Best handling classic Mopar platform?
#2484507
04/18/18 09:46 AM
04/18/18 09:46 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 111 Connecticut, USA
MRGTX
OP
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 111
Connecticut, USA
|
Between A, B, and E bodies, I can see advantages and disadvantages that each one might have but it's unclear which set of attributes comes out with the best formula.
Regarding stock or stock-ish classic Mopars, I'd look to the B-Body ('68-'70 in particular) as probably has the best mix. It has the better (stiffer?) chassis than the A-Body and generally more room for tires, heavier duty OEM equipment and the stability from the longer wheelbase which seems to be a big help in many road course situations while giving up no real weight advantage (if any) to the stockier otherwise similarly massive, similarly equipped E-bodies.
Assuming that we're sticking with a stock style torsion bar front end/leaf spring rear, and building an otherwise optimized protouring car, I'd suspect a toss-up between the 108" A-body coupes and the 111" Darts, beating out the B-Bodies thanks to being significantly lighter while having essentially the same suspension. The Duster/Demon/Sport coupes have quite a bit more room for rear rubber and (IIRC) tend to be a bit lighter...but again, the longer wheelbase tends to be a boon to stability.
What do you guys think? Any thoughts (and corrections to my assumptions) are very welcome.
Last edited by MRGTX; 04/18/18 09:49 AM.
|
|
|
Re: Best handling classic Mopar platform?
[Re: MRGTX]
#2484546
04/18/18 11:07 AM
04/18/18 11:07 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,480 So Cal
autoxcuda
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,480
So Cal
|
All A, B, E cars have very similar unibody structure. Just stretched here and there.
B and E interchange suspension wise. Just e-body rear springs have 1” shorter rear segment so the spring doesn’t poke out the rear valence.
A bodies interchange B/E spindles, steering gear, bushings, ball joints (year & brake dependent). And most suspension piece look very close to B/E bodies but vary 1” or less deminsion wise.
The true post cars are a plus. But 67-69 Abody posts have the same poorer wheel room as the 67-72 Darts
108" WB 70-72 duster demon 67-69 Barracuda coupes
Can fit 245/45/17 tire front with right backspacing. 275/40/17 if you simply cut/fold the bottom front corner. And same size or larger rear. On the two model groups above.
E-bodies can fit 275/40/18. I think Ariel got 305’s on his Cuda with just lipping
Imho, the best light/strong chassis would be the 63-65 valiant sedan at 106" wb. But you'll have to fender flare it. Next would be the Dart of same era.
I don't see why something like a massive 112" wheelbase is an advantage over the extra 200 lbs of a 68-70 B-body on a road course. There's Miata, 911, and smaller wb that perform quite excellent. IMHO, 108 and 106" WB is long.
Last edited by autoxcuda; 04/19/18 05:04 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Best handling classic Mopar platform?
[Re: MRGTX]
#2484582
04/18/18 12:20 PM
04/18/18 12:20 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,394 Pikes Peak Country
TC@HP2
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,394
Pikes Peak Country
|
I wouldn't say there is one best as it depends on what your doing with it. This is why most sanctioning bodies have wheelbase limits within their classes and Pro touring is such a catch all, it could be anything. I;d also surmise that depending on if you lean more towards the pro or touring side, weight could also be a factor. Pro implies light weight and high speed, touring implies creature comfort.
The wheelbase length of a B body would make a better land speed racer and would not be as good for a cone crusher like an A body. Similarly, the narrow width of the A would work good for both. The short wheelbase of the A would be good for cones but not great for high speed. The width of an E isn't bad for autocross, but isn't great for high speed. Of course then you have to consider the chassis ability to absorb all the particulars you want to shove into the car depending on which side of the equation you want to emphasize. Large tires, drive lines, seating, weight, comforts, storage can all factor into the selection.
|
|
|
Re: Best handling classic Mopar platform?
[Re: savoy64]
#2485110
04/19/18 02:33 PM
04/19/18 02:33 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 21,845 Kirkland, Washington
Pacnorthcuda
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 21,845
Kirkland, Washington
|
well-----dont forget the data derived from lapd/chps testing all advertised police cars and grading them out---it included a body b body and c body mustangs camaros lt1 caprices-----for 40 years #1 was a 1968 polara 440------they missed on doing the e body as it was never advertised as a police car-----the 68 record was barely exceeded by a 2006 hemi charger awd w/traction control...... You sure they tested Mustangs and Camaros? I thought if a platform wasn't available as a 4-door it was ruled out for police fleet use? (Maybe a unit here and there, but not fleets and I wouldn't think they would bother testing the platform)
|
|
|
Re: Best handling classic Mopar platform?
[Re: MRGTX]
#2485222
04/19/18 07:08 PM
04/19/18 07:08 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,482 Lake Orion, MI
goldduster318
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,482
Lake Orion, MI
|
I have 275-35-18s on my 70 Duster and I had to only push the support strut out on the front and replace the hex bolt with a pan head for the fender brace in the front. The car has the MP offset shackle kit in the rear and that's it...and I have a mile of room to the springs now.
I think the 70-76 Duster/Demon/Dart Sport is the car that's easiest to get there. I doubt you'd even have issues at high speeds, given that Vipers are much shorter. You'll need to get the caster way up (I have +7) and my car loves going straight at high speeds. More caster is one of the things that modern cars have much more of than an older stock vehicle.
'70 Duster 470hp 340/T56 Magnum/8 3/4 3.23 Sure-Grip
|
|
|
Re: Best handling classic Mopar platform?
