You could build a system similar to the RMS street lynx for cheap if you could do the fab work yourself, I bet it would cost less than a good leaf spring set up by the time you buy springs, shocks and a sway bar. Plus it is easy to adjust the ride height and balance with good double adjustable coil overs.

It appears you have no idea what a properly setup 4 link for handling requires, in an A body one requirement is floor mods. For straight line use you can get by with less than optimal upper link length.

I understand the English language quite well, it's apparent from your use of it all you want is validation of your preexisting biases. You appear to be completely uninterested in a tried, tested and winning combo, such as the 67 Valiant thread I mentioned.

Which brings us back to, why are you here?

As for the Hotchkis subframe connectors, that is one piece of the setup, make your own if you want, I do not care. But good luck not using bolt on control arms, torsion bars, leaf springs or any other suspension part whether you buy or build it.

This thread makes me ZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzz..........

67autocross I really appreciate your opinions. It's what is great about this site. Unlike Supercuda who just wants to stir up a fuss that is completely unvalidated.

I'm sure my custom builds will not be cheap. I only use chrome moly tube. Little more money but both lighter and stronger. Heim joints are the expense. I only use one brand. Some bolt in products use brands that I would not. Just something I watch for when buying from aftermarket. Not sure what Hotchkis uses as it was raining and almost dark when I looked at their car at Carlisle. From their website the upper control arms shown are no different than what I have on my drag/street car. So I would build my own. Not that theirs are not nice. They really don't have to be as strong as many think. The stock control arm rear mount is what is weak. Have broken many on old cars.

I would continue my rant with the fight some have wanted to start with me. But, instead I will collect some pics of a 17 year old setup that has worked awesome on my drag/street car. It is not used for high speed cornering as the magnum drag wheels would surely break. But, huge wheelstands and breaking drive line parts have never hurt anything under this car.

What heim joint brand do you prefer?

Emil- if you keep talking about a 3 link my car won't be running for a good while longer!

AROURA bearing company.

Why not build a front end with coil over shocks and stock geometry upper A arms and give that a try? It should handle about that same but you could get rid of the torsion bars and make some extra header room. Plus it would be easy to adjust ride height, spring pre-load and if they are double adjustable both compression and rebound damping. Kind of a half way between a stock and full tube system.
I would really like when people venture off the beaten path and try something different, if it does not work you can always put it back to stock.




http://www.moparsuspension.com/suspensio...pport+Hoops.php

Yea, but what model. The lower level stuff doesn't not last as long as the upper models.

Who is he planning on autocrossing with? Rules will dictate what is allowable within class structure and I'd look those over before I started cutting or fabing anything, even something as simple as sub-frame connector style and installation can be dictated by these rule sets.

SCCA stock classes will be the most stringent and will limited you severely, even in allowable wheel sizes and tire choices. Touring and Prepared classes start loosing up some but still are not a free for all of modification by any means.

Goodguys and Optima will be the most lenient and are run what you brung type of organizations. This is probably the closest thing to the NHRA Super classes you may be familiar with where allowable mods are wide open.

If you are going down the path of heavy modification, you obviously want adjustability in your system. You want to be able to adjust roll center heights front and rear. Too low in front and you generate too much body roll. Too high in back and you compromise corner exit bite. Up front you need instant centers that will generate negative camber gain while maximizing caster and minimizing roll center migration left to right. Scrub radius amount and ackerman percentages are also considerations to this design. Minimizing anti-dive is a debatable point, but is somewhat contingent upon the wheel rates you are shooting for and how those mesh with chosen roll rates. Similarly, instant centers in the rear combined with/without anti-squat properties will need to be decided on and combined with the adjustable roll center. You likely could achieve this with multiple mounting positions on your link arm brackets but you need to also be mindful of roll steer introduced into the design and how to manage that.

Obviously a lot of concerns to keep in mind as you layout a replacement set up. 3 links, 4 links, 5 links, torque arm, truck arm are all out there for consideration.

When I autocrossed.....27 years ago. I had to run E stock. My Plymouth turismo had the block decked to zero. The head milled and a big cam. A guy with a Shelby charger with larger wheels Webber carbs and a lot of experience ran neck and neck with me, but he was in modified. Every rainy event I won ftd.

