Re: Make it handle
 

Nice build. You might reach out to Rob/NLE directly for a faster response. While he does respond here, it sometimes takes a minute. The direct approach might help get the info quicker.

Re: Make it handle
 

Thanks! Ill give it a few days, then give him a call.

Nik

Re: Make it handle
 

Hey Rob, I just wanted to get your advice on my 69 swb pickup. I've read through quite a bit of this thread, but most of it is oriented towards track and autocross.

Is there a setup you recommend for a daily driver? I'm thinking the most demanding scenario my truck is ever going to see are mountain roads.

I'm looking for a reasonable drop, 3 and 5, give or take without notching the frame. Less drop is ok if that's the way it needs to be. Thanks for yours and really anyone else's input. My brother and I have been looking at Hotchkis, CPP, QA1 and Performance Online.

Re: Make it handle
 

Wow what a fantastic read! Thanks so much for the wealth of knowledge shared!!

My question regards frame boxing & bracing with a current daily driver (not a bare frame). Is it okay to do the welding on a twin post lift? (wheels drooped) Do we need to be concerned about frame flex from it hanging?

Thanks!

Re: Make it handle
 

I would not weld on or box the frame w/it suspended in air from a twin post lift. The frame needs to be properly supported @ all areas along it's length to alleviate stress/distortion before making modifications. I would only consider it if that can be accomplished.

Re: Make it handle
 

Hi Rob,

Can you give us guys without access to a track some real world street tests we can use to track our progress? As we make changes it would be great to have some benchmark tests we can do on the street or in a parking lot to compare the results. I plan to do many of your suggested changes to my ‘69 short bed but want to take your advise and do 1 at a time. And test the results each with each step.

Thanks!!
Posted via Mobile Device

Re: Make it handle
 

Is there an advantage of having a steel floor in the bed verses a wood floor as far a rigidity of the rear of the truck?

Re: Make it handle
 

Having had one of each, I would say yes as far as w/stock trucks. The solid steel floor definitely helps solidify the bed area.

For my 64 that's under construction, I'm gusseting & triangulating the bed supports w/each other so that the mounting structure/s firm up the bed assembly like a steel floor would w/the wood merely being on top for visual purposes.

Re: Make it handle
 

If someone was considering having a new spindle manufactured, what design improvements should be considered? What would be ideal?

Here is what I'm thinking so far:

-Weight optimized
-Bolt on sealed bearing hub from a late model Durango
-Bolt on steering arm to allow for tuning Ackerman and bumpsteer
-Taller for better camber gain
-2.5" or 3" built in drop

What loads would be reasonable to consider for purposes of FEA? Would there be any foreseen issues with billet aluminum instead of a forging?

Re: Make it handle
 

How durable is the Durango hub? Has it been used in actual high load/stress apps (racing)? There's a reason the Vette hubs are commonly used.

This is a good idea. Bolt-on steering arms allow for tuning but will be harder for initial market introduction. Might have to start w/one & then other options w/increased adjustability @ a later date (unless several options can be built/tested prior to public release).

C10 spindles are one of the tallest GM iron spindles for their time. How do they compare to modern spindles? With a taller spindle, would real estate become a limiting factor? Would a more current spindle/joint arrangement work better (BJ attached under the upper pad vs on top; basically similar impact of the Gulstrand mod)?

The more spindle drop, the greater the interference issues. Built in drop needs to be balanced w/possible issues.

Isn't forging done for increasing strength from an aluminum material life-span aspect (aluminum has a reduced lifespan vs steel)?

Just initial thoughts. I'm sure there's more....

Re: Make it handle
 

Thanks for the reply SCOTI. I was hoping that you might weigh in since it seems like you have been into the C10 handling scene for a long time and have a lot of good experience.

My thinking is that the Durango is a considerably heavier vehicle with a 5x5 bolt pattern by default. Could easily sub in Jeep Wrangler hubs which would have the same BP, be very common place, and have certainly been proven to withstand abuse. While the Vette is good for racing a 3300 lb car, I'm not sure it is the best for a 4,000 lb C10 and it requires custom bolt pattern to be drilled.

My thinking on the steering arm is the same for sure.

I know that taller upper ball joints were discussed earlier in the threads with good results so I was after a similar after. While it is taller for 60s GM, these spindles are super short compared to a modern truck spindle. The modern ball joint arrangement may be a good option. I see so many new cars where the upper ball joint is basically on top of the tire!

