Schmucker

I put together the front enough to test the coilover shocks. It works great. No clearance issues and the spring will fit in their just fine. The only thing left to test is if they spring is going to be too firm to have the car ride at the right height at the lowest point. We think the 450lb spring will compress enough to make it work, if not, we'll try the 350lb ones, and if it works there and we can dial it up, I'll get a set of 400s for the front. I still have to paint the lower control arms, if everything goes well and I stay on task the front should be together in a week or two, then I'll take some more pictures. The rear is coming along pretty fast now too. My dad should have the mounts ready and the new differential crossmember built in a few days. The fronts use the stock shock mount. People said it was too weak, but no one could tell me why. My dad and I both looked at it and think it'll be plenty strong, but as an additional precaution and to improve handling, we are making a spreader bar with two links running down to the lower crossmember. This links will be tightened to preload the bar down and transfer to force from the shock top (origin of the bar) back down into the chassis. Don't give me credit for the fabrication and creation of the parts, it was all my dad for that, but it was also his idea.

427V8

:party:

Looks good!
But it's not exactly a bolt in is it :(

Schmucker

For the front it could be. If a company built the lower control arms and a special spreader bar I'm sure it could be. They would just need to make a more compact upper mount. We just cut the hole larger in the frame to get it in. Stock springs can be used again without issue, might need new lower control arms unless you spent a little time with a grinder and drilled new holes for the stock shock to use. But stock isn't as good as modified, right?

battsup

Hold on, I thought coilovers were for adjusting the ride height of your car, so why do you need springs?

Schmucker

Shocks have an optimal ride height, about 60% movement down, 40% up. With a really strong spring you have to have the bottom screwed down further to get the car at the height you want and have the shock in the correct movement range. My springs might be too heavy to get enough compression for the length of shock, putting it out of the optimal range of shock movement and having the ride height wrong. Coilovers really aren't used for adjusting ride height unless it is from optimal to really low for show. Mine are QA1s with 12 points of shock adjustment too. The whole setup is probably about the same weight as the fiberglass traverse leaf, but coilovers are a little better and it ends up being cheaper to do.

desi

I see 4 die grinders in the pics :confused: You must do a lotta grinding :eek:

norvalwilhelm

Schumucker you have a nice dad. It sounds like you and him have a good relationship. He also is doing really nice work and when painted will look really good.
I would love to hear updates in the future.
This is something i could easily do too but still wonder why coil overs are better then a regular setup. Is it adjustability for ride height or just the trick look?
I am also interested in the back setup.

Twin_Turbo

I posed a very similar setup some time ago. The one in this pic uses a conical spring that sits in the stock pocket so it's a semi coil over, however if you want a full coil over just get a plate like in the pics.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/zerothread?id=612261



[Modified by Twin_Turbo, 8:23 AM 7/31/2003]

69Rat

I'm looking into coil-overs as well.. front and back.. but especially back! My dad owns a '65 vert. He busted a rear spring on the rt side while doing 60mph, and did 4 360's on a 3 lane highway before getting it stopped!! I've ran Koni adjustable coil-overs on a few prostreet cars before, and loved them!
My dad is in the fabrication business. They make parts for the aircraft, and automotive industry... I'm thinking of workign with them in developing some ft tubular lower control arms, and rr offset trailing arms for coil-overs.

If we design a semi-bolt in kit using Koni or QA1 coil-overs .... Anybody be interested in buying?

:cheers: :cheers:

Twin_Turbo

I would be interested in tubular lower control arms for coil overs and for the rear it would have to be something like the guldstrand setup. I'm not that much interested ina tubular stock style trailing arm that still would need help to control camber and toe.

69Rat

I'm thinking something that will allow a general garage mechanic the ability to put a coil-over suspension on in a weekend with minimal cutting involved. You would deffinately have to open up the spring hole in the frame, but otherwise, I think we could work out all the rest of the parts needed:

* Tube ft lower control arm
* ft Adjustable coil-overs
* Tube rr trailing arm - regular or Offest
* rr Adjustable coil-overs
* Tube adjustable strut rods
* Rear sway bar to fit - (narrowed for offset ta's)
* Poly bushings and mounts

That should cover it.

