Quote:

---

Hi!

I have been looking and the Alterktion front end kit and also they new rear suspension kit with triangulated 4 bars and coil overs.

I want o build a modern day musclecar with a viper drivetrain.

I was wondering if the front and rear Alterktion suspension and steering will make an old musclecar like an an E body or 68-69 Charger handle real good like a newer car.

Or will handling be just marginally improved over stock?

I would plan on doing some majour unibody stffening, maybe even a full cage, and the front and rear alterktion kit plus some real good brakes and 17" o 18" wheels with some serious tires.

I dont want to spend a ton on suspoension mods, a 500 hp modern drivertain, a 6 speed....and end up having thrown a lot of money on a car that looks cool but handles like a bulldozer.

If that will be the case, Id rather just keep it old school, which is cool as well.....and just get a newer car like a 2010 Camaro, Newer Challenger, or a vette.

I wonder how an old E body with all the tricks would stand against a 2009 Challenger.

Opinions????

---

Quote:

---

I want o build a modern day musclecar with a viper drivetrain.

---

For chassis fitment for a Viper V10 motor with headers, exhausts, oil pan... Something like an alterkion is really the way to go. Probably the only way to go really, beyond the handling aspect of it.

But sure it will handle great with choosing the good shocks, 6 piston caliper option, and some stiff springs.

I don't think the rear link is as big a benefit for your particular situation as the front. But finding the right leaf springs can be expensive. A link rear can be adjusted easier, if you know what you what and why you are adjusting it. Also springs can be swapped easier and cheaper, same for front too. The link rear probably fits your "build" and "theme" also.

Will it handles as good as a stock SRT-8 Challenger? If you can get it to weigh 500 lbs less and get as wide or wider rubber on it, it may be able to generate as good skid pad numbers. It most likey will not be as "refined".

It will not ride as quiet or smooth as the SRT-8. The Challenger as an independent rear that help ride a lot. And it does'nt have a B piller to support the window, nor as tight of body structure, nor an interior made of trash can material .

If you really want to most modern best of all worlds deal IHMO you need to look into a XV level 2 full bore deal.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Hi!

I have been looking and the Alterktion front end kit and also they new rear suspension kit with triangulated 4 bars and coil overs.

I want o build a modern day musclecar with a viper drivetrain.

I was wondering if the front and rear Alterktion suspension and steering will make an old musclecar like an an E body or 68-69 Charger handle real good like a newer car.

Or will handling be just marginally improved over stock?

I would plan on doing some majour unibody stffening, maybe even a full cage, and the front and rear alterktion kit plus some real good brakes and 17" o 18" wheels with some serious tires.

I dont want to spend a ton on suspoension mods, a 500 hp modern drivertain, a 6 speed....and end up having thrown a lot of money on a car that looks cool but handles like a bulldozer.

If that will be the case, Id rather just keep it old school, which is cool as well.....and just get a newer car like a 2010 Camaro, Newer Challenger, or a vette.

I wonder how an old E body with all the tricks would stand against a 2009 Challenger.

Opinions????

---

Quote:

---

I want o build a modern day musclecar with a viper drivetrain.

---

For chassis fitment for a Viper V10 motor with headers, exhausts, oil pan... Something like an alterkion is really the way to go. Probably the only way to go really, beyond the handling aspect of it.

But sure it will handle great with choosing the good shocks, 6 piston caliper option, and some stiff springs.

I don't think the rear link is as big a benefit for your particular situation as the front. But finding the right leaf springs can be expensive. A link rear can be adjusted easier, if you know what you what and why you are adjusting it. Also springs can be swapped easier and cheaper, same for front too. The link rear probably fits your "build" and "theme" also.

Will it handles as good as a stock SRT-8 Challenger? If you can get it to weigh 500 lbs less and get as wide or wider rubber on it, it may be able to generate as good skid pad numbers. It most likey will not be as "refined".

It will not ride as quiet or smooth as the SRT-8. The Challenger as an independent rear that help ride a lot. And it does'nt have a B piller to support the window, nor as tight of body structure, nor an interior made of trash can material .

If you really want to most modern best of all worlds deal IHMO you need to look into a XV level 2 full bore deal.

---

Quote:

---

Im pretty sure I could make it a lot ligter than a new Challenger. Also, fitting big wheels and tires would not be a problem. I am not afraid to fab and modify at all.

I woudl most certainly get rid of the body flex via mist probably a full cage.

Why XV over Alterk? I know this has been beat to death, but really, I have never heard any solid facts.

---

Quote:

---

I wonder how an old E body with all the tricks would stand against a 2009 Challenger.

---

Quote:

---

I not too thrilled about the use of pinto/mustang 2 spindles on the alterktion kit as those cars never were designed to handle.

On the plus side just about everything in the aftermarket in the past was design to fit them as well as use the rack and pinion off of one.

---

Quote:

---

Actually the Alterktion was made to improve handling AND header clearance.

---

Quote:

---

I not too thrilled about the use of pinto/mustang 2 spindles on the alterktion kit as those cars never were designed to handle.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I not too thrilled about the use of pinto/mustang 2 spindles on the alterktion kit as those cars never were designed to handle.

On the plus side just about everything in the aftermarket in the past was design to fit them as well as use the rack and pinion off of one.

---

It's just the spindle not the whole car. You just design around it.

They raced Pintos in like IMSA in the 70's ageing Datsun 510's, Gremlins, Alfa's?.

---

That is exactly my point.

Of those cars none are 3800 lbs. all are under 3000 lbs. most have a race weight which was under 2300 lbs.

The other problem is exactly as you stated you have to design the whole car around the spindle itself and from what I remembered the spindle height is not ideally suited for a car made to handle.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Actually the Alterktion was made to improve handling AND header clearance.

---

where did you get that from? it was built to handle and with the weight savings and header clearance along with how well it works, its found its way to the drag strip.

Quote:

---

I not too thrilled about the use of pinto/mustang 2 spindles on the alterktion kit as those cars never were designed to handle.

---

whats so bad about the spindles? they aren't actually off a ford product. plus they are modified. bill thought about using mopar spindles but there were no real brake options out there at the time for a mopar spindle. and if there was it was very expensive. with the stang spindles it opens the doors to a ton of aftermarket brake options and the front end geometry is correct.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Actually the Alterktion was made to improve handling AND header clearance.

---

where did you get that from? it was built to handle and with the weight savings and header clearance along with how well it works, its found its way to the drag strip.

