i know it can be done cuz i've seen it before

my questions:
1. How Hard?
2. How Much?
3. Is it worth it?

 

1. Real hard
2. A lot
3. Probably not

If you want a Corvette, buy a Corvette. By the time you're done it'll probably cost you the same as a C4. On the other hand if you've got money to burn and want to do something interesting, it'd be a fun project.

 

you won't find a decent C4 for less than $5000 so putting one in an F-body still comes out less. The Vette IRS is usualy $1500 used.

------------------
-Tas
'89 Formula WS-6

305, TBI, auto, 14x3 chrome flat based open element with K&N, Milodon 160* thermo, functional Formula hood, cross-flow Flowmaster, '99z28 rear pipes and tips....

Soon to be installed:
Hooker 1-5/8" 50 state legal headers, Dynomax 3" I pipe (PN 44063 and 43248), Catco 3" cat, and injector spacer.

Super GRK_Taz World
F-Body Dual Exaust
EFI & Intake Options
AOL IM: superGRtaz

 

Your probably going to need a full tube chassis.

 

um no. What's with all these people talking out their *** lately? Have the newbies really outnumbered the techies so bad?

-Tas

 

hmmmm......about 1500 you say that aint so bad..........i mean i cant do it tommorow, but it shall remain a good possibilty

 

well I would have to think so....


No you do not need a full tube chasis. You need to make new SQUARE tube mounts that you will have to have welded to the current SUB frame. You will need to make new shock mounts. After that it will take a $hitload of shimming and lineing up. Making the parts
will not cost the money. Buying the C4 rear will cost ya and the welding will cost ya.
However you can go to www.aircraftspruce.com to get the tubing. Then go to a locla book store and get the performance suspension set-ups book. It will give you the most info you will need.
Now after spending the 2500-3000 will it be worth it?. Well you uneven power take off squat will be all but gone, the performance around turns...Well if you have driven a 4 wheel independant car you know the way it will handle...in a word GREAT. Well you can get gears for it, you can run the 14 inch vette brakes and the vette sway bars(nice huh)?.

 

well i guess after i do the 3.4 engine swap, i'll have yet another project for my camaro

thanx guys

 

Hey hey hey whats with the foul attitude. So you don't think it needs a tube chassis. Well thats your opinion. Heres mine. When you cut out the floor pan and remove the feul tank, exaust your going to at least add a rear subframe. Do you plan on attaching this to a weak set of subframe connectors or put in a cage for it to attach to. I saw an article on a 92 Z with a corvette rear and it looks like there is no way around a tube chassis. The independant rear also needs more room for suspention travel. I personally would not run the corvette rear but would choose to run a watts link setup.The IRS has to much latteral tire movement on a soft sprung chassis. The watts link would get rid of all the straight axles problems. Although you would loose your rear steer affect from body roll.


[This message has been edited by nicmike85 (edited July 04, 2001).]

 

I have that issue with the 92Z and that was extreme. I also have many more issues where people didn't do that to f-bodies, a website http://www.rareautodesign.com/ that has pics and the guy talks about racing his. I've also heard from people that have Vette IRSed f-bodies in their club.
-Tas

 

What makes IRS so great? I've ridden in my friend's vette before and I know it's a nice ride. But is it the design that makes it awesome? Couldn't you just do lots and lots of suspension upgrades and get a solid rear to perform well? And maybe someone can clear this one up for me: solid rear better for drag racing and IRS better for pulling G's and carving corners? Is that right? Thanks

 

Umm if you build the mounting plates right you do not have to touch the tank... And If my memory serve me right the corvette is not a true frame car anyway, it is 2 sub frames... Not positice but pretty sure. And on the lateral movement thing... what are you talking about?... IRS does not have any sideways travel. It had 2 upper and 2 lower bars per side and a spindle in between them. Sounds pretty solid to me. After all its worked on the vette for many many decades.
That "extra" wheel travel... It is rather tight actually. Very little movement. If any it will travel the same amount as the factory solid axle.

 

IRS rides better. Handling might not be any better unless the road is bumpy or something. Our Fbodies with their 3 link + torque arm design is one of the best out there. The top Kenny Brown mustangs even convert from a 4 link design to a panhard rod setup like ours. the panhard rod allows no side to side movement of the axle.
-Tas

 

By lateral movement I mean when the suspention travels it travels in an arc. Yes even a straight axle has lateral movement. When an IRS goes through suspention travel it pushes and pulls the tire sideways. This causes tire scrub and doesn't help lateral grip (cornering). With the three link rear the front pivot points move up and down with bodyroll. The panhard mount on the chassis also moves in relationship to the rear axle. This movement actually pushes and pulls the axle laterally. Along with the control arms pivoting the rear will move at an angle steering the rear of the car. This can be a desired affect as winston cup cars run an adjustable upper panhard bracket. A watts link locates the rear and is not affected by suspention travel or bodyroll. Hope this helps some of you. Yes I guess you could just build a sub frame but if your going all the way, why not go ALL THE WAY.

 

you're an idiot.

 

With IRS, yes, the wheels do describe an arc when going thru the travel. However.... The length of the upper/lower arms determines camber change as the wheel travels. (let's see ya do THAT on a solid rear axel) The way it is set up is to maintain as much tire contact throughout suspension travel as possible.

And, Yes, IRS is better for handling, Solid is better for drags.

 

Everyone should check out their front suspension next time they have their car up. One control arm and a strut. Just almost the same as a swing arm. When the car rolls the tire cambers out on the outside in on the inside(good things). IRS is good because the left side doesn't dictate the right side's movement(and the other way around).

------------------
'87 Bird 350 .060 over 700R4 + Lots more

 

Irs is better! It is and always will be. Irs will not need a full tube frame and the vette is not a solid frame car, rather like the f-body a sub frame setup. Irs has worked on vette's, vipers etc etc etc. There is a reason for that and solid can't touch it. Solid is cheap and cost effective thats why the 30k car has that and the 50k-80k cars have Irs. It would be a nice project. Do all agree no but who cares and it would help.

 

just one question

How do you connect the rear spindles to the frame- the stock LCA mounting point is available but that limits you to a ladder bar suspension - theres not a whole lot of room for a 4-link?

I dont see hanging the pumpkin as huge problem- but from a different angle why not use the wall behind the rear seats to hold the diff in place

 

check out his post....https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/susp...uspension.html

 

"Check out this post..." says the guy who did not notice that he replied to a 11 YEAR OLD TREAD!

Might wanna look at the dates before you response to something.

 

Fwew! Geese! Holy thread resurection!