Alterkation or HemiDenny

-
Yeah. Nobody ever said that Mark wasn't a fun lovin' guy........


100_2637.jpg
 
that sleeper is kinda deceitful...reminds me of the guy with the $189 sharktooth at the....forget it
 
HemiDenny said:
Hey Wracks71...since you are the factory road racer...can I ask you?

for auto X or whatever it is called (roadracing).... what makes a coilover car any better than a torsion bar car? not a trick question or anything, but looking at your race car I see a wider/lower stance..wide, low profile tires....big brakes...no doubt, big sway bars. All stuff I can do without ANYONES coilover conversion. I have seen many race cars with front torsion bars...keeping the weight spread out and low on the car.


the big improvement for road racing (for me) would be to trash the leaf springs and go to a rear 4-bar set-up w/ locator and sway bar...adjust the bars to get in to plant...plus jack the weight where it fits the track.

my experience with the Mustang II front spindle is while it is a great affordable front steer spindle...it does not have the ackerman that the factory rear steer set up provides...the Mustang II is more of what I would call neutral ackerman...both turn about the same. I would think ackerman would be good for road racing/turning corners....but maybe you are sporting some "trick" race parts and not the over the counter spindles???

and since I don't think it is the secret to the nuclear bomb and you are the only A-body road racer I know... I have another question ....the RMS uses a modified steering arm on the spindle to correct (I assume) bumpsteer and it also appears to be lengthened a tad...does the added lenght slow down the steering and/or affect the turning radius where it is noticeable.

just askin' the expert
Click to expand...
HAHA that is awesome! I really hope to see some of these road race cars actually road racing......
 
72BBSwinger said:
HAHA that is awesome! I really hope to see some of these road race cars actually road racing......
Click to expand...

not exactly sure how to take your response....but I have always thought if the intended purpose is road racing...a beefed up stock rear steer set-up is superior. With tune-able (different length) balljoints and tubular uppers....camber/caster/ and the roll center are adjustable.

I'm no road racer...never claimed to be. that's is why I ask ..what you are looking for. Does my front end have the ability to "tune" those characteristics...absolutely.

Since it is raining out , let me bring up another point...

I get asked about alignment graphs/data, but what do the alignment graph tell you?

1) can the proper specs be achieved? most can do that even with the most Rub Goldberg configuration...do we need to show that??

2)how does the camber change thru suspension travel? I have shown ...not from graphs, but from pics that the camber change on my package thru travel is practically zero. Furthermore, for certain specific applications my package, like others including the factory, is "tuneable".

3) caster change......I build my uppers with bungs for adjustable poly-ends..or heim ends (your preference) to work with the factory cam adjusters. The caster is adjusted thru the upper control arm pivot points on the framerail....guess what?.. WE ALL USE THE SAME FACTORY PIVOT POINT unless you have installed a aftermarket front clip.

4) toe-in....here is the BIGGIE,...does the toe-in toe-out change thru suspension travel (the dreaded bumpsteer). ONLY if the lower control arm pivot point is in the correct location (with the other components utilized) can this be kept at the absolute minimum. Of course , there will be some minute movement, because the different length lower control arm and tie rod swing in slightly different arcs. I have always measured bumpsteer the old fashion way...with a guage mounted on the hub to make sure it doesn't move in and out thru the travel.

5) roll center...not in your basic alignment. There are two ways to change/adjust unless the factory upper control arm mounts/attachments are not used (different front clip). The lower control arm pivot point that is set to achieve alignment specs....which leaves the upper ball joint pivot point to change/adjust the angle of the upper control arm. This is adjustable with different length ball joints/ ball joint studs. Same as most.

so back to the important graphs/alignment ....what does it tell you?
can you align it?...and does it bumpsteer.

To satisfy, when time allows ...I will head to alignment shop with the "mule" (actual Duster front end) and a K-frame package.....So much for the land of low overhead, but the data is relevant and understandable after some of the "packages" I have seen out there.

In the weight comparision thread, G Machine Dart GT asked a great question ....what is it intended purpose for your parts?

I will answer it again here...It is a great hot-rod piece...it gets rid of the 40plus year old steering box and the factory rear steer linkage and replaces with a modern, compact, easily accessable rack and pinion. It replaces/removes the torsion bars with coilovers, and sheds appx 30 lbs dead weight off the nose. So, lets see...no torsion bars ...no steering box...30 lbs lighter...not limited to a small diameter tire .....integrated bump stops .....automotive tie rod ends....unaltered spindles....100% bolt-in with no welding or cutting on our A-bodies....Am I getting close???

and to the OPs question.....to re-cap....mine is a somewhat different coilover front end...specifically designed for the hot-rodder. For the road race SPECIFIC build, I would probably go another route...but that's just me

Mopar to ya'
Denny

fixed it for ya.....also forgot to mention my integrated bump stops....I do not like to use the shock on compression as a bump stop...or for rebound. For rebound, I prefer the factory bracket with an extended bumper to keep the shock from holding all the weight.
 
HemiDenny said:
not exactly sure how to take your response....but I have always thought if the intended purpose is road racing...a beefed up stock rear steer set-up is superior. With tune-able (different length) balljoints and tubular uppers....camber/caster/ and the roll center are adjustable.

I'm no road racer...never claimed to be. that's is why I ask ..what you are looking for. Does my front end have the ability to "tune" those characteristics...absolutely.

Since it is raining out , let me bring up another point...

I get asked about alignment graphs/data, but what do the alignment graph tell you?

1) can the proper specs be achieved? most can do that even with the most Rub Goldberg configuration...do we need to show that??

2)what does the camber do thru suspension travel? I have shown ...not from graphs, but from pics that the camber change on my package thru travel is practically zero. Furthermore, for certain specific applications my package, like others including the factory, is "tuneable".