---

IIRC when I first talked to him, what led him down the path of the alterkion was the issues with installing big blocks in A-bodies. Hence the name of his site. One of the concerns he had with a big block in an A-body is headers. At the time TTI's were sort of new. And even they are tight. This would be 1997/98??

At that time he was trying to decide on a computer suspension program to buy and design his first alterkion. His idea was to design it right with full attention to handling. And to have it modular for various motor and handling upgrades to boot.

Quote:

---

This would be 1997/98??

---

Quote:

---

That is exactly my point.

Of those cars none are 3800 lbs. all are under 3000 lbs. most have a race weight which was under 2300 lbs.

The other problem is exactly as you stated you have to design the whole car around the spindle itself and from what I remembered the spindle height is not ideally suited for a car made to handle.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

This would be 1997/98??

---

Tech from 10 years ago.

Sorry if it seems I'm trying to bag on his work. I'm not trying to. I'm sure it is good and in many ways better than stock. Like many things it is a compromise, and you make the best with what you have currently.

---

Quote:

---

The suspension geometry tech hasn't changed. Bump steer, scrub radius, camber change, roll center, roll center change, caster change, anti dive... Same now and same then.


...These are good issues/topic/questions to bring to discussion.

---

Quote:

---

But there are trade offs with each design, for example the is not as much camber gain with the alterkation. Not that everyone believes you need so much. Plus wheel offset is limited.

---

Quote:

---

Then again with the XV I believe you are limited to 18" and above for wheels as the spindle height (I believe that is the limiting factor for them) prevents anything smaller.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

But there are trade offs with each design, for example the is not as much camber gain with the alterkation. Not that everyone believes you need so much. Plus wheel offset is limited.

---

Not as much camber gain as what? Does he publish a comparison?

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Then again with the XV I believe you are limited to 18" and above for wheels as the spindle height (I believe that is the limiting factor for them) prevents anything smaller.

---

Theres alway compromises with this suspension stuff. And there are often two or more different ways to get to the same place.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Not as much camber gain as what? Does he publish a comparison?

---

He meaning who?

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Theres alway compromises with this suspension stuff. And there are often two or more different ways to get to the same place.

---

I.e. Guldstrand vs. Herb Adams?

---

Quote:

---

Hi!

I have been looking and the Alterktion front end kit and also they new rear suspension kit with triangulated 4 bars and coil overs.

I want o build a modern day musclecar with a viper drivetrain.

I was wondering if the front and rear Alterktion suspension and steering will make an old musclecar like an an E body or 68-69 Charger handle real good like a newer car.

Or will handling be just marginally improved over stock?

I would plan on doing some majour unibody stffening, maybe even a full cage, and the front and rear alterktion kit plus some real good brakes and 17" o 18" wheels with some serious tires.

I dont want to spend a ton on suspoension mods, a 500 hp modern drivertain, a 6 speed....and end up having thrown a lot of money on a car that looks cool but handles like a bulldozer.

If that will be the case, Id rather just keep it old school, which is cool as well.....and just get a newer car like a 2010 Camaro, Newer Challenger, or a vette.

I wonder how an old E body with all the tricks would stand against a 2009 Challenger.

Opinions????

---

Quote:

---

If you want to retain a stock look and get the positive caster back for your car. We just developed an adjustable strut rod that you can install in about an hour that will do both. Here is some info:

NEW FOR MOPARS – Developed by DIXIE RESTORATION PARTS

ADJUSTABLE STRUT RODS FOR A, B, & E, BODIES

“ GET YOUR CASTER BACK”

OVER ONE INCH OF ADJUSTMENT TO GET BACK THE CASTER LOST BY INSTALLING POLYGRAPHITE OR POLYURETHANE ON SOME APPLICATIONS.

“BENEFITS”

* “NEW” MADE FROM VERY HIGH STRENGTH ¾ INCH MATERIAL
* UP TO 5 TIMES STRONGER THAN STOCK RODS
* MADE TO PERCISION SPECS., FOR STOCK LOOK AND FIT “ JUST LIKE FACTORY RODS”
* NO NEED FOR OFFSET UPPER CONTROL ARM BUSHINGS
* NO NEED TO BUY EXPENSIVE AFTER MARKET ARMS WITH HIEMS ENDS
* EASY TO INSTALL
* MADE IN THE USA BY CERTIFIED CAR NUTS TO ENSURE HIGH QUALITY

For you guys running larger than stock wheel tire combos, the forces exerted on your suspension during cornering is much greater with larger tires/wheels than the stock strut rods were designed for. These improved rods will easily handle those forces and allow for a more stable car at high speeds if you desire to adjust it as such.

If you want more info, call us or email us and we'll be glad to help. We sold out of all the ones we brought to both Carlisle and the Nats. You can use any brand bushing you want.

Thanks,
Randy

---

Quote:

---

Yours are not the first.

---

Alot of the Australian Mopars came that way factory actually.....

Quote:

---

Many of those claims you make are off base.

Adjustable strut rods with bushings ARE a nice way to add some extra adjustment to your car for alignment.

There have been others that offer adjustable strut rods. Yours are not the first.

The stock forged strut rods have been fine strength-wise and proven in many cars that develop high cornering forces. Including dedicated track cars. Tim W with 275 wide sticky race tires has not broken or bent a stock strut rod. You might if you hit something you shouldn’t have.

The strut rods takes most of the forces from braking along with the upper control arm. Not much side load goes through the strut arm.

And adjustable strut rod is nice for fine tuning alignment. But relying on an adjustable lower control for all your caster adjustment could add to other issues.

Shortening the strut rod forward reduces the clearance between the tire to front lower wheelwell. This is the area most all older mopar run into tire rubbing in the front. If you shorten the strut rod 1", the tire clearance will be reduced at least 1/2". A litte more than 1/2" because the axle centerline is a little closer to the lower ball joint (LBJ) than the upper ball joint (UBJ).

When you use offset bushings or a tubular upper control arm made to add caster the UBJ moves back and actually increases tire clearance.

Also shortening the strut rod too much will twist the LCA bushings. The rubber can take more misalignmen, but the polyurethane LCA bushing is just a plain bearing. If you pull the LCA forward too much with an adjustable strut rod you will twist on the polyurethane LCA bushing. Might oblong the bushing.

