Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#2218844 - 12/22/16 07:00 AM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: Bob J]
jcc Offline
No politics

Registered: 12/21/03
Posts: 16973
Loc: Trumussia
Originally Posted By Bob J
Originally Posted By jcc
Originally Posted By Bob J
I meant camber. If I can get -4 I can set it where I need it. -3 sounds like a good starting point with 0 toe. It may need about 1/8 toe out but we will see how the car is works. My Porsche I can only get -1.2 front and I have -1.8 in the back with 0 toe. I would love -3 on it but I can't run camber plates in Street class so that is all I can get from the adjustment.


This should be interesting. drinking

Yes caster needs to be fixed on Mopars I'm not used to that as you leave Porsche at stock settings. Yes -3 camber is a ton and I wouldn't run over -1.5 on the street but this is a class car and very limited street use. Now lets see about large fronts and large amounts of negative camber. ASP and SSP Porsches with 285 18 fronts running -3 to -3.5 with Hoosers. Mike won the Dixie tour in his Fox body with 275 18 f and 335 18 Rival S with over -3 camber. I may only run -2 or -2.5 and the car maybe happy there but I will be going for the year end trophy. So I need to see how close I can get to 1.5g but I need to hit at least 1.3g. And that is a ton in a B body. I want the adjustment in case it's needed. I do run the complete season plus at least 1 champ Tour. Hey it's all good.


The Porsche you refer to is a strut IFS, ie little camber gain design, liking more initial negative camber, unlike a Mopar unequal arm IFS? work
_________________________
Seeking more civil pastures

Top
#2218867 - 12/22/16 08:15 AM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: jcc]
Bob J Offline
member

Registered: 11/16/16
Posts: 159
Loc: Colorado
Originally Posted By jcc
Originally Posted By Bob J
Originally Posted By jcc
Originally Posted By Bob J
I meant camber. If I can get -4 I can set it where I need it. -3 sounds like a good starting point with 0 toe. It may need about 1/8 toe out but we will see how the car is works. My Porsche I can only get -1.2 front and I have -1.8 in the back with 0 toe. I would love -3 on it but I can't run camber plates in Street class so that is all I can get from the adjustment.


This should be interesting. drinking

Yes caster needs to be fixed on Mopars I'm not used to that as you leave Porsche at stock settings. Yes -3 camber is a ton and I wouldn't run over -1.5 on the street but this is a class car and very limited street use. Now lets see about large fronts and large amounts of negative camber. ASP and SSP Porsches with 285 18 fronts running -3 to -3.5 with Hoosers. Mike won the Dixie tour in his Fox body with 275 18 f and 335 18 Rival S with over -3 camber. I may only run -2 or -2.5 and the car maybe happy there but I will be going for the year end trophy. So I need to see how close I can get to 1.5g but I need to hit at least 1.3g. And that is a ton in a B body. I want the adjustment in case it's needed. I do run the complete season plus at least 1 champ Tour. Hey it's all good.


The Porsche you refer to is a strut IFS, ie little camber gain design, liking more initial negative camber, unlike a Mopar unequal arm IFS? work

Like I said the car may not like it. You go with want you know till you learn it will not work or you are told what to start with from someone that knows and you find out that works. That is why I'm here is to learn.
_________________________
07 Porsche C2 997.1 6spd DD and SCCA Solo II SS
68 Plymouth GTX Convert. 493cu Hotkiss Wilwood Classic air, Building for Solo II Cam
65 Chrysler 300 Convert. project
57 Desoto 2dr. Firesweep 392 Hemi,Wilwood Project with son
2003 Dodge Dakota R/T "DEAD"

Top
#2218950 - 12/22/16 10:34 AM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: Bob J]
TC@HP2 Offline
master

Registered: 01/23/03
Posts: 4834
Loc: Pikes Peak Country
In my experience on cars with unequal length A arms, high static negative cambers numbers are only necessary for softly sprung cars that generate a lot of body roll and/or race on flat surfaces. Also, the unequal length arms create additional negative camber gain as they compress, so a -1* static could translate into a -3* dynamic at 3" of suspension travel depending on your upper/lower arm ratio. Ultimately, your tire temps will tell you what it wants.

