Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Leaf springs for a G-Machine application... #36046
04/24/07 11:00 PM
04/24/07 11:00 PM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,645
Houston, Tx
A
AlexP Offline OP
I Live Here
AlexP  Offline OP
I Live Here
A

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,645
Houston, Tx
The front suspension is falling into place on my car and I think it should perform well.

The suspension is looking to be set up like this so far..

-Energy Suspension polyurethane LCA, sway bar and strut rod bushings
-Moog LBJ's
-CAP Adjustable Tubular UCA's
-Moog 11/16" Tie rod ends
-Firm Feel Stage 3 box
-Moog Late B-pitman and idler arms
-1.22" Torsion bars
-Koni Adjustable shocks
-MP/Adcco 1.125" front sway bar

The torsion bars are a little bit bigger than I wanted, but the shocks should help alot in keeping them under control. I am a little excited to be a guinea pig for these bars, not alot of people have tried them. The alignment will be critical, I have still not yet figured that one out.

I can't decide what to do for the rear though.

I guess there are a few options, but all have their faults.

-MP XHD springs with a 7/8" rear sway bar.

My ride height remains the same, I can get a set for under $200 and they use my existing hangers. I don't know if the spring rate will be too tame in comparison to the front. This seems to make me the most comfortable.

-De-arched SS springs with the same sway bar.

E-berg used them on his Green Brick, and they worked very well. The MP chassis manual says that they can't be used for a turning application due to side loading, but the rebound of the spring (side to side motion) should be eliminated with the de-arch since it will be near flat like stock springs. Cost for the spring is the same and I have to get a set of different hangers. No biggie. I feel the spring rate on these will be fairly well matched to the front.

-Cal-tracs and the custom mono leaf springs

The most untested of the bunch. John Calvert thinks they would work well, and the springs would be custom matched to the car for the spring # and ride height. In his experience the bars them selves do about 75% of the work that the sway bar does. This is the most expensive option, but it is tailored to the car and offers a slight weight reduction.

I am trying to make the most of the cars handling abilities with the use of mostly stock components. IE; No tubular K-member with coilovers and no 4-link rear. Just over the counter stuff for the most part with some attention to detail. I think the biggest limiting factor in all of this will be the 15" wheel and tire combination, but I can live with that.

These are just my basic thought out ideas, please point out any faults or input any of your own ideas.

THANKS !


My Build thread: Let the hemi swap begin!

1968 wanna be pro touring whatchamacallit with some fancy stuff and a new roof skin.
Re: Leaf springs for a G-Machine application... [Re: AlexP] #36047
04/24/07 11:41 PM
04/24/07 11:41 PM
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,204
Fort Worth, TX
Clair_Davis Offline
master
Clair_Davis  Offline
master

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,204
Fort Worth, TX
On my Valiant(3600# with me, 3/4 tank of gas, spare & jack in the trunk, weight distribution is pretty good at 53/47 F/R), the 6-leaf HD reproduction springs I got from ESPO are great. The rate "eyeballs" at about 150#/in, roughly half the rate of my 1.14" t-bars. I think some of the SS springs are in this ballpark, some are lighter. I would try to get SOME info on the spring rate before you buy, but I wasn't so lucky. ESPO doesn't know the rates on their springs, but I took a chance anyway. I didn't want to rearch a set of springs after I got them, so I adjust ride height with an AREngineering front hanger. ESPO can build whatever spring you want, and can increase or decrease arch when they're built. Cost difference is minimal, like $40 or something.

Since not much of this is going where you wanted it to go, I'll say that without a rear sway bar, my car feels pretty dang neutral on "spirited" on/off ramps, and the turn-in is so good it actually surprises me. Too much time in a FWD farm implement, I guess. My advice would be to hold off on the rear bar until you've been in the seat for a while. That doesn't mean don't get it, if you're itchin' to spend money, just don't hook it up right off the bat.

In the end, I'd probably go with the MP XHD's, if they're a quality part. I've heard some negative experiences here on Moparts, so check that out first. The parts I got from ESPO have been great, and the price was good.

On the alignment, start out with 3+ degrees +caster, 0.5 to 0.75* -camber, and just a smidge of toe in, like 1/32" if the front end is fresh. More caster is better, but you can probably stop at 5 or so if you have the ability to get like 7. Not sure how much your UCA's will net you.

