|
12-16-2008, 12:10 PM | #11 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: 1982-92 camaro
Quote:
Since I'm not worried about the 2x2 flexing here is how I braced the crossmenber to the subframconnectors. |
|
12-16-2008, 12:36 PM | #12 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Liberty City [East Texas]
Posts: 1,759
Likes: 5
Liked 99 Times in 60 Posts
|
Re: 1982-92 camaro
ZRacer,
your design looks good, I like the crossmember being triangulated to the frame connectors. Also, I like your idea about removing the poly bushing and building a solid bushing to replace it. I had not thought of that. This is a good example of our information age, I really like being able to share ideas & thoughts. A fellow can usually learn something! [smile]
__________________
Larry Woodfin 471W |
12-16-2008, 12:40 PM | #13 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Liberty City [East Texas]
Posts: 1,759
Likes: 5
Liked 99 Times in 60 Posts
|
Re: 1982-92 camaro
by tha way, what is the length of the S & W torque arm? [center of axle to center of front bushing?]
__________________
Larry Woodfin 471W |
12-16-2008, 12:44 PM | #14 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: 1982-92 camaro
Yes, there is a lot to learn on this site as well as others like it. The torque arm setup was new to me and I had to do a lot of research before I realized just how it works. I actually got to talk to the engineer who designed it for GM. To really make this setup hook and have you car 60' well there is a lot more than just bolting this thing on.
|
12-16-2008, 12:55 PM | #15 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: 1982-92 camaro
From what I understand it is 12" shorter that the stock one which I beleive is 56". That is from the top attachment point in the rear to the center point in the front. The shorter they are the harder hit on the tires.
|
12-16-2008, 02:06 PM | #16 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 303
Likes: 118
Liked 34 Times in 9 Posts
|
Re: 1982-92 camaro
We used the S&W stuff in our Firebird stocker. Never had any problems and picked the 60' time up quite a bit. You cannot go wrong with that set up!!!
|
12-16-2008, 05:25 PM | #17 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Woodlawn IL
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 162
Liked 220 Times in 79 Posts
|
Re: 1982-92 camaro
I wonder if the racers listed in their ad auctually use them un modified or they modify them. I am hoping Mr Josey,or one of the others in their add will see this and chime in as to how best to use them. (modified or unmodified) I am sure there is something better than what I am currently using (SLP subframe connectors and a adjustable torque arm that has the plate bolted up in the tunnel. very heavy but all that was available back in 95-96 when I started bracket racing current car) Its time update I just want to make sure what I buy is what is the best bang for the buck so to speak.
Once again thanks again for all your opininons/help Rob Last edited by Rob Petrie E395; 12-16-2008 at 05:30 PM. |
12-16-2008, 08:21 PM | #18 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 2 Posts
|
Re: 1982-92 camaro
just my 2 cents i have 90 pontiac formula j/sa 2x3 tubing for sub frame connectors eibach srings r/r air bag lakewood control arms stock sway bar stock torque arm with homemade frontmount/ driveshaft loop 60fts low 1.40s in j/sa thanks for listening gene monahan 1021 stk
|
12-16-2008, 09:46 PM | #19 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: 1982-92 camaro
Quote:
|
|
12-17-2008, 11:21 AM | #20 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 392
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
Re: 1982-92 camaro
He doesn't use an anti-roll bar Gene has the stock sway bar. It is the old school set up air bags and sway bar. And hell it works!! Might be better with the s and w stuff. Who knows does some one what to donate so he can back to back the set ups????
__________________
No prep is king |
|
|