Taller spindles will create additional negative camber gain as will shorter upper arms or longer lower arms. Ways to achieve this with stock parts using stock mounting points would be to use A body lower arms, F body disc spindles, and Moog offset upper arm bushings.

All depends on how much effort you want to put into it and how competitive you really want to be. With a full hvac system and a fully insulated passenger compartment, this doesn't appear to be a maximum effort build. Based on some other builds I've seen on the interwebs, I tend to wonder if a truly stock suspension car can really be competitive in the cam classes on a national level at all, but admit some ignorance of the specifics of the classes. Look these for a cam t class car being built on site here; front - http://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/ubbt...tml#Post2187270 and the rear - http://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/ubbt...tml#Post2193251

Top
#2219067 - 12/22/16 12:54 PM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: TC@HP2]
Viol8r Offline
super stock

Registered: 01/22/07
Posts: 780
Loc: Woodinville, WA
Originally Posted By TC@HP2
In my experience on cars with unequal length A arms, high static negative cambers numbers are only necessary for softly sprung cars that generate a lot of body roll and/or race on flat surfaces. Also, the unequal length arms create additional negative camber gain as they compress, so a -1* static could translate into a -3* dynamic at 3" of suspension travel depending on your upper/lower arm ratio. Ultimately, your tire temps will tell you what it wants.

Taller spindles will create additional negative camber gain as will shorter upper arms or longer lower arms. Ways to achieve this with stock parts using stock mounting points would be to use A body lower arms, F body disc spindles, and Moog offset upper arm bushings.

All depends on how much effort you want to put into it and how competitive you really want to be. With a full hvac system and a fully insulated passenger compartment, this doesn't appear to be a maximum effort build. Based on some other builds I've seen on the interwebs, I tend to wonder if a truly stock suspension car can really be competitive in the cam classes on a national level at all, but admit some ignorance of the specifics of the classes. Look these for a cam t class car being built on site here; front - http://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/ubbt...tml#Post2187270 and the rear - http://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/ubbt...tml#Post2193251


I will add that 3º with stock mounting points is not needed. We run a tubular QA1 front which uses mostly stock mounting points and we roll out of the shop for competition at 2.1º camber, 6.5º caster and 0 bump. This is at 5¾" ride height, 18"/ 275 front tire.

Unfortunately, for us ambitious Mopar guys winning at a big national level event is a rarity and mostly garage talk (with a streetable B-body). If you can really wheel and there is some heat in the track, you can touch 8th to 12th most likely.
_________________________
1968 Pro-Touring Dodge Charger
*2011 Optima Ultimate Street Car Challenge Invitee
http://www.popularhotrodding.com/features/1203phr_1968_dodge_charger/index.html

Top
#2219073 - 12/22/16 01:08 PM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: Viol8r]
CJD AUTOMOTIVE Offline
mopar

Registered: 09/08/08
Posts: 560
Loc: Florida
Originally Posted By Viol8r
Unfortunately, for us ambitious Mopar guys winning at a big national level event is a rarity and mostly garage talk (with a streetable B-body). If you can really wheel and there is some heat in the track, you can touch 8th to 12th most likely.


I'm going to see what I can do about that next year with my 'Cuda. Far from stock and stock suspension, but still a Mopar and still steetable.
_________________________
Craig Scholl
CJD Automotive, LLC
Jacksonville, FL
www.CJDAUTOMOTIVE.com
904-400-1802

"I own a Mopar. I already know it won't be in stock, won't ship tomorrow, and won't fit without modification"

Top
#2219079 - 12/22/16 01:20 PM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: CJD AUTOMOTIVE]
amxautox Offline
Still Retired. Still Posting on Moparts. A Lot.