Clair

Re: Leaf springs for a G-Machine application... [Re: AlexP] #36048
04/24/07 11:51 PM
04/24/07 11:51 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,486
Freeport IL USA
poorboy Offline
I Live Here
poorboy  Offline
I Live Here

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,486
Freeport IL USA
From your discription of the front suspension, it sounds like you plan on turning some corners pretty hard. With that in mind, personally, the caltracks would be out. I think the way they are set up would put some real binds on the mono leaf under hard cornering, enough to scare me.

Along the same lines, I would think that by de-arching the SS springs, you are going to loose any advantage they may have over the stock HD springs, esspecially once you throw a rear sway bar into the mix. The shorter SS springs aren't going to help much in the cornering either.

I'd do the HD springs, sway bar, and some good rear shocks. Might consider adding an extra leaf to the spring packs and also adding spring clamps on each leaf end on both of the front segments. Be carefull about flattening out the rear leaf springs too much, if one drops past center and the other doesn't, it can shift the rear axle. Gene

Re: Leaf springs for a G-Machine application... [Re: Clair_Davis] #36049
04/24/07 11:56 PM
04/24/07 11:56 PM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,645
Houston, Tx
A
AlexP Offline OP
I Live Here
AlexP  Offline OP
I Live Here
A

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,645
Houston, Tx
Espo is questionable in my eyes. I sent them an email last week and they gave me the worst response that I have ever gotten from a vendor. I don't know how well they truly "know" their product.

I am not opposed to putting out the money in stages. I think the front end set up may eliminate most of the factory induced under steer. If I can get controllable power over steer, I could feel pretty content without a rear bar.

I think while some guys really have gotten a lower-quality part with the XHD springs, I have the feeling that most were not pleased with the fact that they didn't raise the ride height in the rear. For me, that isn't an issue.

Thus far, the XHD's are winning.

On a side note, what would be the consequence of getting two of the same sided leaf springs ? What motion does the extra leaf on one side control ? This was an early morning thought from a few weeks ago that has been nagging me. What if I got two of the 'extra leaf' springs and used those ?


My Build thread: Let the hemi swap begin!

1968 wanna be pro touring whatchamacallit with some fancy stuff and a new roof skin.
Re: Leaf springs for a G-Machine application... [Re: AlexP] #36050
04/25/07 12:56 AM
04/25/07 12:56 AM
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 797
WA
P
pro451bee Offline
super stock
pro451bee  Offline
super stock
P

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 797
WA
A rear sway bar will be more effective at controlling engine torque than the 6 /7 leaf setup in my experiance . I found some clean 6 leaf units from station wagon for my super bee , put poly bushings in them and HD shackles from Magnum HP , oh ya and fliped the front hanger to lower some cause it looked like a stinkbug ,and a 3/4 rear sway bar and the car rocks now .Poly in the spring eye works very well ,helps steering precision drasticly .The car will not botom out and hooks nicley , KYB shocks for now . I chose to use the .96 T bars and thats firm enough for me with poly strut rod bushings and tubular upper arms ,4* castor and .5 camber .I want to have firmfeel do up my K frame next .

Re: Leaf springs for a G-Machine application... [Re: AlexP] #36051
04/25/07 08:08 AM
04/25/07 08:08 AM
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,204
Fort Worth, TX
Clair_Davis Offline
master
Clair_Davis  Offline
master

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,204
Fort Worth, TX
Quote:

Espo is questionable in my eyes. I sent them an email last week and they gave me the worst response that I have ever gotten from a vendor. I don't know how well they truly "know" their product.

...

I think the front end set up may eliminate most of the factory induced under steer. If I can get controllable power over steer, I could feel pretty content without a rear bar.

...

On a side note, what would be the consequence of getting two of the same sided leaf springs ? What motion does the extra leaf on one side control ? This was an early morning thought from a few weeks ago that has been nagging me. What if I got two of the 'extra leaf' springs and used those ?




Not knowing what ESPO said, it's hard for me to imagine them screwing up what they do with springs. I think they have some pretty standard shop drawings, and then add/subtract/arch to the customer's request. Very little detailed info comes from them (which is too bad).