NHvette

I remember in older posts that a major concern was the strength of the
upper shock tower. It wasn't design to take the entire weight of the front end.
Reinforcement plates were recommended to help strengthen this area.
Does your cross bar help in this area ? Maybe it could.

Lookin' good - though. Keep it coming.

:seeya

Schmucker

I guess a good comparison for why coilovers are better is to compare it to the traverse leafs VBP offers. They both have adjustable ride height, VBP has adjustable spring rates ($50 a spring for coilovers to change it) but coilovers offer adjustable shocks. The best and easiest compromise is doing like Monty did, the traverse leafs with Corvette replacement QA1 shocks for the 12 points of adjustment. This ends up being more expensive than the coilovers cost. I was able to get everything I needed for under a grand. This does front and back. I think coilovers will also help with reducing wheel hop, something my dad had big problems with in his '64 when it still had the IRS (ran 12.20s). Coilovers might be a little lighter too, but I'm not sure, either way it is certainly a great deal lighter than stock. For the rear, we are going to use the bearing joints for the coilover. This will give the proper movement needed for the multiple arcs the rear suspension makes. We made a bracket that comes off of the trailing arm right where the old spring mounted, but off to the side. We are using the typical coilover shock mount brackets with the series of holes in it to set the height on that bracket. Then the coilover attacks at the top to a mount off of the crossmember we are making for the differential. This way it can be set up higher into the car for a longer travel shock to be used. It sits at about a 15 degree angle there. When completed it should produce a well handling car that is easily drive able on the street. I like to think that I could set the shocks to a soft setting, drive to The Cruise-In or where ever, then stiffen them up and compete in the autocross and drag racing, all with the same suspension and not bust my butt on the way down. It takes just a few seconds per shock to change them. It is really quite easy.

Pete79L82

There are two main oerformance advantages to a coil over set-up.

The most important is that with a 2 1/2" ID coil you can move the lower mounting point much closer to the lower ball joint (and center of the tire) for better suspension control. (you retained the stock mounting point) If you look at a VBP transverse spring you will see that the spring hook-up point is much closer to the lower ball joint which is a much better design then the stock spring/ shock location.

When you mount the shock with the body in the upward position it will reduce unsprung weight. (you mounted yours with the body in the downward position so there is no advantage)

You will always have the WOW factor though even if it has no peformance gains.

Tell your father he does very nice fabricating.


PS: Be very careful with adjustable shocks. I have run hundreds of sets on a shock dyno and repeatability is very poor on most models of adjustable shocks. If you have the chance you should have them dynoed before you put them on so you know where the adjustments are at. Rarely are they ever at the manufactures specifications.

Schmucker

I can try reversing them, but I haven't seen anyone with them upside down.

Pete79L82

If you are only going to run down the quarter mile, then it won't make much difference. If you are going to race it (autocross, or similar) where you have to make corners then anything you do to reduce unsrpung weight is an advantage.


I would not reverse them without reinforcing the upper mount. Also you will need to check with QA1 to see if they can be run with the body up. Not all shock are not high enough quality to run body up.

Pete

Schmucker

I won't bother then. I won't be doing any racing at all, there isn't anything close enough to me in their area. Just a drag strip, and I won't even bother going there because they just started paving the road next to our farm. Fresh black top, half mile long. I'll be getting a G tech and we'll have our own private drag strip. I hope the county won't mind if we set up a tree. I just plan on some aggressive driving through the nice country roads around here. If someone ever does get some autocross going around here, I'll be all for it, but it'd just be for fun, not to be competitive.

Turbo-Jet

Neat idea; I am going to follow your progress. But I am one that fails to see the big advantage of coil-over suspension. I think the term has been used way too much in marketing hype. On a 2000 lb racecar I can see the why, but on a 3500 street car… maybe. However, I think the challenge of your project is great and hope it works for you.

Re the quote- dampers have no restoring force, therefore a 'stiff' shock will not necessarily provide a better handling car. But as you know, a fully adjustable shock has a greater potential to create a properly balanced car.

Dwayne 76

Is there a noticable difference in ride quality with coil overs??