|
Re: Alterkation, XV Level II and MagnumForce front end
[Re: demon440]
#47041
11/03/07 08:13 AM
11/03/07 08:13 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
What is the weight of the front end set-up?
Looks to be very heavy for aluminum pieces.
Here is what I bought.
I don't think I have weights. The K itself is quite light, but very strong. I've handled the bare k's and never felt they were heavy.
We used aluminum to lighten everything up, but the design was more around strength than trying to shave every pound out of it. If you are road racing, the strength is critical on that piece. You can draw your own conclusions as to which is stronger, but steel vs aluminum I doubt there is much difference on the weight vs what you have.
For example, we had the lugs for the lower control arm mounts evaluated. They were rated at 7 G's, which is above OE requirements.
|
|
|
Re: Alterkation, XV Level II and MagnumForce front end
[Re: TC@HP2]
#47043
11/03/07 09:39 AM
11/03/07 09:39 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
You know, it is pretty sad condition of the state of the mopar hobby when the best engineered suspension provider for mopars doesn't feel like posting about their products here any more. Heck, for that matter, I don't see Bill Reilly here much either.
Tony, I will post about Level I and the other products we've done and contine to do, but I gave up over a year ago on our Level II with regard to posting about it on here.
We sell them all the time for high end builds and to guys that want their cars to really drive like modern high performance cars do.
You clearly have alot of experience with the factory suspension and making it work, and I respect that alot because you've done it. But in contrast to someone like you, I have a real issue being told all kinds of nonsense by people who don't even know what they don't know and who've never even looked into making cars handle.
The comparison between what we've done and what we've put together vs. what else is out there is comical. Is there a cost difference - yeah definitely, but we're not using the same stuff in virtually EVERY component, and real engineering and testing isn't free. Do you know what a huge step backwards it would be for us to downgrade the shocks to what others are using? We could knock a ton of money out of our costs that way, same on the brakes, aluminum components, racks, trailing arms, hubs, etc.
Yes our Level II costs more, but no way, no how are the other setups the same or even close. We'll keep doing exactly what we've been doing - running our stuff hard on real tracks and getting Car and Driver, Autoweek and others to decide whether it does what it's supposed to, and that's not about how it handles in a straight line.
From my perspective it's not about comparing that setup to what else is available for these platforms, it's about comparing it to modern, vettes, vipers, porsches, BMW's, Ferrari's., etc. We haven't even come close to using everything in our bag of tricks on that count.
Sorry, but I have been attacked here alot over that product and largely by people who don't even know what they don't know, or are already customers of other platforms.
Our product line is expanding faster than anyone's in this space, and will continue to do so. There are many market segments we are introducing product into. Not every product fits every market segment. Our Level II is an example of that, and we knew it full well day one.
So Tony, I don't post about it here anymore because I've been attacked here so many times about it and I also know that the most vocal are more than a little tight with the other guys...
No one else is offering really high end stuff into the Mopar market. Our Level II setup clearly tops that list. However, if you notice we're doing more and more stuff at all price points, not just over the top stuff. The most common theme on evrything we do is quality and really working.
We'll be announcing another small suspension product that will fit anyone's budget and will be beneficial to anyone interested in setting their cars up to handle better. As far as I am aware, no one's ever offered this either. It's something cool, simple, cheap and it works.
Quote:
FWIW, I regularly see posts here asking "how can I modernize my mopars handling" with people thinking the only way to get there is with coil overs and rack and pinion, while in most cases the application of said hardware is usually never more than some fun driving to shows or drag strips. Some food for thought regarding torsion bars; after 30 years, Chevy, Ford, even Toyota, have adopted torsion bar suspension to their most popular light truck lines for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is performance. Something else to consider, 30 year old trans am series race cars can still lap a track faster than many modern "G machines" using recirculating ball steering boxes, torsion bars, leaf springs and 15" tires. You don't always need the latest wiz-bang products to improve road holding capabilities and Steve's formula, as well as the XV level 1 kit, can provide performance capabilities beyond the driving abilities of a vast majority of drivers.
