Is this legal?
 

I was told I could use an anti-rollbar on the rearend in stock but it had to be a bolt-in unit.
Is it legal to weld in box tubing for mounting the anti-rollbar?

Check out this installation:

http://www.competitionplus.com/drag-...via-suspension

Re: Is this legal?
 

looks bogus to me. If I was from that area I would protest.

Re: Is this legal?
 

And the "rule book" says what about anit roll bars???

Re: Is this legal?
 

ahhh...I think it says nothing....traction devices are "supposed " to be bolt on, anti-roll bar is not a traction bar, I've looked under many stockers,lots have them and all were welded in.

Re: Is this legal?
 

^^^ Yep! Mine is welded in.

Re: Is this legal?
 

You can tack weld the anti roll bar in place and bolt it, but i was told you could not completely weld the unit in. Thats the way mine is put it, works great and never had a issue.

Re: Is this legal?
 

OK, if it's not a traction device then what exactly is it? Why do you have it in the car?
To answer the question, no it's not legal but all of the late model F bodies that I've looked at have them welded in and the particular kit in that article is meant to be welded in.
NHRA should spend some time looking under cars instead of just looking under hoods.

Re: Is this legal?
 

well the rule book says you can "beef up" the frame, and the anti roll bar is technically bolted to what ever extra "bracing" they added

Re: Is this legal?
 

I can't find that one. Could you please point out where that is in the book?

Re: Is this legal?
 

The frame can be "beefed up" in stock?

I looked for that in the rulebook before I asked the question. I did not see any such statement in the stock section. The only allowable addition I can find is the connectors between front and rear subframes.

Re: Is this legal?
 

**** this... Does it really matter?
****'s been slid through, covered up or accepted by certain divisions / or inspectors for years,
so that there's nothing "stock" about this class anymore anyway. Weld the bars in. Who cares.

Re: Is this legal?
 

It does to me!

Re: Is this legal?
 

Apparently Billy, You & I are the only ones that it matters to.... to those that have ****ed up this class it doesn't.

Re: Is this legal?
 

Original rear end may be replaced with another from the same
automobile manufacturer; truck rear end prohibited. Distance
between backing plates may not be changed. Any gear ratio that
fits third-member case or housing permitted. Limited-slip or
ratchet-type rear ends permitted. Reinforcement of spring perch
permitted. Spools permitted only with aftermarket axles.
Aftermarket axles not required for front-wheel-drive vehicles.
Larger brakes may be used. Replacement rear end may be
narrowed or widened to obtain original rear-end width. Bracing or
beefing up the rear-end housing permitted.


Swing axle differential may be replaced with conventional housing;
stock trailing arms must be retained, may be beefed up and
adapted to housing, must retain transverse spring. Must install
Panhard bar. Frame may be notched for driveshaft clearance.
Distance between OEM backing plates and OEM wheelbase must
be maintained. Coil-over shock or four-link adaptations prohibited.
See General Regulations 2:11.


I assume that's on the housing only is the way I read it

FRAME
Frame or subframe must be stock for body used. Subframes on
unibody cars may be joined. Maximum-size material to be used is 2
inches x 3 inches x 1/8-inch. Round tubing may be used to tie front
and rear subframes together and join subframe in straight line
extending through car floor, with floor completely welded to
member.

i don't see the words "beefing up" under " FRAME"

Re: Is this legal?
 

is sway bar and anti roll bar the same thing in a f-body?

Re: Is this legal?
 

No sir.

Re: Is this legal?
 

Well there used to be something to that effect. But I haven't read that section in a while.

Re: Is this legal?
 

I would say it's NOT.

Re: Is this legal?
 

I WOULD agree with this.


Years ago, the first time I tore the left lower trailing arm bracket off a full size Chevy frame, I had to do something to fix it...or park the car.
That didn't seem like a good option at the time, so I welded the bracket back on and added a couple of gussets to it. No one ever said anything about or most likely ,even noticed it.
Was it technically legal? Probably not.
If you are allowed to weld braces and brackets to suspension mounts, then it should be mentioned in the rule book.
Just because this deal is out there, doesn't make it legal.
Look how long the first gen. weebie jeebie bars were out there before someone in tech figured out they were moving the whole lower pivot to a non OEM location.

Re: Is this legal?
 

As I understand it, the purpose of a rear "anti-roll" bar, is to help resist the tendency for the entire car to twist or "tilt" to the right on launch, and in the lower gears ? Right ?
In extreme cases ( and I think we've all seen those videos of the early 60's Chevy nostalgia match racing cars that almost lay on their right side on launch ), this CAN'T ber safe.
Solution ?
More weight jacking to the RR spring ? ( "side effect".. no pun intended... car goes back to tilted left at high speed )
WAY stiffer springs ? ( to what end ? ... till the rear suspension doesn't move ? )
Or... install a simple device that manufacturers have used to control body roll, since the late 1930's ?
Cars with rear coil springs, will inherently be less resistant to the body rolling to one side... mostly due the fact that the springs are usually located much more inboard than a leaf spring car.
Having seen some of these "twisted" launches... I think cars with the problem should be required to control it.