The front setup you're going for will INCREASE understeer, all else being equal. That's why you need to get a feel for what the rear end will do with the new springs. I found the unknown-quantity higher-rate rear springs to be a good match for the front bars on my Valiant, but only by accident. The rate is much lower than some successful autoXers I know, so I was a little worried at first. I have an ADDCO rear bar - in the rafters of the garage. Once I determine that I need it, I'll put it on, but I don't have the need now.

The extra leaf controls axle wrap on the one side of the car. Two extras makes a balanced pair, side to side, that's all. Power oversteer is controlled by your right foot, not the sway bar. Adding right foot to a tail-happy car could get un-fun pretty quickly.

Clair

Re: Leaf springs for a G-Machine application... [Re: AlexP] #36052
04/25/07 09:48 AM
04/25/07 09:48 AM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,688
Marlboro, NY, USA
R
Rick_Ehrenberg Offline
top fuel
Rick_Ehrenberg  Offline
top fuel
R

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,688
Marlboro, NY, USA
Biggest problem I see here is a F/R roll rate unbalance. Unless you go with 12-leaf truck rear springs (kidding), the car sure sounds like it will understeer. I'm not sure what exactly you'll be using the car for...I'm an old fart and I guess I don't quite understand the term "G Machine". If the car will be used on short tracks, especially, you'd want the car pretty loose. Mild looseness is also fun on a canyon carver. But as speeds increase - like Silver State - your setup gets closer and closer to spot-on! All these cars (classic Mopars) have less and less understeer as speeds increase.

On the rear leafs: I've played with some of the Espo and Eaton springs, all seem quite good. The Eatons, in fact, were like factory XHDs: plastic interliners at the tips of each leaf, PLUS zinc interleafs! But getting the right rate and arch can be a daunting task.

On one car I built recently - one that was intended as more of a cruiser, an early B-body - I used A-body MP XHD repro leafs; I was worried that the car was gonna sit TOO low and be too soft. WRONG. In fact, overall, I'd have to say that I'm impressed with them - it was the first pair of 'em that I've used in about 10 years. But I think that the probably aren't stiff enough to counterbalance your killer front end.

Monoleafs without some add-on control arm are useless. And I don't know enough about Cal-Tracs to comment on using them in a handling application...basically, I defer to those who have hands-on (tires-on/) experience.

Which brings us to MP S/S springs: First, if I were to duplicate my Valiant today, I'd absolutely use another pair of dearched S/S's. But this time I'd use 2 right side springs. And I'd surely stay with quadrashocks for axle windup control.

The nice thing about the S/S springs is that they are made in four spring rates. Good, because unless you're the kind of guy who goes to Vegas, wins $10K on the first try and walks, you might well need a couple of attempts to get it right.

Which brings me to the bottom line: It's really tough to do this kind of engineering / planning on paper. Even the most sophisticated engineering firms (British Midlands) and automakers use computer programs to get in the ballpark, but then go to a heavily instrumented 4-post hydraulic table - and the street and track - to get it really dialed in.

Rick

Re: Leaf springs for a G-Machine application... [Re: Clair_Davis] #36053
04/25/07 10:46 AM
04/25/07 10:46 AM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,645
Houston, Tx
A
AlexP Offline OP
I Live Here
AlexP  Offline OP
I Live Here
A

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,645
Houston, Tx
Quote:

Quote:

Espo is questionable in my eyes. I sent them an email last week and they gave me the worst response that I have ever gotten from a vendor. I don't know how well they truly "know" their product.

...

I think the front end set up may eliminate most of the factory induced under steer. If I can get controllable power over steer, I could feel pretty content without a rear bar.

...

On a side note, what would be the consequence of getting two of the same sided leaf springs ? What motion does the extra leaf on one side control ? This was an early morning thought from a few weeks ago that has been nagging me. What if I got two of the 'extra leaf' springs and used those ?




Not knowing what ESPO said, it's hard for me to imagine them screwing up what they do with springs. I think they have some pretty standard shop drawings, and then add/subtract/arch to the customer's request. Very little detailed info comes from them (which is too bad).