Quote:

---

If you want to retain a stock look and get the positive caster back for your car. We just developed an adjustable strut rod that you can install in about an hour that will do both. Here is some info:

NEW FOR MOPARS – Developed by DIXIE RESTORATION PARTS

ADJUSTABLE STRUT RODS FOR A, B, & E, BODIES

“ GET YOUR CASTER BACK”

OVER ONE INCH OF ADJUSTMENT TO GET BACK THE CASTER LOST BY INSTALLING POLYGRAPHITE OR POLYURETHANE ON SOME APPLICATIONS.

“BENEFITS”

* “NEW” MADE FROM VERY HIGH STRENGTH ¾ INCH MATERIAL
* UP TO 5 TIMES STRONGER THAN STOCK RODS
* MADE TO PERCISION SPECS., FOR STOCK LOOK AND FIT “ JUST LIKE FACTORY RODS”
* NO NEED FOR OFFSET UPPER CONTROL ARM BUSHINGS
* NO NEED TO BUY EXPENSIVE AFTER MARKET ARMS WITH HIEMS ENDS
* EASY TO INSTALL
* MADE IN THE USA BY CERTIFIED CAR NUTS TO ENSURE HIGH QUALITY

For you guys running larger than stock wheel tire combos, the forces exerted on your suspension during cornering is much greater with larger tires/wheels than the stock strut rods were designed for. These improved rods will easily handle those forces and allow for a more stable car at high speeds if you desire to adjust it as such.

If you want more info, call us or email us and we'll be glad to help. We sold out of all the ones we brought to both Carlisle and the Nats. You can use any brand bushing you want.

Thanks,
Randy

---

---

Sorry for any confusion on my post. I responded to Domingo's original post about a low buck alternative to improve handling. If money is not an object, XV or Alterkation are good products.

We understand that we are not the first to offer adjustable strut rods. Nor did we claim to be. Other companies offer this product at various prices. We feel ours are of a higher quality than most, and are more stock in appearance than the others.

Hope this clears up any confusion.

Thanks,
Randy

Quote:

---

How much does a viper engine weigh compared to a 5.7 or 6.1 Hemi anyway? I know you want the viper drivetrain but I'm curious as to how much weight it puts over the nose compared to the other modern alternatives.

---

Quote:

---

I would prefer going with a much cooler and more exotic engine like the one on the viper. Plus the t56 6 speed comes attahced already!

---

way cooler

Quote:

---

With all that debate between the XV & RMS setups, nobody mentioned the MagnumForce version. Is anyone using it? Is it a viable contender with the other two or is it junk?

---

Quote:

---

With all that debate between the XV & RMS setups, nobody mentioned the MagnumForce version. Is anyone using it? Is it a viable contender with the other two or is it junk?

---

Quote:

---

Are any set up for handling?

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

How much does a viper engine weigh compared to a 5.7 or 6.1 Hemi anyway? I know you want the viper drivetrain but I'm curious as to how much weight it puts over the nose compared to the other modern alternatives.

---

A 3rd Gen Viper engine puts out 505 HP in stock form and being naturally aspirated...plus I can get a salvage one with a 6 speed for a reasonable amount. They weigh about 500 pounds.

A 5,7 or 6,1 Hemi weighs around 485 lbs.

I would prefer going with a much cooler and more exotic engine like the one on the viper. Plus the t56 6 speed comes attahced already!

I would definatly set the viper engine back though and I would cut the firewall in order to keep from mounting it with too much overhang over the front axle.

---

Quote:

---

Hi!

I have been looking and the Alterktion front end kit and also they new rear suspension kit with triangulated 4 bars and coil overs.

I want o build a modern day musclecar with a viper drivetrain.

I was wondering if the front and rear Alterktion suspension and steering will make an old musclecar like an an E body or 68-69 Charger handle real good like a newer car.

Or will handling be just marginally improved over stock?

I would plan on doing some majour unibody stffening, maybe even a full cage, and the front and rear alterktion kit plus some real good brakes and 17" o 18" wheels with some serious tires.

I dont want to spend a ton on suspoension mods, a 500 hp modern drivertain, a 6 speed....and end up having thrown a lot of money on a car that looks cool but handles like a bulldozer.

If that will be the case, Id rather just keep it old school, which is cool as well.....and just get a newer car like a 2010 Camaro, Newer Challenger, or a vette.

I wonder how an old E body with all the tricks would stand against a 2009 Challenger.

Opinions????

---

As a fact I'm planning doing pretty much the same thing myself.
Have a rusty 70 318 cuda to start with. I will make it look like an AAR cuda with black 17" wheels but try to make it handle more like a modern AAR. Noisy and no comfort. Not much interior. Keep the dash and maybe some heat insulation. Some light and good adjustable seats from the junk yard, and probably a tilt/telescopic steering column.
Absolutely no trailer queen, just a hardcore oval track racer legal for the street. I will not pay a dollar extra for chrome!

I've been reading topics for hours but get more confused the more I read...

Plan was to do all the reinforcements XV came up with, not sure if I should put in a roll cage or not.
Build a 408 stroker to hold the budget down. Keisler 5-speed, 8 3/4" rear.
Then either XV front/rear suspension and brakes (around $10K) or save some $$$ with AlterKtion parts.
Right now people is trying to convince me that a 6.1 Hemi is the way to go. I really want fuel injection and they say it is better to buy a crate 6.1 than converting an old stroker...
Whish I liked the sound of a V10

But just like you Domingo, I need to know how good it really will handle before I start investing money and time...

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

With all that debate between the XV & RMS setups, nobody mentioned the MagnumForce version. Is anyone using it? Is it a viable contender with the other two or is it junk?

---

They have a reputation of poor fit and function....

---

pure junk. alterktion is the only way to go.

Quote:

---

plethora

---

Does "Three Amigos" pop into anyone else's mind?

Anyway, a few good, well thought out, and supported questions. I always wonder when an OP starts out like this how they walk away when their question instigates 10 more.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

plethora

---

Does "Three Amigos" pop into anyone else's mind?

---

Ole!

Quote:

---

I guess my question would be what do you consider to be good handling? What or how do you intend to use the car? What type of budget do you have to apply to the suspension? Is the perception of other important to you?

Lesee, typically when asked what good handling is, most will reply that they want their muscle car to handle at least as good as their late model sedan. Since most late model sedans are pulling mid .8 G and stock muscle cars are in the mid .7 range, a slight lowering of the car, larger sway bar, wider tires, and a radial friendly alignment can get you to the mid .8 range. Good enough yet?