As with anything. there's trade-offs.
A rear ant-roll bar, without a front anti-roll bar ( most of us don't use a front one ), creates a car with dramatic over-steer characteristics. Add to that, our low pressure rear tires, and you have someing that you better not try and make sudden moves of the steering wheel at high speed !

To me, if it's not changing the suspension geometry in any way, and you're not welding in a bunch of crap... a rear anti-roll bar should be permitted, and specified as such.
and no... I don't have one.

Re: Is this legal?
 

Just ask Robert Pond if an anti-roll bar is considered a traction device. From what I have been told he had to move his from inside the trunk to under the car. At that time NHRA ruled it as a traction device and said he could continue using it as long as it was bolted in. I do believe the brackets can be welded to the rearend housing but thats all.

Re: Is this legal?
 

I went to a lot of trouble back in the day to put an anti-roll bar in my car and make it 100% bolt in. Worked like a champ but definitely would have been easier to weld it in.

http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/a...waybarpic2.jpg

Re: Is this legal?
 

If the "weld on" style are legal, I'll be changing mine over. I have some issues with my bolt on system, some welding would correct these problems.

Wade

Re: Is this legal?
 

Here's one that is 100% bolt on and used by several Stockers and even some 9"tire SS. It works!

http://www.hrpartsandstuff.com/produ...nd/swaybar.htm


Tom

Re: Is this legal?
 

Yup and 8 second Turbo Buicks,his stuff is pure art.

Kevin

Re: Is this legal?
 

care to explain the differance?

Re: Is this legal?
 

Sway bar = panhard bar. Locates the rear end side-to-side. Anti-roll bars control body roll. Two separate components. Body roll & side-to-side sway are two different things.
At least that's according to GM shop manuals.

Re: Is this legal?
 

And still... no one can post where the rule book states that you CAN'T weld in an anti-roll bar......

Re: Is this legal?
 

i'm not looking for an argument but, i guess i'll have to disagree with gm on that one . how in the world a (sway bar = a panhard rod) is beyond me. i guess a camaro with a front sway locates the front end? LOL. in my opinion a sway bar and a anti roll bar are the exact same thing. they both control body roll. i guess technically it should be called an anti-swaybar

Re: Is this legal?
 

Mark, sway is side-to-side. A panhard bar locates/centers the rear end under the car side-to-side, but will not control body roll.
That front bar is anti-roll also.

Re: Is this legal?
 

i have built a couple of sway bars for customers and made sure they where bolt in,,it should be good but if your welding in supports on the frame like in the "chevy artical" i wouldn't think it would fly gmonde

Re: Is this legal?
 

You need to go back and look at the pictures again - the part that welds in under the floor is designed the reinforce the frame under the rear roll bar braces. The anti-roll bar bolts to those braces. A technicallty? Maybe but acceptable yep. The part has been around for years and is under several national & division winning Camaros & Firebirds including a recent world champs car. It's been looked at by tech guys in several of the divisions - never a problem.

Re: Is this legal?
 

Well, there you have it boys! A technicality! Thanks Don.

Re: Is this legal?
 

That's a "solid" bar..... Much more weight than the http://www.hrpartsandstuff.com/produ...nd/swaybar.htm bar.... Just a FYI post...

Re: Is this legal?
 

Why do my 2 stock street Camaros have both a panhard bar and a sway bar on the rear if both do the same thing?

Re: Is this legal?
 

It doesn't. It has a Panhard or sway bar and that bar connecting the two lower control arms is an anti-roll bar.

Re: Is this legal?
 

I'm confused with your answers....if sway bar = panhard bar, why does my cars have both? These are mid 80's Camaros. They have a bar that connects the body to the rearend housing...panhard. They do not have a bar that connects the lower contol arms. They have a bar that connects to the body and the rear end. Is that an anti-roll bar? If so, why is it not legal to replace it with the aftermarket anti-roll bar?

Re: Is this legal?
 

As I said, the bar that bolts between the F body lower control arms is an anti roll bar. The bar running from the driver's side end of the rear end housing to the bracket on the frame, passenger side, prevents side-to-side sway. Some people tend to cal the anti roll bar a sway bar also. That is not accurate, but you go ahead and call it what you want.

Re: Is this legal?
 

Maybe, Billy , Maybe

Re: Is this legal?
 

Anti-roll, anti-sway or stabilizer (according to GM parts) are all the same. The purpose of the panhard bar (axel tie rod according to GM parts) is to only keep the housing centered in the car. It is not a side to side "sway bar". So if it came with an anti-roll, why can't it be replaced with an aftermarket unit?