Registered: 05/13/03
Posts: 96596
Loc: On The Boat, On The Lake, Wa. ...
Originally Posted By CJD AUTOMOTIVE
Originally Posted By Viol8r
Unfortunately, for us ambitious Mopar guys winning at a big national level event is a rarity and mostly garage talk (with a streetable B-body). If you can really wheel and there is some heat in the track, you can touch 8th to 12th most likely.


I'm going to see what I can do about that next year with my 'Cuda. Far from stock and stock suspension, but still a Mopar and still steetable.
Post videos. boogie

I wish I could afford to put something like your suspension setups on my AMX, but I can't, so I go fishing, aLOT. And it already has a fuel cell, just not that fancy of one. A standard steel one with foam.


Edited by amxautox (12/22/16 01:22 PM)
_________________________
Tom

"Everyone should believe in something; I believe I'll go fishing."

-Henry David Thoreau

Men and fish are alike. They both get into trouble when they open their mouths

author unknown


Top
#2219105 - 12/22/16 02:01 PM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: Bob J]
Bob J Offline
member

Registered: 11/16/16
Posts: 159
Loc: Colorado
Thanks guys that is what I was looking for. As for the insulation and HVAC that was installed before the project was stalled. The dynamat is getting thinned. I want to do well locally and I know that I have no chance at the nationals, not with a B body, no B body is a max build. I agree that a stock suspension will not set the nationals on fire. Not with the rules saying that suspension and motor builds are open. But locally you can do well and that is were I have been playing.
_________________________
07 Porsche C2 997.1 6spd DD and SCCA Solo II SS
68 Plymouth GTX Convert. 493cu Hotkiss Wilwood Classic air, Building for Solo II Cam
65 Chrysler 300 Convert. project
57 Desoto 2dr. Firesweep 392 Hemi,Wilwood Project with son
2003 Dodge Dakota R/T "DEAD"

Top
#2219238 - 12/22/16 06:21 PM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: Bob J]
Mopar Mitch Offline
super stock

Registered: 01/17/10
Posts: 1038
Loc: NW Chicago suburban area
The most critical issue with CAM class is to get your weight down... a Mopar TB suspension can do just fine and be highly competitive... I hope to someday get to the SCCA Nats... I used to attend in national competition running FS and ESP.... the ESP class is great... with some of the BEST ever historical competition for our pony/muscle cars, however, recently there has been some of the import cars (Subarus, Nissans, etc) classified and entering ... and they shouldn't be in that class of ESP... they are much smaller and physically advantaged in their handling over most all the America pony cars.

CAM class is also great... allowing engine mods etc... it was originally intended to attract the Pro-Street surge of cars. True reality is, that a well-setup ESP car can blow away most all Pro-Street cars.

A properly setup CAM car will be almost like an SCCA C/Prepared car, except ~street legal.
_________________________
Mopar Mitch "Road racers and autocrossers go in deeper and come out harder!"... and rain never stops us from having fun with our cars... in fact, it makes us better drivers! Check out MOPAR ACTION MAGAZINE, August 2006 issue for feature article and specs on my autocross T/A!

Top
#2222458 - 12/28/16 07:12 PM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: Viol8r]
Bob J Offline
member

Registered: 11/16/16
Posts: 159
Loc: Colorado
Originally Posted By Viol8r
Originally Posted By TC@HP2
In my experience on cars with unequal length A arms, high static negative cambers numbers are only necessary for softly sprung cars that generate a lot of body roll and/or race on flat surfaces. Also, the unequal length arms create additional negative camber gain as they compress, so a -1* static could translate into a -3* dynamic at 3" of suspension travel depending on your upper/lower arm ratio. Ultimately, your tire temps will tell you what it wants.

Taller spindles will create additional negative camber gain as will shorter upper arms or longer lower arms. Ways to achieve this with stock parts using stock mounting points would be to use A body lower arms, F body disc spindles, and Moog offset upper arm bushings.