So you want to drive it more aggressively than that, okay. The benefit I think people are seeing with these "modern" systems is having someone else spec out all the wheel rates neceessary to balance out the car, thus achieve the perception of excellent handling. With the proper application of formulas, the same results can be produced with the OEM suspensions, but most people do not how to get there, or if they have the books with the theories, have not bothered to do all the calculations (they can get extensive). Tires only care about the force acting on them, not the system appling the force, so whether it is a leaf, coil, or torsion spring is irrelevent to the tread face of the tire.

So lets say you spec out a tricked out stock system that can pull mid .9. Is this still enough? What are your abilities? Are you really pushing the car that hard? Do you need a large selection of spring rates and quick and easy adjustability? Coil overs are nice in that they are lightweight, quickly adjustable, and have a plethora of available springs rates. All great things in a competition environment that require quick, minut changes to adjust the car. For street applications, most drivers will never bother to change rates or perform the adjustments that make coil overs the prefered method of suspending a competition vehicle. Dollars to donuts that 90% of the drivers with an Alterk have never changed their springs rates from Bill's original recommendation. I will grant you, at the limits of capability where cars are pushed to their maximum, many new coil over systems will produce more linear and predictable performance than the original suspension. But, how many drivers on here are really in the realm of that capability where they can tell when a spring rate is off 50# and their track bar needs to go up 1/2"? Not that many I'm guessing.

Do perceptions matter to you? Not many people will stop and gawk at a stock system that has no bump steer, leaf springs, and corners like a fiend. Put coil overs under a car and suddenly peope are dropping to their knees to look under it. Compliments will flow and you'll be voted most popular at the local cruise in meet. Well, maybe not, but a lot of people will be impressed.

So, once again, what do you consider to be good handling? What or how do you intend to use the car? What type of budget do you have to apply to the suspension? Is the perception of other important to you? Answer those questions and you can usually decide on a course of action.

---

Quote:

---

I am not interested at all in making impressions on the crowd, I just want a good handling car for the least amount of money.

---

Then buy a Miata, and it will hang with the Cobra in the corners

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I am not interested at all in making impressions on the crowd, I just want a good handling car for the least amount of money.

---

Then buy a Miata, and it will hang with the Cobra in the corners

---

Well, that would be an option for someone else. First, I don't think you can enter a race with AC Cobras and other vintage race cars
second, and more important: I want to be in my cuda!!

Quote:

---

I just want a good handling car for the least amount of money.
Sorry but I don't know about g numbers. I want to be able to compete against other classic racing cars such as AC Cobras.
Is it possible to do that with original k-frame and leaf springs?
Anyway, I want to stiffen the chassis with the parts from XV. Will torque boxes do any difference upon that?

---

Quote:

---

you wont be re-inventing the wheel here, but IMO, trying to make a 40 year old car handle like a new car is a loosing battle from a $:performance ratio.

---

Quote:

---

I want to be able to compete against other classic racing cars such as AC Cobras.

---

Please be specific. Is this VARA SVRA competition? OR vintage track days with the Shelby club or other older cars come out. There are lots of AC Cobras that go to track days, most are kit Cobras??

Tim Werner has a 68 Valiant that can keep up with most any AC Cobra. He is a road race driving instuctor too, so his skills make up for a lot. He can hang a little while with GT3 Porsche's. He doesn't have the power, but that may soon change: https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/show...part=1&vc=1

This car is something fun and wild on the street and to use at track rental day events.



Tim Herren has a VARA legal 70 Cuda. He races it a vintage VARA events. All of those cars are trailered race cars and have to run the same rules of the era of car like cubic inch (not stricly inforced, single carb, 15" rims...

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I want to be able to compete against other classic racing cars such as AC Cobras.

---

Please be specific. Is this VARA SVRA competition? OR vintage track days with the Shelby club or other older cars come out. There are lots of AC Cobras that go to track days, most are kit Cobras??

Tim Werner has a 68 Valiant that can keep up with most any AC Cobra. He is a road race driving instuctor too, so his skills make up for a lot. He can hang a little while with GT3 Porsche's. He doesn't have the power, but that may soon change

This car is something fun and wild on the street and to use at track rental day events.

Tim Herren has a VARA legal 70 Cuda. He races it a vintage VARA events. All of those cars are trailered race cars and have to run the same rules of the era of car like cubic inch (not stricly inforced, single carb, 15" rims...

---

Not VARA or any other historic/vintage race class, just have fun with others. Cobras, Mustangs, Camaros or whatever they'll bring. It doesn't have to be "period correct", like I wrote earlier I will put on 17" wheels to make it handle better so anyone will see it's not correct.

Tim's Valiant looks really interesting . Do you know what mods it has?

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

With all that debate between the XV & RMS setups, nobody mentioned the MagnumForce version. Is anyone using it? Is it a viable contender with the other two or is it junk?

---

They have a reputation of poor fit and function....

---

pure junk. alterktion is the only way to go.

---

Quote:

---

I have seen pics of failed XV and Magnumforce systems (saved the MF ones)........havent seen one failed AlterK.

---

Quote:

---

Tim's Valiant looks really interesting . Do you know what mods it has?

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I have seen pics of failed XV and Magnumforce systems (saved the MF ones)........havent seen one failed AlterK.

---

I would love to see those pictures, when those pictures were taken, what the car was doing when it failed, what kind of car and who installed the system.

Bigdad and I were at the Lonestar Nats this year when a guy with a MF equipped Cuda snapped a bolt backing up into a parking spot. The car was laying on the ground for 4 hours. This was the third time it happened to him with this car.

The parts broke at a speed under 5 mph.

Quote:

---

Something I did not know.. but do now...





http://www.schwartzperformance.com/news.aspx?newsid=33

Apparently, they are now working on an E body frame.

Greg

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I have seen pics of failed XV and Magnumforce systems (saved the MF ones)........havent seen one failed AlterK.

---

I would love to see those pictures, when those pictures were taken, what the car was doing when it failed, what kind of car and who installed the system

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I have seen pics of failed XV and Magnumforce systems (saved the MF ones)........havent seen one failed AlterK.

---

I would love to see those pictures, when those pictures were taken, what the car was doing when it failed, what kind of car and who installed the system

---

Link to the thread on Lat-g. http://www.lateral-g.net/forums/showthread.php4?t=18789&page=9&highlight=magnumforce

If you read the whole thread another builder comments on his experience as well.

---

The picture that shows a LCA seperation could be as simple as a bolt fell out. Even though it is a single shear design, I saw/read no where that the bolt sheared off, I suspect it fell out, and the reason for that is?