You are correct and that is why we also did a Level I suspension. It works very well and has the same level of engineering and testing in it as our Level II (four post eval, four post dial in of shock valving and bar/spring rates, track testing, street testing. Grab the DVD from Dream Car Garage, it's all there.
|
|
|
Re: Alterkation, XV Level II and MagnumForce front end
[Re: demon440]
#47044
11/03/07 09:48 AM
11/03/07 09:48 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
You make the parts, or have them there and no one
has ever weighed any of them??
I can tell you I saved 85lbs. from the set-up I
have. I am a machinist and this set-up is extremely
well built.
Just so you know it takes a lot more aluminum to equal the strength of steel.
No, no one has taken the time to weigh them. Why do we need to?
Aluminum tube we are using is 1/4" wall and the layout of our K is VERY strong. We also get the benefit of lighter unsprung weight in the control arms and spindles being aluminum.
|
|
|
Re: Alterkation, XV Level II and MagnumForce front end
[Re: Devil]
#47045
11/03/07 03:27 PM
11/03/07 03:27 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,188
upstate western ny
sogtx
master
|
master
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,188
upstate western ny
|
Quote:
Don't forget that the alterktion front ends are for off road use only and not to be used in daily driver/cruiser applications.
The only system I've seen that has been rated for daily driver/cruising usage is the XV system.
Ryan
Why wouldnt you use an alterkation for street driving ?????
|
|
|
Re: Alterkation, XV Level II and MagnumForce front end
[Re: sogtx]
#47046
11/03/07 05:25 PM
11/03/07 05:25 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,527
Chicago, Illinois
Devil
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,527
Chicago, Illinois
|
Quote:
Quote:
Don't forget that the alterktion front ends are for off road use only and not to be used in daily driver/cruiser applications.
The only system I've seen that has been rated for daily driver/cruising usage is the XV system.
Ryan
Why wouldnt you use an alterkation for street driving ?????
Cause a Mopar was never built to have a suspention system like that. The way it is setup puts alot of stress where there wasn't before. Without serious strengthening to the mopar sub-frame and front frame area, it could come apart.
It even says on the first page of the instruction manual, "for off-road use only!"
http://www.reillymotorsports.com/instructions/installation_manual.pdf
Ryan
|
|
|
Re: Alterkation, XV Level II and MagnumForce front end
[Re: Devil]
#47047
11/03/07 05:59 PM
11/03/07 05:59 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 42,714
Spokane Washington
ScottSmith_Harms
Mr Wizzard
|
Mr Wizzard
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 42,714
Spokane Washington
|
Quote:
It even says on the first page of the instruction manual, "for off-road use only!"
Ryan, to be fair to anyone printing that in thier instructions it is more likely that it's there for insurance/liability purposes than anything else. ALLOT of automotive aftermarket parts suppliers use it for that reason alone.
|
|
|
Re: Alterkation, XV Level II and MagnumForce front end
[Re: ScottSmith_Harms]
#47048
11/03/07 08:12 PM
11/03/07 08:12 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,712
Sacramento, Ca
Darius
master
|
master
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,712
Sacramento, Ca
|
Hi All
I am a complete novice when it comes to cars. My career (Kitchen and Bath remodeling)consumed me to the point that I never could stay involved (or afford) to build the car(s) I always wanted. Fortunately for me, my hard work and perserverance now allows me to "play" a little. I own a 69 Dart GTS that is stock except for a carb and intake and I LOVE to drive it. I also own an 06 Charger with a stock 5.7 Hemi which is my daily driver.
John provides me with the answer to the question I've had since I got the Charger....can I build a 1970 Roadrunner with a modern suspension and drivetrain to use as a daily driver!