I agree on the forging being a better option for long life. It just seems cost prohibitive unless large orders. Wondering out loud if a billet aluminum machined spindle could be designed for sufficient strength and life. I know DSE'S new upright is forged but not sure about Wilwood Pro Spindle.

My biggest complaint with aftermarket options currently available is lack of a spindle with bolt on arm for tuning and also lack of "off the shelf" bolt on sealed hub in 5x5 bolt pattern. There has to be a way to incorporate those features and I figured that I may as well improve other geometry at the same time if possible.

Re: Make it handle
 

True. There's a big difference between Vette vs truck weights; especially on the front hub. I know my research on comparable aftermarket high end spindles suggested there is a tug-o-war going on about the reliance of sealed bearings.

The spindles using the C5/6/7 sealed bearing set-ups recommend only using the top tier Zr1 parts because of short life span on alternative replacement parts. Those suckers are ~$400 a pop; pricy if you're replacing things more frequently. Thus the old stand-by wheel bearings w/their easy serviceability & 'common-folk' friendly purchase price are a value to those that have limited resources.

I see value in both. But, w/o having first-hand exposure on the lifespan of unit-bearings I'm @ a disadvantage of how 'worthy' they are in the scheme of things (return on investment).

I have tall upper BJ's on my C10's. I just know from my previously mentioned research that the disc brake style C10 spindles were taller than most for their era. From my notes:

67-72 A/F/X/& G body 'short' spindles ~7-7.5"
70-81 F/B-body & 73-87 C10 'tall' spindles ~9"
C4 Vette ~11"
ATS & Wilwood aftermarket spindle ~9"

*I can confirm the 73-87 C10, G-body, & C4 Vette spindle heights as I own them & actually measured for the research when trying to source something better for a g-body. The other numbers were from online look-up & could be suspect/incorrect.

This is true & apparently time consuming (I'm still waiting for ATS spindles paid for in June). The ATS spindle is forged & I believe the Wilwood is as well. But, even the forged versions have an expected lifespan (x-miles/x-years) before they SHOULD be replaced. It's a limitation most don't even think about for their steel spindles

I confess I haven't really studied the Wilwood spindle because I'm a fan of being able to source the parts used from OE applications (Have a brake part issue in Podunk, TX. Pop into Oreillys/Auotzone/Advance Auto & ask for a Wilwood pad/caliper/master cyl/hose etc....). However, you can usually do the same for PBR & Brembo parts & they'll have something.

I'm 100% w/you on a spindle designed for optimum set-points of the geometry & tuning for the steering. I'm on the fence about the sealed hubs being 'better'. I assumed they were until reading about the alarming failure rate for typical store-bought replacement parts.

Re: Make it handle
 

Scoti, you have probably said in the past but what tall ball joint did you use? Did you like that mod? It sounds fairly simple I thought I had looked in the past and didn't find an option for that swap but it has been so long I don't remember.

And to add to this I am running the CPP modular spindles and am almost certain at the time I went with the 71-72 spindles, I don't remember why but did.
Thanks,
Dave

Re: Make it handle
 

I'm using the CPP 'modular' spindle on my current built ('64). I used the QA1 tall BJ for the upper.

Re: Make it handle
 

Just for FYI, the spindles are all the same when looking at the unfinished casting used. The only difference between the 71-72 and the 73-87 spindles are in the size and taper of the ball joint holes and the tie rod hole on the steering arm. So, I am guessing you bought the 71-72 spindles so that you did not have to changes ball joints and/or tie rod ends.

Re: Make it handle
 

We are discussing this in PM's now so I wanted to put it here as well....

I recall the 71-72 vs 73-87 spindle differences were the TRE's. Drum brake spindles use different UBJ's/LBJ's vs disc brake spindles. I've always used the 73-87 platform when modding the front suspension so I have no knowledge of the 71-72 model specific parts. I swapped things to whatever the 73-87 spindles required (arms/steering/etc).