And that sliver Challenger is likely the first "checkbook" car that really should handle and look awesome at the same time

Quote:

---

Unlike alterkation, they are always looking to improve technology and offer upgraded suited for the customer and the vehicle.

---

Quote:

---

Unlike alterkation, they are always looking to improve technology and offer upgraded suited for the customer and the vehicle.

---

Quote:

---

lower control arm braces to resist sway bar deflection,

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

lower control arm braces to resist sway bar deflection,

---

Could you say a little more about these lower control arm braces, or does someone have a picture? I'm having trouble imagining them.

---

Quote:

---

What would be the effect of having these items (including your other suggestions) on a car that did not have any additional stiffening beyond the factory torque boxes. Street driven, not competition in my case. Would there be any handling improvement? Would the lack of extra stiffening potentially cause the metal to buckle somewhere while driving?

---

Quote:

---

Yes, there would be a handling improvement using that set up as it is a big step up on wheel rates from original and is in the upper range of what a lot of "pro-touring" type cars are running. However, you don't realize the full potential of the changes when the uni-body structure starts flexing. When your putting suspension loads that are this big of an increase, your body is going to be moving around. Similarly, once the body becomes an active participant in the suspension motion, handling can become unpredictable as you expose each new weak area. Check out the XV video on chassis movement and you'll be surprised how much these things move in their stock form. While it is unlikely that your car would just come apart, over time it is possible that you would begin to pop spot welds here and there and as each weld yields, you increase the load on remaining points. That could eventually lead to buckling or tearing an exterior panel. My guess would be the first place to start showing fatigue would be seams where the roof attaches.

---

I've got over 50K miles on .99" 185 lbs/in rate torsion bars, KYB or performnace shocks, 60 or 50 series tires,... and no sub frame connectors.

I've seen lots of regular stock mopars separate the weld at the firewall to the floorboard. That spot welded pinch seam on top of the bell housing area. My 383 Auto Challenger showed signs of pulling there. And my Cuda with .99 T-bar is starting to show signs too. Both cars are So Cal no rust cars.

Also on A-bodies the ends of the shock towers to the frame rail will crack. My 68 conv dart, my 68 Cuda, and I check A-bodies over the years in the junks yards and spotted that. Again none of those cars had any rust in that area or anywhere structural.

Now I traveled 1600 miles across country with my 68 Cuda loaded to 5600 lbs without any front bumpstops. I didn't re-adjust ride height adjustment screws. So, the frame was hitting metal to metal on bumps during the trip. Right after that, the torsion bar hole on the K-member broke it's welds. And the frame showed some cracks around the K-member nuts that are welded to the underside of the frame.

Since that happened in 1997 I still run it without bumpstops. I haven't had any issues. I'm sure the chassis flexes.

Sure someday I would like to put in frame connectors. I just need to save up for the expensive of buying them and installing them.

Mitch Lelito SCCA Autocrossed a 70 Challegner T/A from early 70's to early 2000's with 1.24" T-bars and SUPER stiff suspension and tires. He has no frame connectors (not allowed in rules until very recently). Now that they are allowed I'm sure he'd like to put some in.

Quote:

---

You guys with track time seldom mention two things that make a huge difference on how a car actually gets around corners:
1. How well the driver is seated/belted in
2. And the driver's skill/experience level

Those two items will likely outweigh almost any 3 things mentioned so far except maybe the tires, ie the driver needs seat time before going off on an internet induced spending sprees.

---

Absolutely.

That's why one of the reason's mine is low bucks. Also, lack of funds is big reason

Tim Werner in that 68 Valiant is a track instructor. He has lots and lots of seat time.

I've heard stories about Dick Guldstrand giving driving instructions at the old Riverside Raceway. He would take a Chevy station wagon packed elbow to elbow with students around the track. They said they thought the door skins were touching the track

More than a few times that loaded station wagon would have fastest time of the day. Later he gave lessons in a mid 70's Caprice 454 Convertible

I had a copy of this article posted on my website for years, but AOL dumped my 68 Cuda Autocrosser website. Read this written by the famous Dick Guldstrand...


------------------------------------------------

Some Handling Theory

By now you have probably read enough "straight talk" articles about high-speed handling to be totally confused. Your condition stems from the fact that most such articles are written to sell rather than to inform. This section will outline a few basic concepts, which will help you make an enlightened choice about how to modify your car for superior handling. Some parts will get a bit theoretical, but the knowledge gained will be worth the effort, so bear with us.

Where to start?
Where do we start this discussion of high-speed handling? I can tell you it doesn't start with G-forces, gumball tires, spring rates or any other thing the enthusiast considers central to high performance.

It starts with Joe Average. You've met him. He's the driver of that car acting as a moving chicane on your favorite back road. Joe is also the typical car buyer and the key to General Motor's plans for making big profits. They want to sell a large volume of cars all based on the same basic design. To do this they must appeal to the large group of buyers in the middle of the market. Sport coupes like the Z51 Corvette, Z-28 Camaro, and Trans Am Firebird represent the most that GM is willing to do for the enthusiast. If GM can't sell hundreds of thousands of a particular part over the life of a model run, they are simply not interested. Their marketing plans rely on volume.

We need to look at how Joe drives and what he expects from a car. Then we can compare his style with that of "The Enthusiast Driver". Once we understand these differences, we can look at how they affect the overall design of the car. The best way to examine these differences is by watching our two drivers negotiate a typical turn.

A Typical Turn
Let's assume a 180°, medium-speed corner with a radius of approximately 230 feet. This turn will have a total distance along its circumference of 722 feet. If you are having a hard time visualizing it, think of a 180° freeway on-ramp with a recommended speed of 25 mph. Assume also that Joe and Enthusiastic are driving base-model Coupes, which weigh about 3500 pounds. Cornering in a normal manner, Joe will round the turn at 30 mph. His subjective reaction to the cornering experience will be that the car handles just fine. Enthusiastic will corner at 45 mph. He feels that the car leans too much and is not precise.

Why do Joe and Enthusiastic have such different reactions to driving the same car around the same turn? The simple answers are that Enthusiastic is going faster than Joe or that the base-model coupe is designed for Joe's driving style rather than Enthusiastic's. While these answers are valid, they don't help us decide how to obtain superior handling. We're looking for a more fundamental understanding. To get it, we have to discuss some basic physics and the nature of human response to time-distance relationships.



