as there name states go between the 2 sets of sub frames and connect them(simple ain't it?). there are 2 types that i am aware of for third gens 1 type runs along the rocker pannel and are tucked up into that channel, they keep ground clearance but i dont think that they are as strong as the second style which Direcly connects the ends of the 2 sub frames together like the alstons do an example of the rocker pannel ones are the spohn ones. the main reson i can see why the rocker style would be better is they wont create ground clearance problems on lowered cars.
Supreme Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 1
From: SLO County, CA.
Car: '88 Camaro
Engine: 5.7 L98
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: Borg Warner 9 bolt w/3.27 lim. slip
So which wiegh more? Alston style or Spohn style? Sounds like the Alston style works better. Thanks, Daniel U
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 830
Likes: 0
From: Kansas
Car: 85 camaro sport coupe
Engine: 2.8 MFI
Transmission: v6 700R4 wish it was a 5spd Stick
Axle/Gears: Stock non posi 3.42s
I dunno neither maker lists the weight. its usually something i dont worry about. mine will never be a true race car so i dont give a darn howmuch things weigh.
Supreme Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 1
From: SLO County, CA.
Car: '88 Camaro
Engine: 5.7 L98
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: Borg Warner 9 bolt w/3.27 lim. slip
I want to keep mine at 3000 lbs. or less. It seems easier/cheaper to make it lighter than stronger(more H.P.). I'm removing the rear seats soon, removed the A/C, fiber glass hood, etc. Weight is almost formost when I buy parts for the car. I might go with the Alston style then. Thanks though, Daniel U
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
TinnMann2
Canadian Region
16
Jun 18, 2017 05:10 PM
luvofjah
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Parts for Sale
13
Sep 26, 2015 08:28 PM