All depends on how much effort you want to put into it and how competitive you really want to be. With a full hvac system and a fully insulated passenger compartment, this doesn't appear to be a maximum effort build. Based on some other builds I've seen on the interwebs, I tend to wonder if a truly stock suspension car can really be competitive in the cam classes on a national level at all, but admit some ignorance of the specifics of the classes. Look these for a cam t class car being built on site here; front - http://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/ubbt...tml#Post2187270 and the rear - http://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/ubbt...tml#Post2193251


I will add that 3º with stock mounting points is not needed. We run a tubular QA1 front which uses mostly stock mounting points and we roll out of the shop for competition at 2.1º camber, 6.5º caster and 0 bump. This is at 5¾" ride height, 18"/ 275 front tire.

Unfortunately, for us ambitious Mopar guys winning at a big national level event is a rarity and mostly garage talk (with a streetable B-body). If you can really wheel and there is some heat in the track, you can touch 8th to 12th most likely.


I was just reading the instructions for my LCA's from Hotchkis. You are in the ball park for what Hotchkis recommends. Sport -1 camber, caster +5 toe 1/8 toe in. Race -2.5 to -3 camber caster +5 to +7 and 0 toe. So this looks like -2.1 to -2.5 is a good starting point. I hope this clears a few things up I know it does for me.
_________________________
07 Porsche C2 997.1 6spd DD and SCCA Solo II SS
68 Plymouth GTX Convert. 493cu Hotkiss Wilwood Classic air, Building for Solo II Cam
65 Chrysler 300 Convert. project
57 Desoto 2dr. Firesweep 392 Hemi,Wilwood Project with son
2003 Dodge Dakota R/T "DEAD"

Top
#2222707 - 12/29/16 09:21 AM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: Bob J]
68rrunner Offline
member

Registered: 02/06/10
Posts: 149
Loc: Mountain View, CA
The most aggressive settings we run on the Road Runner and the Challenger is 2.7* Camber and 7-9* Caster. My "default" setting for the Road Runner is 2* Camber and 8* Caster. Very easy to obtain on a straight car with the full Hotchkis TVS.

Top
#2222731 - 12/29/16 10:22 AM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: 68rrunner]
Bob J Offline
member

Registered: 11/16/16
Posts: 159
Loc: Colorado
Originally Posted By 68rrunner
The most aggressive settings we run on the Road Runner and the Challenger is 2.7* Camber and 7-9* Caster. My "default" setting for the Road Runner is 2* Camber and 8* Caster. Very easy to obtain on a straight car with the full Hotchkis TVS.


Thank you for the information. I'm also running the full TVS system. My car was put on the frame machine before body work so it should be straight. I think that is the first thing that you should do is to have the car checked out before do much work.
_________________________
07 Porsche C2 997.1 6spd DD and SCCA Solo II SS
68 Plymouth GTX Convert. 493cu Hotkiss Wilwood Classic air, Building for Solo II Cam
65 Chrysler 300 Convert. project
57 Desoto 2dr. Firesweep 392 Hemi,Wilwood Project with son
2003 Dodge Dakota R/T "DEAD"

Top
#2252535 - 02/12/17 05:43 PM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: Bob J]
Bob J Offline
member

Registered: 11/16/16
Posts: 159
Loc: Colorado
It looks like I'm buying new caliper brackets for my Wilwood setup. I bought these about 10 years ago off of Ebay. The rotors and brackets don't match. So my question for the folks Autocrossing with the Hotchkis TVS setup. Should I go to the 2 inch drop spindles to get full suspension travel.
_________________________
07 Porsche C2 997.1 6spd DD and SCCA Solo II SS
68 Plymouth GTX Convert. 493cu Hotkiss Wilwood Classic air, Building for Solo II Cam
65 Chrysler 300 Convert. project
57 Desoto 2dr. Firesweep 392 Hemi,Wilwood Project with son
2003 Dodge Dakota R/T "DEAD"

Top
#2252891 - 02/13/17 09:41 AM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: Bob J]
68rrunner Offline
member

Registered: 02/06/10
Posts: 149
Loc: Mountain View, CA
I wouldn't unless you want the front end low. Like race car low. The optimum ride height to put your compression on the negative-gaining side of the camber curve; the car is plenty low for most folks.