The front setup you're going for will INCREASE understeer, all else being equal. That's why you need to get a feel for what the rear end will do with the new springs. I found the unknown-quantity higher-rate rear springs to be a good match for the front bars on my Valiant, but only by accident. The rate is much lower than some successful autoXers I know, so I was a little worried at first. I have an ADDCO rear bar - in the rafters of the garage. Once I determine that I need it, I'll put it on, but I don't have the need now.

The extra leaf controls axle wrap on the one side of the car. Two extras makes a balanced pair, side to side, that's all. Power oversteer is controlled by your right foot, not the sway bar. Adding right foot to a tail-happy car could get un-fun pretty quickly.

Clair




I am getting that the distinct feeling that using the 1.22" bars is going to make matching of components near impossible without trial and error.

Clair, thanks for righting my comments. I need as much help thinking this through as possible.

Rick, Ideally I would like to be able to run the short track stuff like the tracks available in this area. Events such as the Silverstate are not the type of action I am after, my car would fall apart if I kept it above 100 for a few miles.

All in all, I am looking to have a few steps up in terms of a controllable mopar. If I could get 1" bars, I think the match of XHD springs would be almost perfect in terms of balance for the car.


My Build thread: Let the hemi swap begin!

1968 wanna be pro touring whatchamacallit with some fancy stuff and a new roof skin.
Re: Leaf springs for a G-Machine application... [Re: AlexP] #36054
04/25/07 02:27 PM
04/25/07 02:27 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
T
TC@HP2 Offline
master
TC@HP2  Offline
master
T

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
Roll couple is the term that is used to describe the amount of load each end of the car is going to need to handle. Since there is more weight on the front, you want more roll couple % on the front to control it. This is why you would go with higher wheel rates up front. Wheel rates are measured directly at the tire contact patch on the ground and are a combination of the torsion bar and sway bar up front and the leaf spring and sway bar out back.

You are going with the highest over the counter wheel rates possible on the nose of your car. You will need a corresponding increase in the rear to match it. As such, you could go with the stock XHD springs at approx 140# spring rate, (actually less than that at the wheel once motion ratios are applied) they are quite a bit under the 300# wheel rate the t-bars produce (not including the sway bar mulitplication), so you may need a 3/4 to 1 inch rear sway bar to match things up, depending on your personal preference for under/oversteer.

Another option to consider is going to an oval track supplier such as Speedway Motors and buying leafs designed for turning corners. You can buy specific spring rates from 80 to 200 pounds in monoleaf steel, monoleaf fiberglass, or multileaf steel configurations. When buying these types of springs you will need to specify the free arch you want. 4" should be about right as once they are installed and loaded, they will lie flat.

Again, consideration of using a rear sway bar will factor into deciding the springs to get. In general I'd say go softer then add sway bar sizing to dial things in or you could go heavier and not use a bar at all. For a ball park guess, I'd say 160# if using a bar, or 200# with no bar.

For a point of comparison, Mopar's oval track leaf springs are 120# and are completely flat when installed. These are recommended for use with torsion bars up to 1.16 with a 1" sway bar and no rear sway bar. The XHD springs are in the 140# range, SS springs are typically 160#. However, the SS springs also have a fair amount of arch to them which is great for the starting line leverage required for drag racing, but not great for round the corner handling.

Personally, I don't think a 1.22 is that radical for a performance handling application. By comparison, the 300# wheel rate these produce would be along the lines of a 600# coil spring in a GM. There are a lot of Camaros out there running 600# springs in the G-machine genre. When I was running oval track, we routinly used 800 and 1000 pound springs up front with 160 to 200 pounders out back. I also liked the car plenty loose and this got it there.

Re: Monoleaf springs for a G-Machine application... [Re: TC@HP2] #36055
04/25/07 04:10 PM
04/25/07 04:10 PM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,688
Marlboro, NY, USA
R
Rick_Ehrenberg Offline
top fuel
Rick_Ehrenberg  Offline
top fuel
R

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,688
Marlboro, NY, USA
Quote:

<snip>....going to an oval track supplier such as Speedway Motors and buying leafs designed for turning corners. You can buy specific spring rates from 80 to 200 pounds in monoleaf steel, monoleaf fiberglass....<snip>




Ah, yes, who wouldn't love the reduced mass? But monoleafs are terrible at windup control (launches, or heavy braking forces), and Chrysler Engineering has tested nearly every composite / fiberglass leaf out there - they desperately wanted to use them on minivans, where the rear axle is just along for the ride. But every one failed durability testing (at the "ends", not surprisingly) so they seem to be good only for single-purpose race cars, not street cruisers that actually might hit a pothole.