While I would like to call John and order one up, I am not THAT well off. I do believe I can afford to do it myself with the help of a few friends in the business of building cars.
If you really want to feel comfortable about the XV systems, I STRONGLY urge you to send off for their video showing the process they went through to develop the level 1 and 2 systems.
Dealing with constantly evolving systems for everything you can imagine in a home, I can appreciate having a product available that has some PROOF behind their claims.
I think a big problem with the generation of folks that grew up in the muscle car era is their reluctance to embrace and accept technology. It is a wonderful thing and I am thankful for people like John who utilizes this technology to better our choices and therefore our lives.
Thank You John!
Driving modern convenience in classic beauty
|
|
|
Re: Alterkation, XV Level II and MagnumForce front end
[Re: Devil]
#47050
11/03/07 08:41 PM
11/03/07 08:41 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,912
The Dark Side
Fasbird
master
|
master
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,912
The Dark Side
|
Quote:
The way it is setup puts alot of stress where there wasn't before. Without serious strengthening to the mopar sub-frame and front frame area, it could come apart.
Ryan
Ryan,
Have you looked at the AlterKtion setup? It has the same dynamics as the Level II from XV. The front coilover shocks are mounted within it's own frame. i think you are confusing the magnum force setup that uses the inner fender panels and upper shock tower as the upper coil mounting point. The AlterKtion and XV both use it's K member which has provisions of self-containment of the coilover. Just an FYI.
|
|
|
Re: Alterkation, XV Level II and MagnumForce front end
[Re: Fasbird]
#47052
11/03/07 10:24 PM
11/03/07 10:24 PM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Have you looked at the AlterKtion setup? It has the same dynamics as the Level II from XV. The front coilover shocks are mounted within it's own frame. i think you are confusing the magnum force setup that uses the inner fender panels and upper shock tower as the upper coil mounting point. The AlterKtion and XV both use it's K member which has provisions of self-containment of the coilover. Just an FYI.
We don't use the K-member to mount the coilover. Our mount for the upper control arm and the upper mount for the coilover sits inside the shock tower. It's a complete unit that gets welded to the frame rail and the shock tower. Loads are completely changed, but we don't install this setup without our chassis stiffening. It's also why we're able to use shocks with a proper amount of travel...
Here's another view of a suspension display. You can see the shock/control arm mount assembly that sits in the shock tower. The little blocks and frame rail below it are just mock-up to support it for display purposes. The pic above shows how it is mounted. The whole assembly sits right in the shock tower and is welded to the frame rail and the shock tower.
You can also see the use of modern large diameter sealed bearings in the hubs.
|
|
|
Re: Alterkation, XV Level II and MagnumForce front end
[Re: PHJ426]
#47055
11/04/07 01:12 AM
11/04/07 01:12 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
John,
Is the mounting setup that fits into the shock tower, for the shock and upper control arm, fabed up to some degree when the kit is shipped out then the installer fits it to the car and TIG's it in there?
Thanks for the info...........
That Level II system looks like a work of art.
The mount for the shock and upper control arm is fully welded together in the kit. You just have to weld it in place.
|
|
|
Re: Alterkation, XV Level II and MagnumForce front end
[Re: sycboi]
#47056
11/04/07 01:19 AM
11/04/07 01:19 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,912
The Dark Side
Fasbird
master
|
master
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,912
The Dark Side
|
Quote:
Quote:
Cause a Mopar was never built to have a suspention system like that. The way it is setup puts alot of stress where there wasn't before. Without serious strengthening to the mopar sub-frame and front frame area, it could come apart.
Actually the AlterKtion takes alot of stress off the chassis by removing the twisting stress the torsion bars put on the crossmember and the front suspension. The AlterKtion is the only aftermarket k-member I am aware of that puts all the weight and spring loads onto itself. And I can tell you it is more than capable of handeling it. Just the addition of an AlterKtion and subframe connectors makes driving an older car enjoyable again.