Top
#2252956 - 02/13/17 12:02 PM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: 68rrunner]
Bob J Offline
member

Registered: 11/16/16
Posts: 159
Loc: Colorado
Originally Posted By 68rrunner
I wouldn't unless you want the front end low. Like race car low. The optimum ride height to put your compression on the negative-gaining side of the camber curve; the car is plenty low for most folks.

I was thinking that plus I already installed new ball joints and Wilwood hubs for my small bearing spindles. So the price tag would be about 1k extra to change spindles. This is what happens when you sit on a project to long.
_________________________
07 Porsche C2 997.1 6spd DD and SCCA Solo II SS
68 Plymouth GTX Convert. 493cu Hotkiss Wilwood Classic air, Building for Solo II Cam
65 Chrysler 300 Convert. project
57 Desoto 2dr. Firesweep 392 Hemi,Wilwood Project with son
2003 Dodge Dakota R/T "DEAD"

Top
#2253885 - 02/14/17 11:06 PM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: Mopar Mitch]
geo. Offline
member

Registered: 05/11/15
Posts: 119
Loc: n.c.
Originally Posted By Mopar Mitch
The most critical issue with CAM class is to get your weight down... a Mopar TB suspension can do just fine and be highly competitive... I hope to someday get to the SCCA Nats... I used to attend in national competition running FS and ESP.... the ESP class is great... with some of the BEST ever historical competition for our pony/muscle cars, however, recently there has been some of the import cars (Subarus, Nissans, etc) classified and entering ... and they shouldn't be in that class of ESP... they are much smaller and physically advantaged in their handling over most all the America pony cars.

CAM class is also great... allowing engine mods etc... it was originally intended to attract the Pro-Street surge of cars. True reality is, that a well-setup ESP car can blow away most all Pro-Street cars.

I'm sure you meant "Pro-Touring" though I'd like to see the owners reaction to being tagged "Pro-Street" smile
And I agree completely with your post!

A properly setup CAM car will be almost like an SCCA C/Prepared car, except ~street legal.

Top
#2254105 - 02/15/17 02:02 PM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: geo.]
Mopar Mitch Offline
super stock

Registered: 01/17/10
Posts: 1038
Loc: NW Chicago suburban area
geo -- yes, I meant Pro-Touring, per sa, T/Anks. Those cars (Pro-Touring and Pro-Street) are works of art to the owners, IMO, and that's OK... "...beauty is in the eyes of the beholder...". I lean towards choosing a club's set of "rules" to "compete" in for racing (HSAX, AX, HPDE, etc), and follow those rules in car preparation and build-up.. The Pro-scene (Touring/Street) can become an endless and huge financial investment, then only to find that such a car isn't so fast after all when compared to certain other less-modified car builds (which cost a lot less, in other words). Of course, the nut-behind-the-wheel" (driver's skill and experience) will make the biggest difference in a timed vehicle's performance.
_________________________
Mopar Mitch "Road racers and autocrossers go in deeper and come out harder!"... and rain never stops us from having fun with our cars... in fact, it makes us better drivers! Check out MOPAR ACTION MAGAZINE, August 2006 issue for feature article and specs on my autocross T/A!