My son has never been fast in a car. He rides the heck out of his little 125 dirtbike. And handles my ttr250 well although it's heavy. He has a very good seat of the pants feel.

Have a few friends who know suspensions well. One worked for Petty, Earnhardt, and Woods bros. He is in bad shape. The other worked for him.

If I built a rear suspension it would have to have a lot of adjustment. Because setup is uncharted territory. I may just stay with leafs. Just depends.

Really with a 318 engine you just can't put much power down coming out of a corner. But, I have several R5P7 engines sporting 575 torque and 800 HP that would be awesome. They do not fit around stock steering. Alterkation has a decent front suspension and rear suspension. I just prefer a strut rod support rather than a fixed a arm.

The rod ends I buy are from RJ race cars. Pro stock uses same. I have rod end 17 years old with no noticeable wear.

Just kicking some ideas around at this point.

Thank for the interest.

I had an 85 Turismo, electronic carburetor, I hated that mofo.

73 Duster road course, 161 mph

https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/1851312/1.html

Probably the ultimate A body build

https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/1592993/1.html

On a '71 A-body? Maybe an issue on the slightly tighter first gen A in your avatar. I have not done it, obviously, seems odd to me on a car we stuff big blocks and Gen III Hemis into would not fit the R5P7.

I have a few comments. Hotchkis is good stuff, but the "improved geometry" claim may be true on B&E, but not really on the A body. The only improvement is an increase in caster which is common to most the aftermarket UCA solutions. Technically, the geometry was changed, but the claim is a little thin. On the B&E they moved the mounting point, that was not necessary on the A. The A body suspension was well designed from the factory, especially for its time. That said, if I was helping someone w/ a stock oriented car I would not hesitate to recommend the Hotchkis. I think they hurt themselves with their pricing, they are on the high end of the market segment. Their UCAs also have clearance issues w/ certain brake packages.

As far as the suspension mods / direction. As was earlier stated, depends on the class you wish to compete in. If you are going to a more competitive class then cutting the car to put in a properly designed 3 link should not deter you. As others have said, don't bother w/ a 4 link. From an Engineer's perspective the 4 is a compromise for the cornering cars and one of the upper bars is a redundant member that is not required. Placement of the upper link L-R and effective distance from the center of the axle are important, compliance in fore-aft at the attachment helps to not shock the tires and helps in planting power coming out of corners. Example: http://www.lateral-g.net/forums/showthread.php4?t=48576&highlight=sutton+link

The stock based stuff is good to a certain level. The K-frame can be reinforced, LCAs reinforced, good brakes are available. I have not seen a clear advantage of the bolt in coil over conversions for handling. Some packaging issues are addressed. But, as usual, most "bolt in" stuff out there also has compromises and is expensive.

On the upper end of the spectrum you can look at John Sandberg's car for some inspiration. Picture attached. This car has wide 5 hubs and a fabricated coil over set up in the front. I'm pretty sure he runs a 3 link in the rear. This is a car that was specifically built for and nationally competitive in the C-prepared class.

Know what you mean. We knocked the tamper plug out, unhooked the solenoid and manually adjusted. Well a good friend who worked on them at the dealership. Helped me a ton. I didn't have a clue back then. Sometimes, still don't LOL

Looking for 18X8 for front or bigger if it fits. Then 20x10 or possibly 12" for rear. Mini tubbed and relocated springs.

What fits?

Son wants something with a bright finish rim and prefers a flat black center to match stripes. Can make the rear any width we need to accommodate wheels. Would prefer to run the least backspaced wheel.

We are just to short on time right now to go much over stock just now. Kids and dad have too many irons in the fire.

https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/ubbt...tml#Post1853151
Leon if using stock front track width you can get an 18x9 to fit easily with a 30-35mm backspace. If using an aftermarket front rotor/hub brake package it varies +/- 1/4" on backspacing.

30-35mm is 1 1/4-1 3/8" back spacing. Is this what you meant? Or is that figure offset?

18X9 would be great.

Thanks, we currently have 73 spindles and stock disk brakes.

Yes I meant offset sorry. A wheel with 6-6.5 total backspace.