[Re: Pacnorthcuda]
#2485423
04/20/18 02:25 AM
04/20/18 02:25 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 18,679 Fresno, CA
Jim_Lusk
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 18,679
Fresno, CA
|
well-----dont forget the data derived from lapd/chps testing all advertised police cars and grading them out---it included a body b body and c body mustangs camaros lt1 caprices-----for 40 years #1 was a 1968 polara 440------they missed on doing the e body as it was never advertised as a police car-----the 68 record was barely exceeded by a 2006 hemi charger awd w/traction control...... You sure they tested Mustangs and Camaros? I thought if a platform wasn't available as a 4-door it was ruled out for police fleet use? (Maybe a unit here and there, but not fleets and I wouldn't think they would bother testing the platform) CHP has used Mustangs (5.0 LX) and Camaros as pursuit vehicles. At one time the CHP specs included a 122-inch wheelbase. That's why they used Dodges and not Plymouths.
|
|
|
Re: Best handling classic Mopar platform?
[Re: MRGTX]
#2485579
04/20/18 01:03 PM
04/20/18 01:03 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,042 colorado
savoy64
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,042
colorado
|
another good read is the Allpar "history of mopar squads" from the 1930's till modern times---also my mistake it was the 1969 polara that held the records until beat by the 2006 hemi charger-----it also said in 1969 85% of squads in north america were plymouth-----the california market was so important to chrysler that chp had a custom cam grind available only to them....the mopars graded out better because they had heavy duty suspensions--bigger brakes and skid plates.......
Last edited by savoy64; 04/20/18 01:05 PM. Reason: speling
|
|
|
Re: Best handling classic Mopar platform?
[Re: MRGTX]
#2485673
04/20/18 04:43 PM
04/20/18 04:43 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,076 Oregon
AndyF
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,076
Oregon
|
Between A, B, and E bodies, I can see advantages and disadvantages that each one might have but it's unclear which set of attributes comes out with the best formula.
Regarding stock or stock-ish classic Mopars, I'd look to the B-Body ('68-'70 in particular) as probably has the best mix. It has the better (stiffer?) chassis than the A-Body and generally more room for tires, heavier duty OEM equipment and the stability from the longer wheelbase which seems to be a big help in many road course situations while giving up no real weight advantage (if any) to the stockier otherwise similarly massive, similarly equipped E-bodies.
Assuming that we're sticking with a stock style torsion bar front end/leaf spring rear, and building an otherwise optimized protouring car, I'd suspect a toss-up between the 108" A-body coupes and the 111" Darts, beating out the B-Bodies thanks to being significantly lighter while having essentially the same suspension. The Duster/Demon/Sport coupes have quite a bit more room for rear rubber and (IIRC) tend to be a bit lighter...but again, the longer wheelbase tends to be a boon to stability.
What do you guys think? Any thoughts (and corrections to my assumptions) are very welcome. Just depends what you are trying to accomplish. The A body cars are smaller and lighter. With a late model Hemi install they would be very potent. But they might be a little on the small side if you want something to actually drive in. Especially if you're planning on having a buddy or a wife or someone with you and maybe take some luggage along. If you're going to build a Pro Touring car that actually gets out on the highway and goes somewhere then I'd step up to a B body car. If you want a real challenge then go with an early B body car. My '65 Coronet isn't a lot bigger than my Duster but a big block drops right in and there is a little more space inside the car and in the trunk.
Last edited by AndyF; 04/20/18 04:45 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Best handling classic Mopar platform?
[Re: MRGTX]
#2485703
04/20/18 05:58 PM
04/20/18 05:58 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,138 Home of the Bluegrass
MoparJunkie
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,138
Home of the Bluegrass
|
Not to hijack, but...... I’m in the middle of my 69 Bee resto and I’m looking for a good suspension component recipe????
"It takes a Mopar to catch a Mopar” 1971 Roadrunner FJ6 Sassy Grass 505"RB, 18 spline 4 speed, and Dana 60 with 3.54 2022 Hellcat Charger Widebody Redeye Jailbreak: Hellraisin with 8 speed auto
|
|
|
Re: Best handling classic Mopar platform?
[Re: MoparJunkie]
#2485906
04/21/18 01:31 AM
04/21/18 01:31 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,394 Pikes Peak Country
TC@HP2
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,394
Pikes Peak Country
|
So based on the series of comments above, a 4 door C body is the best handling Mopar platform? If we're heading down that path, than a station wagon is the ultimate pro-touring body because of its ability to handle multiple suitcases worth of luggage, multiple coolers, and allow on the road sleeping arrangements while having the underpinnings or other popular body styles.. I'm pretty sure there is a reason why most competitive enterprises limited their classes to allow either A, B or E bodies, but not all of them at once. I like Andy's suggestion of an early B body for the same reasons. Not to hijack, but...... I’m in the middle of my 69 Bee resto and I’m looking for a good suspension component recipe???? Yea, your kinda high jacking things since that topic has been well covered multiple times. Hotchkis or Firm Feel will solve all your problems. Build all at once or as budget allows. That's the beauty of these two companies product lines.
|
|
|
Re: Best handling classic Mopar platform?
[Re: savoy64]
#2486774
04/23/18 12:30 PM
04/23/18 12:30 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,645 Phila. Pa.
Mattax
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,645
Phila. Pa.
|
Assuming that we're sticking with a stock style torsion bar front end/leaf spring rear, and building an otherwise optimized protouring car This was the original parameters. Its hard to know what sort of use is really meant by the OP. Protouring is a look and a general concept but what platform is best will depend on actual intended use. Some of you guys covered that pretty well. i think the question is not about how you can build the 68-70 platform------but how did they run with all stock components I find stuff like this - how they performed with the stock available equipments is interesting and informative.
|
|
|
|
|