Top
#2269594 - 03/14/17 07:30 PM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: Bob J]
Bob J Offline
member

Registered: 11/16/16
Posts: 159
Loc: Colorado
Front end almost done


Attachments
IMG_1225.JPG


_________________________
07 Porsche C2 997.1 6spd DD and SCCA Solo II SS
68 Plymouth GTX Convert. 493cu Hotkiss Wilwood Classic air, Building for Solo II Cam
65 Chrysler 300 Convert. project
57 Desoto 2dr. Firesweep 392 Hemi,Wilwood Project with son
2003 Dodge Dakota R/T "DEAD"

Top
#2269602 - 03/14/17 07:54 PM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: Bob J]
Bob J Offline
member

Registered: 11/16/16
Posts: 159
Loc: Colorado
I was trying to see how much tire that I could fit. This is a unmounted 285/30/18 high in the wheel well. So it looks like I'm taking the back of the car apart this weekend and start rebuilding the 8 3/4. This will take some time since I'm going to scrap the undercoating off. What a pain in the axx job. I have a new ring and pinon with clutch pack for the sure grip and all the bearings. With a new Wilwood setup.


Attachments
IMG_1235.JPG


_________________________
07 Porsche C2 997.1 6spd DD and SCCA Solo II SS
68 Plymouth GTX Convert. 493cu Hotkiss Wilwood Classic air, Building for Solo II Cam
65 Chrysler 300 Convert. project
57 Desoto 2dr. Firesweep 392 Hemi,Wilwood Project with son
2003 Dodge Dakota R/T "DEAD"

Top
#2269675 - 03/14/17 09:45 PM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: Bob J]
MuuMuu101 Offline
I got lucky at Woodward!

Registered: 12/12/10
Posts: 12235
Loc: Covina, Ca
How short is the 285/30/18 in your opinion? I've seen a guy fit it in the front of an A-body, but that's more than an inch shorter than my 255/40/18.
_________________________

68 Dart GT Project Thread: Linky!

Top
#2269766 - 03/14/17 11:32 PM Re: 68 GTX Autocross Build for CAM Class [Re: Bob J]
Bob J Offline
member

Registered: 11/16/16
Posts: 159
Loc: Colorado
It is a short tire 24.8" and a very stiff side wall. This is the RE71r that I ran last year on my 911. This lowered my top speed in 2nd. from 72 to 66 in the 911 with my 6 speed. I needed the gear ratio since I lose so much power up here a mile high. I'm looking at Rival S 315/30/18 that is 25.5" but now Hankook just came out with the RS4 with a set for the front 275/40/18 at 26.4" and 295/40/18 at 27.1". This looks like a good choice for size if the tire is any good. About 3 years ago the RS3 was the tire to have so we will see how the early test go. Someone will test these against the RE71r or Rival S like Grassroots motor sports mag.

So you can see from my picture that it is super short but it was what I had sitting in the garage to see if it would fit. That tire has a section width 11.4" and tread of 10.3". On the other hand the RS4 section width is 12.2" and a tread of 11". Once I put the rearend back together I will mock it up with the 295/30/19 Pilot Super Sports that I have on the back of my 911 and that has a section of 11.9" and tread of 11.5" and a 26" diameter. It will be a good mock up to see how it fits. I'm hoping that it does.


Attachments
IMG_1236 (3).JPG


_________________________
07 Porsche C2 997.1 6spd DD and SCCA Solo II SS
68 Plymouth GTX Convert. 493cu Hotkiss Wilwood Classic air, Building for Solo II Cam
65 Chrysler 300 Convert. project
57 Desoto 2dr. Firesweep 392 Hemi,Wilwood Project with son
2003 Dodge Dakota R/T "DEAD"

Top
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >

Advertisement
Sponsored Link
Forum Stats
25,351 Registered Members
32 Forums
190,315 Topics
2,220,541 Posts

Most users ever online: 1,424 @ 06/20/18 07:18 PM
Moparts Newest Topics
Intake bottom "pan" or "plate"
by DUFFMAN
06/24/18 04:08 PM
Any Mopar fanatics live in or near Ottawa Canada?
by Moparpete
06/24/18 04:06 PM
1971 Charger R/T fender tag question
by Purestocker
06/24/18 03:54 PM
SSBP discs: No room for grease cups
by General 68
06/24/18 01:46 PM