![]() |
Re: Make it handle
I've been following this thread for a while and have looked over the posts several times, but I haven't seen much of an answer to a topic that was covered around pages 8, 9, and 10. The topic was about anti-squat and that brought up the theory of swapping or changing the trailing arm mounts to reposition them higher at the crossmember. One member asked what a recommended pinion angle should be, but I seem to have lost the exact location of that post. Robnolimit, you comment that getting the right pinion anlge is free horsepower. Do you have a recommended pinion angle and could you give a little insight on if/how pinion anlge affects handling or perfomrnace?
|
Re: Make it handle
I have a question, how do you calculate your roll center and the best ways to lower it. I know you can lower your motor and gat as much weight down low but can you lower it with A-arm geometry?
|
Re: Make it handle
Quote:
Lowering the motor will lower your center of gravity. |
Re: Make it handle
Brain fart I ment center of gravity. I knew the roll center would be effected. Let me try again center of gravity?
Posted via Mobile Device |
Re: Make it handle
Nate, how about the cantilever setup? What are some of the advantages I will get with that? Will keeping it a longbed hinder the performance? I was considering a mid sized bed, I would rather not go full short since everyone runs short.
I ask here since others might benefit as well from your insight. |
Re: Make it handle
Quote:
|
Re: Make it handle
Quote:
|
Re: Make it handle
Quote:
|
Re: Make it handle
Thanks for the rule of thumb, Rob. I will play more with wheel base and as the build gets closer, Nate and I will work specifics. I was going with the C4 setup to keep with the theme of the build. But the more I talk to people, the more I am learning just how well this might work out.
I am not looking to race hardcore. But I will take it out and see what it can do against my buddies at some local events when its done next year. |
Re: Make it handle
Quote:
Jimmy... there are a handful advantages to the rocker arm set-up, other than it just looking cool.... here are a couple that come to mind right off the bat. - It can help in packaging the components when space is at a premium. - It can allow you to change the rocker ratio and have infinite adjustment in spring rate. You can do all sorts of things by tweaking and changing the rocker arms and their geometry. :) |
Re: Make it handle
The rocker ratio was my first thought, and I saw a post from Josh who had it on his custom frame (pic above). I am so giddy with anticipation. :lol:
Adding the adjistability of the select ride shockwaves make for some added refinement as well. I will play with wheelbase numbers and weight tonight. |
Re: Make it handle
Right you are Nate. The ratio is the big advantage. if you use a 4" stroke shockwave, and build a 1.5 ratio rocker arm, you would have 6 of travel available. Also, the 7000 series shockwave will yield appx. 350 lb/in spring rate at 75 psi. On the rocker arm with a 1.5 ratio it will net out at appx. 233 lb/in, which is right in the range you want.
Nate, one expert sharing his knowledge may be seen as opinionated. A group of experts sharing the same same knowedge will set the standards and help shape the future. |
Re: Make it handle
I see Hotchkis now has 2" front lowering springs, but at a 1500 lb/in rate. This seems kind of high compared to what has been mentioned previously in this thread..... Any thoughts?
|
Re: Make it handle
This goes right to your "set up theory", or plan. you only get to choose one, no mixing to get good results. - 1)soft spring/big bar/low RC. -or- 2) stiff spring/soft bar/high RC. Now somewhere in the middle is med spring/med bar/med RC, but lets choose option 1 or 2. O.E. C-10 geometry nets a pretty high RC, as it should, it's truck after all. So it sort of forces you over to option 2. I have to say that for me, 1500 lbs seams stiff, but, depending on the shock and swaybar, it could work. Remember, if you drive it everyday, and it's not a dedicated weekender, you need to be comfortable in it too.
|
Re: Make it handle
Rob - Yeah, it's more of a weekender and plan on hitting the local track occasionally. I would be matching up the rest of Hotchkis front end components and a custom coilover set-up out back using QA1 shocks all around. I don't mind giving up some ride quality for added performance. I noticed you used the MOOG bick block springs and just cut a coil off. Have you been satisfied with that result?
|
Re: Make it handle
I am really happy with them, it yields appx 1200 lb spring rate, smooth and good handling. For a dual purpose driving, adjustable shocks can be a big help.
|
Re: Make it handle
Quote:
Posted via Mobile Device |
Re: Make it handle
awesome thread! Rob and nate and everyone else thank you for your i have learned alot about handling! I just cant make up my mind on my 57 truck or my 82 chevy!
|
Re: Make it handle
hmm, the 9000 bags are 4.5" closed, 12" oper, spec ride height at 9" - 9.5". Oops, '7000' series, (1000 to 1200 lb cap.) they are 4" closed, 13" open, and 8" to 9" RH
|
Re: Make it handle
Quote:
|
Re: Make it handle
Quote:
The impression your not supposed to weld sway bars or springs. If it is ok that would be an easy way to make a bar adjustable. Or stiffen it up if needed. Posted via Mobile Device |
Re: Make it handle
Quote:
|
Re: Make it handle
Thanks, I was just going to post that.
|
Re: Make it handle
Quote:
Posted via Mobile Device |
Re: Make it handle
Quote:
Thanks, Matt |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:58 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1997-2022 67-72chevytrucks.com