If you take a look at this photo you can see the AlterKtion coilover is contained. The pressure of the spring/shock is on the K-member itself and does NOT put the pressure on the existing Mopar chassis other than the same points the original K-member bolts to. The AlterKtion does not need the upper mounting to be WELDED into the mopar chassis tower assy. It is a true bolt-in system.
RMS Bolt-in System
I do not want to get into a debate over which system one should decide on. XV offers GREAT products. I have bought some myself. But, in regards to RMS vs. XV Level II, I chose the RMS. You say po-ta-toe, I say Po-Taa-toe.
|
|
|
Re: Alterkation, XV Level II and MagnumForce front end
[Re: sycboi]
#47057
11/04/07 01:40 AM
11/04/07 01:40 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Actually the AlterKtion takes alot of stress off the chassis by removing the twisting stress the torsion bars put on the crossmember and the front suspension. The AlterKtion is the only aftermarket k-member I am aware of that puts all the weight and spring loads onto itself. And I can tell you it is more than capable of handeling it. Just the addition of an AlterKtion and subframe connectors makes driving an older car enjoyable again.
Actually, the torsion bars putting the load down low and into the cross member is probably one of the best features of that design. It puts alot of the load down low and out back. That's actually great design.
Moving the load does not eliminate it. Relocating it up front like that puts more load onto the frame rails directly in the front. Our setup puts more into the front rails and the shock tower, as opposed to primarily the rails as you are describing.
That's why we tie the frame rails together with a lower rad support, and use inner fender braces and engine bay brace to reinforce the shock towers.
Our K also reinforces the frame rails - notice how it is boxed across the rails and has two attachment points on each side of the four points that go into the rails? We're making it all tighter and stiffer.
%20-%20Web%20Large%20Photo.jpg)
If you look at the picture just above, the lower rad support and the two cross bars on the K are tying the frame rails together from underneath at three different locations. And the two bars on the K are boxed (tied together).
|
|
|
Re: Alterkation, XV Level II and MagnumForce front end
[Re: Fasbird]
#47058
11/04/07 02:17 AM
11/04/07 02:17 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
If you take a look at this photo you can see the AlterKtion coilover is contained. The pressure of the spring/shock is on the K-member itself and does NOT put the pressure on the existing Mopar chassis other than the same points the original K-member bolts to.
Except that the original chassis had a large portion of the load into the cross member and it's now all at the mounting points for the K, further forward.
Quote:
The AlterKtion does not need the upper mounting to be WELDED into the mopar chassis tower assy. It is a true bolt-in system.
Yes, it is a true bolt in, which admittedly always creates greater compromises when you commit to doing it only as a bolt in - which makes it for a bigger audience right there. The trade off of not welding it into the shock tower however, is shock travel. Take a look and see.
Quote:
Just the addition of an AlterKtion and subframe connectors makes driving an older car enjoyable again.
Since you have it installed and are happy with it, I don't doubt you. I don't know how much is suspension versus the feeling a rack gives you, as the difference on that alone is dramatic. But, irrespective, if you're happy that is what really matters - seriously.
What we have clearly is not for everyone, but it's also not the same - not by a longshot.
|
|
|
Re: Alterkation, XV Level II and MagnumForce front end
[Re: RTSE4ME]
#47060
11/04/07 10:04 AM
11/04/07 10:04 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Just wondering what the advantage is with longer shock travel? Thanks
You can incorporate bump stops into your system...
...you don't have to worry about the shock bottoming out, you have more flexibility with ride height and more than likely in a road racing environment the shock is very likely going to live alot longer and/or be less prone to overheating (also why you really want a monotube shock). The road race issues are admittedly irrelevant for 99% of the cars.
Bump stops are probably the most important, especially on a street driven vehicle.
We actually use them front and rear. It's easier to see it in the rear. The bright blue piece above the label on the shock is a bump-stop for a coilover shock:
|
|
|
|
|
