Frapps

First time working on a 61. Is the rotation of the backing plate normal? The car was raced for a while ages ago (notice the bent leaf spring) but the rear end doesn't appear to have been twisted (notice the casting line in picture two). Both sides are the same. If GM did this intentionally, why?

Bizarro.

(clicky on the thumbnails)

67tripwr

That spring is damaged, and GM did not partake. You can probably pull it, and correct it or replace it.

DZAUTO

Yep, that's the way 56-62 backing plates are oriented on the axle housing. Looks crooked or twisted, right? Well, it's not.
The spring? Looks like numerous, serious drag race launches. Moderately normal as a result. If you plan a full restoration, then it'll have to be professionally repaired/restored.
If you want to drive it, here is what I'd do if it were mine.
Remove the leaf springs, disassemble the leaves. Place the inverted bent leaf on a large, big board (2x6, 4x6, etc) and beat, yes, I said BEAT the inverted bend back into submission using a heavy hammer (about 5lb hammer). Reassemble the leaves and install a leaf spring clamp around this area of the assembled springs. Go drive it. Trust me, it will be fine.

Tom Parsons

67L36Driver

And do not use your rosebud heating tip (torch).

Truck spring shops have 'stuff' that can fix that leaf or make you a new one.

Frapps

Thanks Tom. The (new) owner is not concerned with originality. The car has been in a couple of accidents and the repair work is well below standards. We'll just replace the springs with repops.

Thanks all.

Frapps

DZAUTO

OK, fine, but I would STRONGLY encourage you NOT to toss the bent spring!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tom Parsons

rustylugnuts

I have a question related to this topic. Have recently seen a 61 with five leaf springs and the rear stabilizer bar removed, and the right strut rod was bent upward from the center approximately 3/4". I'm assuming this shortened, or tighten up the play resulting in better control into the corners. I was told this by an old racer that what some racers did for better handling. I couldn't see the removal of the rear stabilizer bar though, It would seem to me that it would give more control then without!

Any comments or theories?

rustylugnuts

Plasticman

If the strut rod was deformed intentionally, it may of been an attempt to correct the pinion angle (in relation to the driveshaft and transmission angles). Not the right way to do it, but................

As for removal of the rear anti-sway bar, that would remove some oversteer effect (increase understeer). Depends on how the owner "likes" his Vette to handle. It also would decrease the chance of side to side induced wheel hop greatly. I have had experience with that problem, and actually VCR recorded it, and know that removal of the bar will stop it. It will not correct "normal" fore/aft (leaf spring) induced wheel hop.

PS: My 62 has original OEM style (grooved leaves) 5 leaf springs.

Plasticman

rustylugnuts

Plasticman, interesting analogy, I wasn't aware that 5 leaf springs were optional after 1959. I was under the assumption this 61 I'm inquiring about was a modification. Would you happen to know the RPO number indicating the 5 leaf spring option? I'm sure if it was available for 62 it must of been available in 61. I appreciate it!

rustylugnuts

Plasticman

From what I have read, I agree it was not an option. Just was saying that I have them on my 62 (PO installed).

Plasticman

rustylugnuts

Plasticman & frapps, I didn't mean to hi-jack this thread, but I had to ask, stranger combinations have surfaced throughout the years resulting in an option revision. Did you add this setup or was your Corvette previously modified. What I'm trying to get at, is the ride more rigid with 5 leafs or about the same as a stock 4 leaf? In other words have you ever chip a tooth after running over railroad tracks?

I promise that was my last question.

rustylugnuts

DZAUTO

When the auxillary front sway bar became available (and I'm not sure just when that was-----------60-61?) for field installation, there were SOME (road) racers who preferred to remove the rear bar and only use two front bars. Also, some racers replaced the stock front coil springs on 60-62 models and installed the stiffer, shorter 57-59 HD coils, as well as add the 5th rear leaf.
For 1960, the HD suspension pkg changed. The front sway bar was increased in diameter and the rear sway bar was added as part of the standard suspension on ALL Corvettes. As a result, there were no longer any HD front or rear springs, they were all the same. With the heavier bar up front and a rear bar, this decreased body roll and also permited a smooth ride without the harsh springs used in the 57-59 HD susp pkg. But the serious racers reverted to the earlier HD springs and only two front bars along with the stiffer shocks.
I have added the heavier front bar and the 60-62 rear bar to the 56, and handling is better. But I've never driven a car with two front bars and no rear bar, so I can't speak for that.

Tom Parsons

Plasticman

Rusty,

No, a PO (previous owner) must of installed the GM (with the grooved leaves) 5 leaf springs on my 62, so I have no experience with the 4 leaf springs. I did install new front / rear bushings on them several years back when I was chasing down the cause of rear wheel hop, but they did not help or hinder.

As for ride, I do not feel that the ride is harsh at all, and wmf62 has 5 leaf rear springs on his 62 as well (and his is smooth as well). He has a R&P steering front end with different springs and geometry, while my front end is stock 62 (except shocks).

Note that when I installed the Traction Master traction bars a couple years ago, I did a series of tests, and eventually removed the upper (OEM) Strut Rods. The combination of the upper strut rods and lower traction bars was causing a binding in the rear spring movement that added harshness to the ride (although Tom Parsons - DZAUTO does have both and claims his is just "fine"). After removal of the upper strut rods, I found the ride to be better than ever (including when I had just the upper strut rods). So currently, I have the lower traction bars and no rear anti-sway bar (I had found that the rear anti-sway bar in combination with the lower traction master supplied too much oversteer for my tastes).

FYI: Shocks are ancient (but still in very good shape) Gabriel Striders, 3 way adjustable, set on "Firm" all the way around.

Plasticman

Plasticman

Tom,

Adding another front anti-sway bar would add understeer. Removing the rear anti-sway bar would add even more understeer. Obviously, the racers that did that felt they needed a lot of understeer for their application!

Plasticman

Coves4me

Plasticman, I, too, have the 5-leaf rear springs with the center groove as came from the GM factory. I believe them to be original as I changed out the front and rear bushings on the springs last year and the bushings were VERY difficult to remove. I resorted to a propane torch to get them out. As far as ride, my 62 rides much stiffer than my 59, which has also has "aftermarket" 5-leaf springs with no groove.

Mark

AZDoug

The 1961 AMA specs are foot noted to indicate the four leaves were regular production equipment, which I assume means, there was something else as an option.

I use a 5 1/2 leaf set to keep the body from contacting the wider that stock tires on my car. Ride isn't really harsh, though it can launch you on large bumps if your seat belt isn't tight.

Doug

Plasticman

Mark,

Mine came out without having to use a torch, so I did/do not know if they were original or changed by a previous owner. JohnZ has stated previously that (as stated above) that the 59's were the last year for the 5 leave springs, and I took that at gospel. At this point, that and your info is all we can go on.

John (Plasticman0

rustylugnuts

I just cam across this: http://www.libertyship.com/rpo/default.htm

rustylugnuts

DZAUTO

EVERYBODY, I mean EVERYBODY needs to save this link who owns a 56-62 model, or, is just interested in the early RPO stuff. The information that Jerry Wagner has put together is about the most complete RPO information that I've ever seen in ONE PLACE. All of the information that he has put together is readily available, BUT, you have to dig it out from multiple sources.

Tom Parsons

rustylugnuts

I passed this information on to the owner, and appreciates all your inputs, many of his questions and concerns were address. This particular enthusiast is in the process of a frame off restoration. All your responses and camaraderies has convincing him to join the forum.

rustylugnuts