12:05 Garage- ’70 Duster build
Tim is correct, HDK never claims they make the cars handle better.....I will however claim that the car will drive a whole lot different.
Sorry Denny, but I've got to say that feels like "politician speak" to me. Drive different? Certainly not worse, so you must mean better. Which could be interrupted as "handle better", and if someone else were to say that and you didn't correct them then you didn't say it, right? And if they go from a worn out mis-aligned TB suspension to all new parts, they wouldn't really be wrong would they?
Don't take that harshly, not trying to poke at you, but you have to see that as a little bit of a double speak.
Honestly, I struggle to see how a TB suspension with a decent wheel rate, a good amount of caster and decent camber and a Borgeson box would feel much different that a COC.
Unless you mean that the roll center is underground with the COC so it actually has more roll in the corners than the TB suspension. That would be different. But no one says it will feel a whole lot different and mean worse, so...? :D
Dropping a few pounds with the ability to (easily) be more aggressive on the the alignment specs to match our modern tires is the name of the game. Add the additional room afforded by the elimination the OEM steering and torsion bars that allow for easier powertrain transplants and it is a win / win for us Mopar hot rodders.
I would never argue that there aren't some advantages to a COC, fitting a motor is certainly one of them. I would argue that it isn't the only way to do so though. Not that you have said that, but I know others have at least implied it.
And to be clear, a COC isn't required to be more aggressive on the alignment specs, so not sure I would include that in the list of advantages. Certainly the COC kit adds the ability to length or shorten the LCA, but that isn't the only way to get more aggressive on the alignment specs so not sure how it is different.
Definitely not for everyone, especially those that want to keep their OEM ride.
Ok, to me that comment says "if you don't care about handling keep the TB's, but if you do want it to drive and handle like a modern car then you need a COC". Sorry, mixed messages here.
That's probably not what you meant, but it's what I hear.
For the record......Tim has an off the shelf / standard HDK package, not a "Slammer" or "Super Slammer" . Those packages were built for specific customers that wanted to lower the body to the extent they required extensive fabrication like raising the transmission tunnel and the OEM inner fenders. And yes, in those versions, as the the body drops, the K frame and its pivot points are raised. On most of the "slammer" builds standard length upper ball joints were used.
Gotcha. I wasn't sure if I was remembering that correctly. It was just an idea since the M2 spindles appear to be on the short side for a handling package.
It's interesting that the "Slammer" and "Super Slammer" kits require inner fender work and tunnel modifications. So bringing the k-frame up so the spindle height is better and the geometry is actually decent causes all kinds of problems. Which kind of implies that the real issue is that the spindle is just too short.
I am grateful for Tims input and glad to reciprocate with HDK "help" wherever possible.
I think with Tim's input you will be able to get to a package that will actually handle well. Not to say it didn't before, but the results Tim has posted so far imply that there were some deficiencies that were unknown before.
It also implies to me that there isn't a COC on the market that has a good roll center. I really wonder if QA1 already knows this but ignored it.
Either way, let me end by saying that I am glad that you (Denny) and HDK are here and are always looking to improve their product. I do think the HDK is the superior product in the COC arena and would be the one I would chose if I went that direction.