It's Only Natural
The basic physics we need to examine is the concept of energy. Of particular interest is kinetic energy, the so-called energy of motion, which is present in all moving objects. The amount of kinetic energy in any particular moving object is determined by both the weight and velocity of the object. It is important to realize how weight and velocity influence the amount of energy. This relationship is expressed by the formula:

Energy =
½ Weight x Velocity²

This tells us the amount of kinetic energy increases in direct proportion to added weight and in geometric proportion with added velocity. Thus if the weight doubles the kinetic energy also doubles, but if the velocity doubles the energy will be four times greater. Let's get down to earth by seeing how much energy is involved as our two drivers round the typical turn as above. When Joe Average rounds the corner at 30 mph, he is cornering at about 0.279 g. The amount of energy involved is about 142,785 Newton-meters. Enthusiastic Driver goes around the turn at 45 mph, or about 0.628 g, which is not that slow for a base-model car. The amount of energy involved as Enthusiastic corners is about 321,183 Newton-meters. Notice that while Enthusiastic is going 50 percent faster than Joe (45 vs. 30 mph) the amount of kinetic energy involved has increased by 125 percent (321,183 vs. 142,785 Newton-meters).

You're thinking this is all very interesting but wondering how it relates to improving your car. Well, it means that the amount of energy involved with your car during cornering is the basic physical design criteria used in the construction of all suspension components. Think of the suspension components as devices to resist, store and control energy. The spring is a good example. We always hear people talking about spring rates. What does "spring rate" really mean? When we say that a spring has a rate of 250 pounds per inch, it means the spring can store 250 inch/pounds of energy for each inch of compression.

Why don't we use our example again? If we assume that as Joe goes round the turn his outside springs are compressed one inch; then as Enthusiastic Driver corners, the outside springs will be compressed an additional 1.25 inches. How does this extra compression affect the driver's subjective reaction to handling? At this point we get to the second important concept: the nature of human response to time-distance relationship.

It's Just Human
Back at our typical turn, we can watch more closely as our two drivers negotiate the corner. Recall that Joe Average went around the turn at 30 mph, or to put it another way, at 44 feet per second. Assume that as Joe enters the turn, the car takes 2 seconds to roll over, compress the outside springs and come to a steady-state cornering attitude. Likewise, at the exit of the turn, Joe's car takes about 2 seconds to unroll and get comfortably straight again. Watching Joe go through our 722 foot long turn, we see that it takes him 88 feet to transition into the turn, that he has 546 feet of steady-state cornering and another 88 feet of transition back onto the straight. Joe spends a total of 16.4 seconds in the turn.

Of these, 4 seconds (24%) are spent in difficult transitional cornering maneuvers, and 12.4 seconds (76%) are spent in relatively easy steady state cornering. This is why Joe feels that the car handles fine. At 30 mph, he spends relatively little time doing the difficult tasks of getting on and off the proper line and has a good deal of time in the middle of the turn to make corrections.

Enthusiast Driver experiences quite a different situation. He is going 45 mph or 66 feet per second. Remember that basic physics indicates that there is 125% more energy involved because Enthusiast is cornering 50% faster. Remember also that the greater energy causes the outside springs to compress an additional 1-¼ inches. Assuming a "linear" suspension response time, it will take Enthusiastic 4.5 seconds of transition at each end of the turn. He spends 297 feet of transition during turn entry (66 feet per second x 4.5 seconds), has only 128 feet of steady-state cornering 297 feet of transition at the exit. This is why Enthusiast thinks the car is unresponsive. He is in the turn for a total of 10.9 seconds. Of these, he spends 9 seconds (82%) of the time in difficult transitional cornering and 1.9 seconds (18%) in relatively easy steady state cornering.

The technical name for this phenomenon is yaw response. The yaw response characteristic of a car is the single most important of that group of traits we call "handling". The parameters for determining an ideal yaw response characteristic are derived from study of the human nervous system. The yaw response must be designed to make the driver feel comfortable at the speed he wished to go. It cannot be too slow or too fast. It must be slow enough so the driver can react to steering inputs; yet, it must be fast enough so that corrections can be completed before an off-road excursion occurs. The "base-model coupe" has been designed by GM with an ideal yaw response for Joe Average, who normally corners at about 0.300 g. If a driver wants to corner at some higher speed, then the suspension must be modified to provide an ideal yaw response at the higher speed. In other words, we must keep the yaw time, when expressed as a percentage of total cornering time, constant. To keep Enthusiast Driver comfortable going around our typical turn at 45 mph, we must modify the suspension so about 18% of total cornering time is spent in transitional cornering. This is what keeping yaw time constant means.

The Indicators Game
At this point we should scrutinize the primary indicator of cornering performance – namely cornering force as expressed in g's. At the present time, we all tend to focus on how many g's a car can generate. We normally equate high g-forces with good handling. Does this equation really hold-up? Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. We have all read comparison road tests where the car with the highest cornering force was also the slowest through a slalom course. This happens because g-forces are measured on a skid pad, which tests only steady state cornering. The skid pad tells nothing about yaw response characteristics during transitional cornering. Yet, it is these characteristics which are the most important factor contributing to superior handling.



Whether high cornering forces translate to superior handling or not depends on the honesty of the suspension designer. If he designs a complete system which takes into account both transient and steady-state cornering, then yes, high cornering forces will mean superior handling. However, if he uses tricks just to yield high cornering force numbers and does not do his homework on the remaining suspension components, the no, superior handling will not result. Remember, skid pad results are just indicators; the real test of good handling is how your car performs over your favorite back road, in transition as well as "steady-state".

How can we judge the honesty of the designer's work? A good place to start is by examining how General Motors upgrades a base-model coupe into either a Z-51 Corvette, Z-28 Camaro or Trans Am Firebird.

A Lesson from GM
It is a myth that General Motors cannot design good cars. Their engineers and technical staff are among the best in the world. If you have any doubts just look at GM's impressive competition record. It includes numerous successes doing both officially sponsored corporate projects as well as countless backdoor efforts. You may remember their NASCAR efforts of the 50's, the Grand Sport Corvette, and the racing Camaros of the late 60's. From our point of view, the only problem is that these superior technical capabilities are generally used to produce designs for the average buyer rather than the true enthusiast.

When these talented engineers redesign the base coupe into a Z-51 Corvette, Z-28 or Trans Am, they treat the whole car as an interrelated system. They make detail changes to a wide range of suspension components. The Z-51 Corvette, Z-28 or Trans Am differ from the base coupe in the hardness of rubber suspension bushings, the rate of both front and rear springs, the diameter of sway bars, the ratio and feel of the steering gear, the width of the wheels, and the size and compound of the tires. It takes the combined effect of all these changes to maintain a balanced car, which (1) exhibits cornering forces in the 0.800 ranges and (2) has good yaw response characteristics. Notice that they change several of the major system components and not just a single item such as a front or rear sway bar. The total system approach produces a car with an integrated, balanced feel derived from all the parts working in harmony.



