Ford vs Chevy Build-up

[FireSale]

I've photos of cars wheels up in ND that don't seem to meet these regs.

"SUSPENSION, Front
Must retain complete stock front suspension system as produced
by manufacturer for body used, aftermarket tie rods with Heim joints
permitted. Lift kits/travel limiters prohibited. Sway bar optional. See
General Regulations 3:4.

3:4 SUSPENSION
All cars must have a full suspension system of the type produced by an automobile manufacturer (i.e., springs, torsion bars, etc.). Rigid- mount front and/or rear axles are permitted when so indicated in Class Requirements. All rod ends must be installed with flat washers of sufficient outside diameter to prevent bearing pullout. Hollow rod ends are prohibited. With the exception of unaltered OEM production Can-Am Spyder three-wheel motorcycles, three- wheel vehicles are not eligible for competition in any class. Radius rods are not required on front axles that are rigidly mounted 18 inches or less from kingpin axis. Any front suspension using a beam or tubular axle must have radius rods attached to frame."

Aftermarket brakes are OK. If that thing counts as a radius rod, toss it. Since it bolts in, pull it out but hold on to it. If a tech asks for it, stick it back in.

Dale

[Geerhead55]

Sway bar Optional,, Rich. The way that thing is bolted in, going from one side to the other,, it could be considered a sway bar,,, at least it looks like one when I squint my eyes! Good luck with this project,,, but I do miss the Camaro build.
Danny Durham

[FireSale]

Unfortunately, Mark may be right. Stock requires a full factory front end as does SS except for the conversion cars, for that matter. When I rebuilt the front end of my 68 for GT I used aftermarket stock replica parts piece for piece except for brakes. There are solid bars similar to those on my car that run from the lower control arms to the front of the chassis under the radiator support. They are responsible for part of the alignment and are adjustable. The whole front is different from yours.

Dale

[HandOverFist]

A pic of the front brace attached...



I know some use these parts, but I never envisioned it would be illegal to delete or modify said part. What exactly constitutes "factory suspension"? I can substitute aftermarket rotors/calipers but can't touch this junky bracket? It looks like a bandaide fix from Ford to me. When I installed the subframe connectors I had to cut the factory braces at the rear that the back braces bolt to...does this make the car null and void now? It sure isnt going to be as Ford produced it.

[slowpony]

Originally Posted by HandOverFist

A pic of the front brace attached...



I know some use these parts, but I never envisioned it would be illegal to delete or modify said part. What exactly constitutes "factory suspension"? I can substitute aftermarket rotors/calipers but can't touch this junky bracket? It looks like a bandaide fix from Ford to me. When I installed the subframe connectors I had to cut the factory braces at the rear that the back braces bolt to...does this make the car null and void now? It sure isnt going to be as Ford produced it.

These braces were put on convertibles to lessen cowl shake and to distribute load from k member back to body structure. I have a 94 GT convertible with them. My 86 GT T-top car and early convertibles don't have them. I am not sure when they started putting them on, but strut tower braces served the same purpose. Car is most certainly stiffer with frame connectors and a roll bar.

[HandOverFist]

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

Yes, you have to have them, Rich...Now that you put it on the internet.
TMI

I waited and went to work thinking about this Mark so I could be sure of being polite and respectful.

That statement infers that doing something out of the scope of the rule book is alright as long as it isnt spoken of...at least that is how I interpreted it. I don't exist in a grey area nor do I wish to...I'm the most black and white person you are likely to meet and make no apologies for it. The only reason I post on this forum is because I thought this would be the best place to gather information from like minded racers on subjects or issues I have with ongoing projects.

I understand this is a open forum and I appreciate information and suggestions from all regardless of experience...you never know what ideas might prove beneficial until you hear them. I like to think I'm savvy enough to sort through and consider all input. Those that follow me here know I am not prone to opinions nor do I usually comment on subjects unless I have personal experience with them. Btw, I do have contact with and consider advice from some of the racers you mentioned, but I do not limit myself or censor information from all other sources.

With that off my chest let's continue this build. Hoping I can take delivery early enough tm to allow me to at least set the hoop in the car to measure clearance with the ragtop.

[Mark Yacavone]

Originally Posted by HandOverFist

I waited and went to work thinking about this Mark so I could be sure of being polite and respectful.

That statement infers that doing something out of the scope of the rule book is alright as long as it isnt spoken of...at least that is how I interpreted it. I don't exist in a grey area nor do I wish to...I'm the most black and white person you are likely to meet and make no apologies for it. The only reason I post on this forum is because I thought this would be the best place to gather information from like minded racers on subjects or issues I have with ongoing projects.

I understand this is a open forum and I appreciate information and suggestions from all regardless of experience...you never know what ideas might prove beneficial until you hear them. I like to think I'm savvy enough to sort through and consider all input. Those that follow me here know I am not prone to opinions nor do I usually comment on subjects unless I have personal experience with them. Btw, I do have contact with and consider advice from some of the racers you mentioned, but I do not limit myself or censor information from all other sources.

With that off my chest let's continue this build. Hoping I can take delivery early enough tm to allow me to at least set the hoop in the car to measure clearance with the ragtop.

Rich, I'm not sure how to reply to this, as I'm not really sure you got my original point.
Let me ask you this; Do you think you could leave the under hood fender braces off of your 67 Camaro and nobody would notice ?
Conversely, how about the under chassis front braces on a convertible only Fox body?

I suppose I should have answered like this:
No you can't take the brace off. It's part of the car ...just like the Camaro fender braces.

Doing a nice job..Carry on!

[HandOverFist]

I will argue the point with logic Mark. To compare those flakey brackets under the Mustang to a Camaro fender brace is apples vs oranges. At least the Camaro brace serves some purpose...I can think of nothing those flimbsy pieces of metal under the Mustang could possibly contribute.

They are most certainly not a suspension part, so that is out of the way. Let's see...they are attached to the lower portion of the radiator support at the front and to the subframe/rocker panel at the rear. What does all this have in common? Why everything is joined at the crossmember...hmm. Ok, I shall deem it part of the crossmember...we can call it a crossmember brace if you like. The NHRA rule book says I can alter the crossmember for oil pan removal. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Oh yeah...I can easily replace those brackets with something of my own design that will actually serve a purpose if the need arises.

[mike britt]

Hey Rich, if you look at how flimsy that core support is, that's probably why Ford put that brace there.