Re: Make it handle
 

Thank you guys for the info, I had PM to Scotti as not to completely muddy this great thread. I had stuck with the 1972 spindles so it appears the tall ball joints referred to will work on the 73-87. The older spindles don't seem to have an option for those, that said I may have missed it somewhere but they don't seem to be around.
Thanks,
Dave

Re: Make it handle
 

It appears from my research that the LOWER ball joint is the same from 1971-1986 ('87 R10 also). But the UPPER ball joint is specific to the 71-72 and then a different one for the 73-87.


I would think that mounting the UPPER ball joint to the underside of the upper arm will give you a slight increase in ball joint height (it moves the pivot point of the ball about 1/2" to 5/8") vertically referenced to the plane of the arm. I my head, that tells me you would get some benefit similar to a taller ball joint...

Re: Make it handle
 

Thanks. That makes sense. The upper BJ & the TRE's were the changes.

I bolted the uppers under the a-arm before I knew 'tall' BJ's were available.

Re: Make it handle
 

Karl and Scotti that's a heck of an idea on mounting the upper ball joints. I agree that should simulate the taller ball joint to a degree.
Thanks for the great suggestion.
Dave

Re: Make it handle
 

I made a trim/backing plate for the top side of the a-arm as well.

Re: Make it handle
 

Ok I have a question, my truck has a 5.5/7 ride hight with springs and spindles in ft and leafs and a flip kit in the rr. I am running .5degs camber and 4.5 degs caster with cpp upper control arms and leafs in the rear. I have 255/35 20s in ft and 275/40 20s in the rear. It will go around 50 mph corners at 70 with no roll and no slip. Am I doing somthing wrong here?

Re: Make it handle
 

Other than exceeding the speed limit? Sounds like your combo works for you.

Re: Make it handle
 

I have a 1964 GMC with Porter Built Air ride suspension front and rear.
I recently swapped out the generic mustang 2 front power steeering rack for a Detroit Speed rack. I was having some steering issues which I thought where related to the rack, it turns out that it must be power steering pump as the problems still persists after changing racks. The issue I am having is that the steering is very knotchy, easy, hard, easy, hard as you turn the wheel left to right or vice versa.
I did take out the washers I put in to reduce pressure for the Mustang rack that runs at 1100 psi to 1300 psi that the Detroit Speed rack requires.
I think it is the Saginaw pump which I am unsure of it’s condition.
The question I have is do I fix or replace the Saginaw pump or do I take this opportunity to switch to a type 2 pump.
Your thoughts please
Thanks
Rob Fisher

Re: Make it handle
 

I would switch to the Type=2 set-up if making changes.

Re: Make it handle
 

Make sure you don't have any binding in your steering column. As I'm sure you know the u joints have a limit on angles. If you are over that you will get some notchy binding.
Dave

Re: Make it handle
 

That's a good point.

Re: Make it handle
 

I took the tires off and have the suspension at Ride height and it cycles left to right as smooth as can be. With the tires back on and driving around it returns to being knotchy.

Re: Make it handle
 

If you are going to C5/C6 bearing, I would only run ZR1s or SKF X trackers. They do take much more abuse than the OEM bearing. LG replies in post 10 listing how long they used bearings. They are about $400 and you'll likely have to go to a shop that supports the Corvette HPDE/ race community. The x tracker is basically the same design as C6 Zr1 bearings. Splines and abs signal change.

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...e-upgrade.html

The post was for World Challenge Racing which was aero, big brakes, basically heads and cam LS6s, wheel to wheel, hard racing. Failure rates for various parts were higher than what most club racers experience now. I also assume this was for SKF x trackers as SKF also offers a more OEM replacement bearing which is what you'll get at NAPA, Autozone etc. Corvettes were also running world challenge before the x tracker came out and the regular SKF is an improvement over stock.


His reply:
For us on one of the World Challenge cars.....closest to what you guys run on track this is what we would see time wise out of the bearings on track.

OEM GM bearings
1 weekend event (80 mins practice, 20 min qual, 50 min race) Approx 2.5 hrs track time

GM blueprinted "race" bearings
3-4 weekend events, approx 10 hrs total run time on track

SKF bearings,
28-34 hrs total run time on track
...
I help a friend maintain a C5 HPDE car which has a Nine Lives wing and splitter on 100 tread wear tires and he has been a few seasons on X trackers. I believe they would last a long time on C10 especially on the street. I'd have more faith in them than Silverado bearings. As posted above they are 5x4.75. If I went that route I'd set the rear up to use the same. DSE is likely using the X tracker in their front suspensions for F-bodies, Novas etc. AFX spindles have also used X trackers on 64-72 A-bodies.