Rick

Re: Spring/Wheel rate [Re: TC@HP2] #36056
04/25/07 04:23 PM
04/25/07 04:23 PM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,688
Marlboro, NY, USA
R
Rick_Ehrenberg Offline
top fuel
Rick_Ehrenberg  Offline
top fuel
R

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,688
Marlboro, NY, USA
Quote:

...Personally, I don't think a 1.22 is that radical for a performance handling application. By comparison, the 300# wheel rate these produce would be along the lines of a 600# coil spring in a GM. There are a lot of Camaros out there running 600# springs in the G-machine genre. When I was running oval track, we routinly used 800 and 1000 pound springs up front with 160 to 200 pounders out back. I also liked the car plenty loose and this got it there...




This may well be true. But on a stock Camaro with a bolt-on subframe, there's typically such a lack of torsional rigidity in the platform that, once a certain point (in spring rate) is reached, it really doesn't matter how stiff you make the springs! That, in my experience, is not true for full-unibody Mopars.

Of course, as you mentioned, weight distribution / bias is a key factor in setting this up. I've always tried to keep the weight as close to 50/50 as possible, which, of course, is a common goal.

I've never been a fan of large rear swaybars (mind you, I'm not talking race car, I'm talking canyon carver / street driver). Unless extreme care is taken to reduce or eliminate their progressiveness (solid frame mounts, ball joint or heim joint "ends"), the car may transition from understeer to oversteer at the most inopportune moment. While you'd think that multi-leaf rear springs would also be quite progressive, in reality it doesn't seem to be so. Probably this because, unlike truck leafs, all leafs are already in contact with each other at normal ride height.

I think we all agree, however, that this is still a black trial-and-error art!

Rick

Re: Spring/Wheel rate [Re: Rick_Ehrenberg] #36057
04/25/07 07:52 PM
04/25/07 07:52 PM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,645
Houston, Tx
A
AlexP Offline OP
I Live Here
AlexP  Offline OP
I Live Here
A

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,645
Houston, Tx
More and more I see Camaro guys using stock 5 leaf springs, Koni's and Cal-tracs with no rear bars.

Quote:

Koni shocks

factory 5 leaf rear springs

front 2" lowered springs from DSE

Cal Trac traction bars

PST super kit

1" sway bar by PST








My Build thread: Let the hemi swap begin!

1968 wanna be pro touring whatchamacallit with some fancy stuff and a new roof skin.
Re: Spring/Wheel rate [Re: AlexP] #36058
04/25/07 08:41 PM
04/25/07 08:41 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,630
Burma Shave
plymouthfan Offline
top fuel
plymouthfan  Offline
top fuel

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,630
Burma Shave
Have you considered something like this Street Lynx system A Body Joe just installed?

https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/show...part=1&vc=1


One red car, one yellow car.
Re: Spring/Wheel rate [Re: plymouthfan] #36059
04/25/07 10:28 PM
04/25/07 10:28 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,394
The Pale Blue Dot
Skeptic Offline
master
Skeptic  Offline
master

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,394
The Pale Blue Dot
Quote:

I am trying to make the most of the cars handling abilities with the use of mostly stock components. IE; No tubular K-member with coilovers and no 4-link rear. Just over the counter stuff for the most part with some attention to detail. I think the biggest limiting factor in all of this will be the 15" wheel and tire combination, but I can live with that.




Quote:

Have you considered something like this Street Lynx system A Body Joe just installed?



Re: Leaf springs for a G-Machine application... [Re: AlexP] #36060
04/26/07 07:28 AM
04/26/07 07:28 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,836
Detroit boy in Saugerties, NY
BrianShaughnessy Offline
master
BrianShaughnessy  Offline
master

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,836
Detroit boy in Saugerties, NY
Quote:


-Cal-tracs and the custom mono leaf springs

The most untested of the bunch. John Calvert thinks they would work well, and the springs would be custom matched to the car for the spring # and ride height. In his experience the bars them selves do about 75% of the work that the sway bar does. This is the most expensive option, but it is tailored to the car and offers a slight weight reduction.