The other thing to notice is that all of the revised parts are stiffer than the normal part. The springs are stiffer, the sway bars are stiffer and the rubber bushings are harder (which is another way of saying stiffer). As we discussed above, they must be stiffer to deal with the increased energy generated by higher cornering speeds.

No Free Lunch
We need to understand one final point. Every given set of suspension components has a limited working range. As suspension components are modified for higher cornering speeds, the working range becomes narrower. Thus, the base-model coupe rides well at slow speeds, corners satisfactorily up to about 0.450 g and is uncomfortable at 0.650 g (145%). The Z-28 or Trans Am has a firm ride, corners well to 0.720 g and becomes difficult to control at 0.770 g (107%). A good combination street/slalom car has a very firm ride, corners well to 0.875 g and feels "edgy" at 0.900 g (103%). The typical racecar has no ride comfort, corners well at 1.200 g, and leaves the road at 1.210 g (101%). Notice that as cars are tuned to handle well at higher g-forces, low speed ride comfort is sacrificed.

Under current technology, the twin goals of pillow-soft low-speed ride and superior yaw responses at high cornering forces cannot be accommodated in the same car. The truth is that tuning the suspension to work well at higher cornering speeds always trades off some low-speed ride comfort. We must each individually decide how much low-speed ride comfort should be sacrificed for added high-speed cornering capability. As a wise man once said, "There is no free lunch."

So there it is, the real "straight talk" about high-speed handling. You won't remember all the details but you should remember the following three points. First, superior high-speed handling is more than just high cornering power. It must include a balance of both high cornering power and correct yaw response characteristics. Second, a car with superior high-speed handling is produced only by the systematic modification of a wide range of suspension components. Just bolting on a sway bar or some other part won't get the job done. Finally, as cornering speeds get higher, the suspension system must get stiffer in order to handle the increased energy levels.

Author, Dick Guldstrand

------------------------------------------------

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Tim's Valiant looks really interesting . Do you know what mods it has?

---

Trying to remember. AndyF might know better.

1.24 T-bars
275/40/17 tires front/rear
17x9 rims front/rear
13" AREngineering Viper/Brembo caliper conversion
Firm Feel tubular UCA's
Bilstein shocks
I think rear drum brakes?
Roll cage with bars going into the engine compartment
Leaf rear springs, can't remember rate or brand
Front sway bar, can't remember size or brand. Might be a custom one adjustable one
Don't remember if he is running a rear sway bar
73-76 front K-member welded/reinforced
power steering

Just going off memory. Might be off on a few things. But you can see things are simple but very effective.

This is certainly one of the fastest pre 1980 street driven/legal Mopar/driver road race combinations with stock located suspension points and suspension type in the country. With the new bullet 426 small block motor that AndyF is building this is going to be near the top of any pre 1980 Mopar whether it has a kit car chassis under it or not.

---

That is a pretty good list. Tim finally got around to swapping rear disc brakes onto the car. He used the DoctorDiff kit which is the best rear disc setup on the market.

He does have a small rear bar on the car. Rear springs are stockers. We're interested in the new Hotchkis rear leaf springs but haven't ever heard back from them so we might just stay with the factory original springs for next season.

The new 427 inch bullet is going together. Should be on the dyno sometime in Jan. Tim has an aluminum driveshaft for the car and Passion sent us some aluminum tranny stuff. New Baer rotors should drop 12 lbs of unsprung weight. Hughes Engines did the CNC port work on the heads and RyanJ is porting the intake. We got a killer new carb from Bo Laws.

It will be interesting to see how the '68 goes when it hits the track next spring. It will be lighter than before and will have a ton more power. Tim didn't have much trouble with Vipers or Vettes before so the new setup might be eye opening. A Z06 with a good driver would give Tim more than he could handle last year but I bet that situation will even up this next year. But you don't know until you get it on the track. It might take some time to sort out the cam profile with the tranny gear ratios and stuff like that.

Quote:

---

It's Just Human
Back at our typical turn, we can watch more closely as our two drivers negotiate the corner. Recall that Joe Average went around the turn at 30 mph, or to put it another way, at 4 feet per second.

---

Quote:

---

“Will an Alterkation make a muscle car handle like a vette?” I don’t know but this is what works for me and I can beat up most corvettes and other fast cars but not all. There are quality packages to make your car handle like that Tupperware [vette] but many of them are out of the common man’s realm. [$$$$$] I have not found anyone running an alterkation like I run my T bars. Since 1990 I have been regularly flogging an E body 4 speed around Watkins Glen Racetrack with Phoenix CMR driving School. The approach since day one has always been it’s a street car that gets driven on the road course. This has always been for fun and to make my car a better driving/handling street car-I think it’s called pro touring now…

Let’s do some math: average of 18 laps per session @ 3.4 miles per lap is 61.2 miles, 4 x a day is 244.8 miles a day for 2 days. 489.6 miles x19 years is 9302 miles. For 5 years I ran the Glen 2x yr so add 2448 miles. 11750 miles. I might know what’s working by now. As the years go by the car & I both have gotten faster and better. I have had some wonderful instructors in the passenger seat and I have been passenger doing HOT laps in cars like Ford GTs, SCCA mustangs, track mustangs, Z06 corvettes etc. In addition to seat time there is classroom instruction & a lot of post run discussion among us as well as helpful advice and the sharing of ideas. My fellow speed demons are always watching my car & lap times-go figure-they are always surprised at the go & whoa…and then again so am I.

I started with 15 inch rallye wheels with 235 60 15 BFG tires, KYB Shocks & stock disc/drum brakes with Velvetouch brake linings front & rear, stock sway bars, engine trans seats and seat belts etc. stock stock stock

In the process I learned the 4 most important items to have on your handling car are:
Sticky tires
Real seats & seat belts
Adjustable shocks
Brakes that don’t fade away
Everything after that improves on the basics.

Even the stock suspension set up was limited by the tire and shock choice and the overall handling [think lap times] was severely handicapped by not being held firmly in the seat by a 5 pt seat belt.