I agree with you on parts which you can find in OEM applications. I have toyed with idea of a No Limit wide ride and CPP tall spindles (2 gen fbody) for the C5 bearings. But, then you're mixing parts to run a few OEM parts but using aftermarket control arms etc for their suspension.

Aluminum spindles/knuckles do have a life span. Another part that changed thanks to the C6 ZR1 was the spindle. The early spindles have had the ears which mount the caliper break off. GM discovered flex in the spindle and changed the manufacturing process when the ZR1 came out. I have not heard of the later knuckles failing. The failure on the original design were after many seasons of racing. I do know of one that failed on a 72 Charger with an aftermarket suspension using C5/C6 spindles and big Baer brakes with many autox days.

Re: Make it handle
 

Question with caster. I have a 67 stepside with tube up control arms and the truck sits very low. 245x35 20s. it has about .5 degree of of camber and close to 4 degrees of caster. What I notice is when backing out of my driveway the front tires seam to drag? is that the caster? it drives nice a straight, and handles the corners like on rails.

Re: Make it handle
 

Can you offer some advice on brake pads.
I don’t take the truck to the track so mainly looking for something that will give me good bite when cold and still perform well when driving a little more spirited.
I have Wilwood brakes front and rear and a 1” bore master brake with no booster. I have contacted EBS and they recommend their Yellow Stuff and Hawk Performance recommends their HPS 5.0.

Re: Make it handle
 

It is not caster causing the drag.

How much toe it or toe out does your set up have?

Re: Make it handle
 

Guys I have leafs in my 67 and lowered 5-1/2" ft and into the C notch tell I almost hit on the rear. My truck will go around 50mph corners at 75mph and the back wont even break loose, street corners the same. What kinda 'G's do you think Im pulling?
Next week we are adding the caster mod and the bump steer mod.
Just a 1-1/4 ft sway bar and viking shocks, oh and cheap tires.

Re: Make it handle
 

What are the wheels/tires?

Re: Make it handle
 

275/40x20 rr, 255/35x20 ft all Amazon Fullway HP108s. They may be cheap but they sure do grab

Re: Make it handle
 

It has 1/8" of toe in, thats a 1/16 on each
Drive strait as an arrow with no pull on the highway

Re: Make it handle
 

I'd say if you're not running high-end sticky rubber with </= 200 tread wear rating, they're not sticky enough to grab & hold beyond a .8x G. I bet it feels like it is >.8 simply because of where it was/what a typical truck can do.

High end G's are recorded & possible in controlled/maintained track surface environments. Not so much on the state/city maintained road surfaces.

Re: Make it handle
 

Those are 380 treadwear, I would think that .80, maybe .85 is all they're good for with normal truck suspension.

As far as old cars/trucks go, I've only seen lateral grip test results posted by Mark Stielow's "Jackass 2.0" Camaro that does 1.15g on 200tw BF Goodrich Rival tires. A thing to note about modern 200tw tires- they're labeled 200tw just to pass class rules, they're much stickier than traditional 100tw track tires. So going by treadwear isn't a good indication of how much grip a tire will have.

Here is a list of cars and the amount of grip they have for comparison.

https://fastestlaps.com/lists/top-grip-kings

Re: Make it handle
 

Just to add to this as well, when folks like Stielow are recording the "Gs" they would be done on a skidpad that is setup specifically to measure this as a sustained reading. At least that was years ago.
With the sophisticated equipment they will monitor the course and can pull off the Gs as well.
It does sound like your truck is working well and makes you happy when you drive it. I say that is a win regardless of Gs. keep enjoying it.
Dave

Re: Make it handle
 

Yeppers. I follow many of those top tier 'Pro-Touring' guys. Mr. Stielow is one of the elite of that group & a super nice guy as well.

I 100% agree w/your assessment on using/going by the TW numbers as an absolute value but it's a decent indicator of where in the range it's supposed to be. Something around 200TW should stick much better than something w/a 500TW rating w/the suspension set-up being the same (kind of a Cliffnote version). I had 300TW rated Comp G's on our 4th GEN T/A. They were decent as far as 'stick' but wouldn't surpass 10k miles on the street.

--Scot