I'd agree with Johns assessment of the caltracs. I like my caltracs. I just run the stock R/T springs but I really haven't seen a need for me to run a rear bar yet.

I upgraded to a FFI 1.125 front bar. Haven't had a chance to really road test it yet.

I'm not trying to run autocross or anything... I just live in a area north of Rick where straight roads just don't exist.

The caltracs were necessary due to the truck dana 60 without pinion snubber provisions.


Black Betty: '69 Charger RT: 440 6 pack, TKO600 5 speed, 3.73 Dana.
Sinnamon: '69 Charger RT: 440, 727, 4.30 8.75. High School Sweetheart.
El Grande: '98 Grand Cherokee 5.9 Limited.
Re: Spring/Wheel rate [Re: Skeptic] #36061
04/26/07 08:54 AM
04/26/07 08:54 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,630
Burma Shave
plymouthfan Offline
top fuel
plymouthfan  Offline
top fuel

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,630
Burma Shave
Quote:

Quote:

I am trying to make the most of the cars handling abilities with the use of mostly stock components. IE; No tubular K-member with coilovers and no 4-link rear. Just over the counter stuff for the most part with some attention to detail. I think the biggest limiting factor in all of this will be the 15" wheel and tire combination, but I can live with that.




Quote:

Have you considered something like this Street Lynx system A Body Joe just installed?






My bad I got sucked in reading all the suggestions and forgot the basic idea of the thread


One red car, one yellow car.
Re: Spring/Wheel rate [Re: plymouthfan] #36062
04/26/07 09:32 AM
04/26/07 09:32 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,394
The Pale Blue Dot
Skeptic Offline
master
Skeptic  Offline
master

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,394
The Pale Blue Dot
No biggie, I've been wanting that 4 link myself, but just getting my Barracuda road ready again is just now in the budget.

Re: Spring/Wheel rate [Re: plymouthfan] #36063
04/26/07 09:56 AM
04/26/07 09:56 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,336
central New Jersey
D
dbdartman Offline
master
dbdartman  Offline
master
D

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,336
central New Jersey
I'm loving this thread & soaking it up like a sponge!

Like Clair, I built my suspension using intuition & "best guess" technology. Again, like Clair my Dart seems incredibly well balanced in 270° 20-25MPH on/off ramps (both front & rear seem to lose lateral traction at the same time around 55-60MPH). I guess we both got real lucky...

I should be able to give some comment on the mono-leaf/cal-track combo this time next year as we're installing this in my bro's 69 B-body wagon (already has 1.16" 1/2-mile banked track T-bars, 1.125" front sway bar & Koni shocks, limiting factor is still the 255/60/15's).

Alex, if you PM me your phone #, I'll be happy to talk about what I know & have done (wont' cost me, have unlimited L/D at any time) at your convenience.

Re: Spring/Wheel rate [Re: AlexP] #36064
04/26/07 07:44 PM
04/26/07 07:44 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
T
TC@HP2 Offline
master
TC@HP2  Offline
master
T

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
Quote:

More and more I see Camaro guys using stock 5 leaf springs, Koni's and Cal-tracs with no rear bars.








Don't get too wrapped up in the 5 leaf vs 6 leaf vs 7 leaf. The leaf count is only part of the equation and it is entirely possible ot have a 5 leaf pack that is equal in rate to a 7 leaf pack. Thickness of the leaves, end design, interliners, steel alloy as well as leaf count can all be factors in the overall rating

Re: Spring/Wheel rate [Re: plymouthfan] #36065
04/27/07 10:50 AM
04/27/07 10:50 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
T
TC@HP2 Offline
master
TC@HP2  Offline
master
T

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
Quote:

Have you considered something like this Street Lynx system A Body Joe just installed?

https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/show...part=1&vc=1




This is a very nice set up. while the coil over change allows a greater range of spring rates and the link arrangment is somewhat lighter than leaf springs, it doesn't have any adjustment in it for roll center alterations. Not that this is a big deal for most guys as once it is set, they learn to live with it and they never run it in varying track conditions that require tunability. However, with a few simpler mods than this system requires, leaf springs can be set up to have changeable roll centers which can then be used to alter the amount of rear bite you need in your set up.

Page 1 of 2 1 2






Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1