Let me show you where the money goes

Level Q Sub Zero AAR ‘Cuda as currently configured, the numbers are the $$$$

Tubular UCA urethane bushing RMS Chassis Components 250
Tubular adj strut rods w/rod ends RMS Chassis Components 199
Boxed lca with rubber pin bushing 50
Shocks QA1 adjustable… RMS 580
Springs 160 lbs/in ESPO 260
Urethane Spring bushings ESPO 40
Torsion Bars 1.120 Mopar 150
Sway Bars 1-1/8 front ¾ rear Firm Feel 500
adj front leaf spring hanger 3 position [lowers car] Mopax 100
11/16 Seamless Tie Rod sleeves Firm Feel 175
16:1 Manual Steering Flaming River 400
Brake upgrade: RMS
wilwood dynalyte calipers w/12 inch stock rotors, spindles 625
11 drum rear w/small wheel cyl and Velvetouch shoes 150
Bracing across entire pkge tray for seat belts and x braces reinforced for the:
Corbeau seats and 5 pt belts 1000
Front spoiler MAS 60
Passon Alum OD 4 sp 2799
3.55 sure grip
Synthetic lubricants
Driveshaft Denny’s 400
Accusump 400
Aluminum head six pak 416 Muscle Motors/Repine 400 rwhp 8000
MSD ignition 200
16x8 Alum wheels 1000
255-50ZR16 competition tire Toyo RA1 1000
Air ducts on the front rotors, no splash shields
Clutch 10.95 Custom “Emerald” by Rochester Clutch & Brake w/6 paddle Velvetouch disc 300
SFI flywheel 300
Good tach SW 275
Light Battery in trunk 200
Seat belts 250

Body flex-every year the car gets an inspection, every year there are no surprises. 11000 miles and counting…want to come and inspect yourself, pm me for an appointment. Nothing has broken, twisted or cracked & the doors, trunk & hood close as they always have. I do not beat the equipment and that makes a difference in the body stresses. Design me an X brace for the floor pan that fits like a glove as has been suggested here and I will install it and be faster than I am now. Smoooth is fast and you can only go so fast smoothly. No serious body stresses when smooth and it is such a blast to run up and down the gear box with your foot buried in the throttle. If you hate Miatas on your butt then make sure you have enough ponies for the straight-aways.

If you spend any time flogging the road course you will meet many a driver who gets the gleam in their eye as they talk about the car “rotating thru the turn”. When the car finally does “rotate” you have arrived. To get my po$ to “rotate” the 3 key items were seats, seatbelts, and TIRES more than anything else...Yes my car rotates and that is a treat!

Rear spring rates: Remember I have street car that runs the road course. I ran 115lb/inch 5 leaf springs that were not enough. I currently have installed ESPO 6 leaves that come in at 160 lbs/inch. I had to soften up the rear bar by using rubber sway bar bushings. I am thinking about removing the smallest leaf from each spring to reduce the rate slightly. Cost and availability was the reason I used the ESPO 6 leaves. I am not dissatisfied with the results so far but in hindsight I wish I had started with the 5 leaf instead of the 6 leaf as my first choice. I have a nice set of lightly used E body six leave springs for sale…

Shocks: KYB, Edelbrock and most others “porpoise” when hot. Nuff said. With every car being different there is no one size fits all so adjustable shocks are the only way to go. Konis are too stiff for my SOTP meter. Remember street car driven on the roadcourse.

Tires & wheels: 16x8 wheels with the same 255-50 ZR16 competition tires. I am not going to argue with anyone about other tire/wheel combinations as this is what works extremely well with out compromise and shoe horns.

Several years ago I helped prepared a common man’s 440+6 real Superbird for the Glen and the results were phenomenal. I am looking for the paperwork so I can post the hardware and costs. It was not expensive; the owner drives the bird a lot and loves the car.

BTW I can’t out run a Z06, an AC Cobra, a Ford GT or Tim Werner'68 Valiant but I make them work hard for the lead.

---

WOW!!! The information on this site can be priceless. I know that I will never see or experience what you have personally accomplished. I am happy to learn from your experience. Thanks for putting things in perspective.

Quote:

---

Level Q Sub Zero AAR ‘Cuda as currently configured, the numbers are the $$$$

---

Oh man, I gotta come up with some name for my setup. Hmmm, let me see…

Level Y Ultra Zero Formula S 340 Barracuda

Stock UCA offset rubber bushing Moog 7103 RMS $40
Stock strut rods w/rod poly bushings cut 3/16” $30
Boxed LCA homemade with 1” strap steel poly bushing $20
Front Shocks QA1 adjustable… Used swap meet $80
Springs 130 lbs/in OE 340 Formula S 40 years old $0
Urethane Spring bushings Energy $40
Torsion Bars 0.99 Mopar (1994 pricing) $109
Sway Bars 1-1/8 front ¾ rear Firm Feel –Used swap meet $35 ft, $25 rr
11/16 Tie Rod sleeves junk yard $8
Mopar Part Remanufactured Power Steering box $160 (1994 and a good deal even then)
La Carra steering wheel Cedar Rapids swap meet never used $20
Brake upgrade: Junk Yard rotors, spindle, UCA’s. $90
HD Police Semi Metallic Pad Pin type Des Moines Mopar swap meet from Jeff Dory $15/set
MP/Willwood adjustable proportioning valve $40
MP Aluminum 1 1/32” bore master $50
Master adapter 2 aluminum bars from Industrial Metals’ extra’s bin $6
10 drum parts store shoes
73-76 K-member $50
K-member welding/reinforcing by a buddy and I bought the metal $20
3.23 sure grip OE $0
Re-ringed 340, VJ w/hardened seats, $600
15x8 4.5” backspacing rallye rims made from used centers $320
245-50ZR15 $450 for first set. $200 for 200 mile used second set
Sun Pro cruddy tach $10 swap meet used
Toyota Celica GTS seats –used out of the paper for $60


The larger front spring rate made the biggest impact. Rebuilt steering box, offset UCA bushings for caster, steering wheel, semi bolstered seats were big driver impact. But none of those really give a big mechanical performance gain.

Quote:

---

Steve, I think Red Bull Racing is more like it for you

Sorry, I just had to, what with your threatening to drink some before SFSF.

---

Threating?? All night thrashing on the car before Spring Fling Speed Festival or getting ready for a Spring Fling show I inhale that stuff. Actually I like the AMP energy drink in 16 oz cans.



I still have a 16oz radiator overflow can made from Energy drink and duct tape.

Here's a pic at 12:55am before SFSF07. I like to keep them handy on the fender. Double fist style.