3) caster change......I build my uppers with bungs for adjustable poly-ends..or heim ends (your preference) to work with the factory cam adjusters. The caster is adjusted thru of the upper control arm pivot points on the framerail....and WE ALL USE THE SAME ONES unless you have installed a aftermarket front clip.

4) toe-in....here is the BIGGIE,...does the toe-in toe-out change thru suspension travel (the dreaded bumpsteer). ONLY if the lower control arm pivot point is in the correct location (with the other components utilized) can this be kept at the absolute minimum. Of course , there will be some minute movement, because the different length lower control arm and tie rod swing in slightly different arcs. I have always measured bumpsteer the old fashion way...with a guage mounted on the hub to make sure it doesn't move in and out thru the travel.

5) roll center...not in your basic alignment. There are two ways to change/adjust. The lower control arm pivot point that is set to achieve alignment specs....which leaves the upper ball joint pivot point to change/adjust the angle of the upper control arm. This is adjustable with different length ball joints/ ball joint studs. Same as most.

so back to the important graphs/alignment ....what does it tell you?
can you align it?...and does it bumpsteer.

To satisfy, when time allows ...I will head to alignment shop with the "mule" (actual Duster front end) and a K-frame package.....So much for the land of low overhead, but the data is relevant and understandable after some of the "packages" I have seen out there.

In the weight comparision thread, G Machine Dart GT asked a great question ....what is it intended purpose for your parts?

I will answer it again here...It is a great hot-rod piece...it gets rid of the 40plus year old steering box and the factory rear steer linkage and replaces with a modern, compact, easily accessable rack and pinion. It replaces/removes the torsion bars with coilovers, and sheds appx 30 lbs dead weight off the nose. So, lets see...no torsion bars ...no steering box...not limited on tire size...automotive tie rod ends....unaltered spindles....100% bolt-in with no welding or cutting on our A-bodies.

and to the OPs question.....to re-cap....mine is a somewhat different coilover front end...specifically designed for the hot-rodder. For the road race SPECIFIC build, I would probably go another route...but that's just me

Mopar to ya'
Denny
Click to expand...

All of that info is super..........All that I cared about when my 71 duster was going to get your suspension

1) 528 Hemi
2) Flat hood
12 years of driving my hot rod with your front suspension .........
priceless.
 
abodyjoe said:
??? you mean i can stick a 33x12.5 up front?? lmao.
Click to expand...

how bid a hammer ya got?

perhaps I will change that to "not limited to a small diameter"....hard to sneak one by you, I'll bet you never let anyone 2-count you
 
HemiMark said:
All of that info is super..........All that I cared about when my 71 duster was going to get your suspension

1) 528 Hemi
2) Flat hood
12 years of driving my hot rod with your front suspension .........
priceless.
Click to expand...

It was a blast....I miss that thing
 
I have 245/35/18 on 9 inch rims on the front of my barracuda with the RMS system
 
"...It is a great hot-rod piece...it gets rid of the 40 plus year old steering box
and the factory rear steer linkage and replaces with a modern, compact, easily
accessable rack and pinion. It replaces/removes the torsion bars with coilovers,
and sheds appx 30 lbs dead weight off the nose. So, lets see...no torsion bars ...
no steering box...30 lbs lighter...not limited to a small diameter tire....integrated
bump stops .....automotive tie rod ends....unaltered spindles....100% bolt-in with
no welding or cutting on our A-bodies......."

And if I recall, the original purpose was to fit the 426 motor into an A-body with a
flat hood, Heater (and A/C), wiper motor etc.

Sounds to me like it should be $1000 more; not $1000 less.
 
This is great info! Now after reading it all it seems to boil down to the spindle and it being a mustang II style part, is there anyway to have a hub based version like a viper or vette (you get the idea).
 
1970Duster said:
This is great info! Now after reading it all it seems to boil down to the spindle and it being a mustang II style part, is there anyway to have a hub based version like a viper or vette (you get the idea).
Click to expand...

if you mean of a purpose built front steer spindle w/ workable geometry (like widely used on a Mustang), most use it because of the availability/cost/multitude of brake packages factor....compare price ($169pair/new) to vette or viper parts and/or brake packages
 
Spun Bearing said:
What's your point? I'm not laughing.

They're trying to have a relevant discussion here.
Click to expand...

no worries Spun

Joe and I routinely bust on each other...we have fun, it's what we do. If he was standing next to me when he said it...I'd probably have to whack him in the nuts with something lay'n around.....then run like hell.
 
DR HEMI said:
"...It is a great hot-rod piece...it gets rid of the 40 plus year old steering box
and the factory rear steer linkage and replaces with a modern, compact, easily
accessable rack and pinion. It replaces/removes the torsion bars with coilovers,
and sheds appx 30 lbs dead weight off the nose. So, lets see...no torsion bars ...
no steering box...30 lbs lighter...not limited to a small diameter tire....integrated
bump stops .....automotive tie rod ends....unaltered spindles....100% bolt-in with
no welding or cutting on our A-bodies......."

And if I recall, the original purpose was to fit the 426 motor into an A-body with a
flat hood, Heater (and A/C), wiper motor etc.

Sounds to me like it should be $1000 more; not $1000 less.
Click to expand...

good point Doc..all that...for a thousand dollars cheaper is probably too much ...looses credibliity....remind me to visit with "pricing" Monday morning
 
1970Duster said:
This is great info! Now after reading it all it seems to boil down to the spindle and it being a mustang II style part, is there anyway to have a hub based version like a viper or vette (you get the idea).
Click to expand...

You can use a sn95 style hub bearing on the mustang 2 spindle and there is an adapter to run the cobra dual piston calipers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top