Re: SS SPRINGS FOR THE TURNS
[Re: A/MP]
#2821797
09/17/20 07:25 AM
09/17/20 07:25 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
|
My first question, at rest, how much arch do the springs have or are they ideal rather flat, which is a better goal.
They likely have a resale value, and excessive oversteer from arched springs might make for neat video clips, but its not fast.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: SS SPRINGS FOR THE TURNS
[Re: A/MP]
#2822222
09/18/20 11:53 AM
09/18/20 11:53 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385 Pikes Peak Country
TC@HP2
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
|
In their original form, the SS springs have too much arch, too much rate, and are biased side to side with unequal rates. Combine these with a rear sway bar and you will have a very tail happy car. On the plus side, the short front segment will work well at putting power down effectively.
Ultimately its all about balance. For handling, you want the car lower, not higher, so its a bit of the opposite approach of drag racing traction. However, regardless of if you use stock, SS, Oval Track, Hotchkis, etc, you want the rear rate to compliment the front rate. Mopars are very limited in what t-bars and s-bars are available for the front. The rear leafs, however, can more easily be dialed in with the variety of leafs and materials out there. I'd suggest you decide on the combination of torsion bars and sway bars you want for the front, then deconstruct the leafs to balance it out.
Mopars oval track springs are interesting creatures. As pointed out, they have fewer leafs than a regular pack, but the leafs are slightly thicker. They don't have as much front control bias as others springs, which makes sense since oval racing is more about being smooth than dumping a clutch. They have an odd length front segment which requires special hangers. When installed, zero arch springs actually appear to bend backwards, which will freak out a lot of owners.
|
|
|
Re: SS SPRINGS FOR THE TURNS
[Re: A/MP]
#2822331
09/18/20 04:27 PM
09/18/20 04:27 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385 Pikes Peak Country
TC@HP2
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
|
It's been awhile since I bought them so I can't remember all the specs off the top of my head. I remember the front segment was a little different then stock A-body springs but it isn't much. IIRC it's only about 1/4" difference? I have them installed on my 68 right now while I wait to get into the paint shop. I've got a set of old Rallye's on it and they look fine in the wheelwell. Oval track springs front segment is 20.5", so half inch longer than A body/SS springs but shorter than B/E springs. The typical Mopar show fender tag number cruncher will probably notice something isn't quite right in the rear wheel well, but may not know what. In my Challenger I used the 2" longer SS hangers, so in combination with the oval track front segment, I have actually pushed the rear axle back half an inch from stock. I've had a couple people notice it and ask if I've relocated the axle. I guess this means that the front /6 T bars need to go, A factory 340 or 318 leaf spring is acceptable? Absolutely get rid of the slant 6 bars. Probably want something like .94, 1.0, or 1.06 depending on how big a sway bar and how aggressively you want to run corners. With those, add a 1.125" solid or 1.25: hollow bar and they may be a nice match for a set of 340 leafs. Is there any info if I start researching the Trans AM cars of the 70's? The first couple of years of the TA series had several '65 D Darts prepped specifically for road racing. In fact, the very first race in the series was won by the '65 Dart of Bob Tulius in the over 2 liter class. The Darts were competitive through 66 and into 67 before the Ford and Chevy pony cars began to dominate. I'd imagine you could dredge up some detailed info on them if you look.
|
|
|
Re: SS SPRINGS FOR THE TURNS
[Re: burdar]
#2822367
09/18/20 06:53 PM
09/18/20 06:53 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 30,947 Oregon
AndyF
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 30,947
Oregon
|
It's been awhile since I bought them so I can't remember all the specs off the top of my head. I remember the front segment was a little different then stock A-body springs but it isn't much. IIRC it's only about 1/4" difference? I have them installed on my 68 right now while I wait to get into the paint shop. I've got a set of old Rallye's on it and they look fine in the wheelwell. I make hangers for the oval track springs. Very slow selling product! http://arengineering.com/home-page/spring-hangers/
|
|
|
Re: SS SPRINGS FOR THE TURNS
[Re: A/MP]
#2822368
09/18/20 06:56 PM
09/18/20 06:56 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 30,947 Oregon
AndyF
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 30,947
Oregon
|
I guess this means that the front /6 T bars need to go, A factory 340 or 318 leaf spring is acceptable? Umm, yeah. They have to go. Put big torsion bars up front and use a factory 340 rear leaf spring and you'll be fine. That is the combo that Tim ran and it worked really well.
|
|
|
|
|