|
![]() |
#1 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Liberty City [East Texas]
Posts: 1,760
Likes: 5
Liked 99 Times in 60 Posts
|
![]()
My 3rd gen Camaro Lamplighter project is equipped with an Ed Quay, unequal length, four-link system, and rear frame. It is a back half build the OE front suspension and Randy Mans front struts.
The question, up to recently adding an anti-roll rear bar, has been the standard thinking. However, there has been some suggestion that the unequal length bars work better without the anti-roll. For those racing with the Ed Quay back half, what is your feedback about the anti-roll bar?
__________________
Larry Woodfin 471W |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: phoenix
Posts: 1,486
Likes: 66
Liked 704 Times in 281 Posts
|
![]()
My Monte was built by Ed in 1985 and my experience was the opposite. It was an unequal 4 link. I struggled to get car from not rolling over. With anti bar it solved roll over, but cant say it was faster.
Last edited by Jeff Stout; 11-09-2020 at 01:26 PM. Reason: more |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Liked 31 Times in 7 Posts
|
![]()
My car is a Quay car and I had an anti-roll installed to stop the body from rolling so bad. I have had zero issues with mine.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: NY, NY
Posts: 750
Likes: 175
Liked 189 Times in 48 Posts
|
![]()
Do you have access to scales?
My first GT car was a Quay car. I was able to correct that tendency w/o a anti-roll system with more preload in the right top bar and a little extra height (3/4") on the driver side front spring. That being said - there's nothing wrong with an anti-roll system. Also - downward (nose down) rake on both bars (top and bottom) helps to limit the amount of roll.
__________________
Angelo DiTocco '98 Firebird SS/HA '98 Firebird B/SA Last edited by Angelo DiTocco; 11-09-2020 at 03:10 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
VIP Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: phoenix
Posts: 1,486
Likes: 66
Liked 704 Times in 281 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kiefer, Ok.
Posts: 167
Likes: 64
Liked 125 Times in 59 Posts
|
![]()
Larry this may seem crazy to you but it really helped mine. Once I got to 5.60s it was a hand full. Just an option to keep in mind.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Liberty City [East Texas]
Posts: 1,760
Likes: 5
Liked 99 Times in 60 Posts
|
![]()
Curtis, I like that, a good idea and easily done. Do you also employ an anti-roll bar?
__________________
Larry Woodfin 471W |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 243
Likes: 36
Liked 34 Times in 12 Posts
|
![]()
I have built two of these cars and have not had problems with body roll, not sure if it is how they were setup or lack of power, lol.
I worked with Ed 20 years ago and he provided details on the setup that are still in my car today. My car is setup neutral- no squat and no separation. I have some preload in top passenger bar but minimal. Bottom bar is 2 degrees down, cannot remember top bar location. I scale car with 40# more on driver rear than passenger rear. Front is same side to side. I did have driver front springs 1/2 coil higher initially but went to Santuff springs which are equal. Never saw a difference in roll. In my humble opinion- if the shocks are set soft, rear springs are soft or 4 link is set for excessive squat- you could have the body roll. It appears some cars require anti roll bar and some do not, everybody has a different recipe. |
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#9 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Liberty City [East Texas]
Posts: 1,760
Likes: 5
Liked 99 Times in 60 Posts
|
![]()
Bert, Thanks, I appreciate the note.
__________________
Larry Woodfin 471W |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kiefer, Ok.
Posts: 167
Likes: 64
Liked 125 Times in 59 Posts
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|