DOES THE HDK SUSPENSION K-MEMBER HANDLE BETTER THAN A T-BAR SUSPENSION?

[DionR]

The 'brick's set up was good for when it was built, but, it's a pretty basic set up. A couple of the first iterations of my Challenger's set up were similar. But compared to how my Duster is set up now? Nope. Just the street tires I run are substantially better than what they used then, and then everything else follows from that. How the green brick was set up is where I would start someone that wants a basic cruiser with decent handling manners.

And that mild suspension setup gave the factory-ish backed Camaro fits. Imagine what that Valiant would have been like with the cubic dollars the Camaro had thrown at it.

 

[racerjoe]

I’m happy to see I’ve set this thread on fire again. It’s so comical how quickly panties get bunched up in y’all’s asses. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. The thread was intended to provide information based on my personal experience with the two setups.
I also love the speculative engineering from people who likely never even took a calculus class let alone define failure points of steel using formulas. I realize there are likely some engineers here making valid points, but I don’t see yall designing a new mousetrap.
Also, please tell me how this is a pinto/mustang 2 front end. The geometry is nothing like an M2. Sure it has an m2 spindle, but that’s it. If you put a Miata seat in your car, does that make it a Miata? I could use a GM A body spindle on my HDk if I wanted to, I just don’t want to spend $800 to “try” it. I guess maybe I should then I could say I have Camaro suspension on my Duster.
I’ll see my way out of this **** show. I’ll be out driving and autocrossing my HDK setup without any worry of crashing and burning, while most everybody’s car is sitting in the garage and never sees the light of day.

 

[HemiDenny]

If we are talking racing, I would rather see us compete together against the other makes so that a Mopar/Mopar build wins regardless of the type of suspension.

But the reality is, we aren't talking about (most of the time) any kind of competitive use at all. And I don't see running canyons with Shelby's and Corvettes as "competing". So for most on this forum, the "best" suspension is the one they chose to use as long as it keeps or gets their car on the road.

There have been some builds that have competed against the other makes in some bigger series, though. One was the Valiant on TB's in CAM-T (I think?) that was very competitive despite being way down on power. Another I think of is the guy on here with the blue and black Duster that was friends with the owner of RMS, hasn't been active for years. He started on TB's in some kind of national event (maybe Optima?) and wasn't competitive. He ended up with RMS kits front and back and (I think) still wasn't competitive. But maybe he was more competitive than I know, just reading between the lines with him.

I would love to see someone build a car and be competitive in something like the Optima series or maybe the CAM classes again. There is the yellow Super Bee that won the Vintage class at Moparty and made it into the Optima Invitational at SEMA last year. He was on a full QA1 coil over setup but has now swapped to full SpeedTech kits front and back. There is also the orange Cuda that started the SpeedTech chassis design for Mopars and runs in the Optima stuff. He is also good enough to get into the SEMA invitational as well.

The big issue (besides time/money) with getting into those big series is that the competitors in the other makes aren't running a stock type suspension in any way, in the older cars. This makes sense in the fact that most of the older cars from the other manufacturers didn't have a good suspension design so they had to do something. But the biggest difference now (IMO) is most are running a 315/30R18 tire. If you can't stuff that under the fenders, I think you will be a back marker. Guess what the SpeedTech chassis did for the Yellow Super Bee, it allowed the guy to run a 315. To try and keep up, you are going to probably have to move frame rails around so those tires fit. So it's more than just a new suspension in those cases, it's a new chassis. And while you are at it, make sure you look at things like scrub radius, SAI, roll center (both instant and active), jacking, roll couple, CG, etc. etc. Because I bet the guys at places like SpeedTech did exactly that as well.

But the ultimate prize wouldn't just be to be competitive in a vintage class at one of those bigger venues, but to be competitive with the late model iron as well. Which isn't impossible, there is a '70-ish Camaro that won the Optima overall several times, but with all the tricks like a SpeedTech chassis, mega HP, ABS, etc. And the new stuff just keeps advancing, I guess the Dark Horse has brake by wire now? And the top dog at Optima the last several years has been a tricked out AWD GTR.

For me, I've give up on the dream of building a car for something like the Optima series and instead just want to enjoy driving it. I don't have any events out my way to compete in anyways. I couldn't even find anyone autocrossing up here. There is a road course at the local track, but an open road course day is like $300. That might be cheap if you have the funds to drop on a $5K suspension kit, but this poor boy is working overtime to repurpose OEM computer modules to avoid spending $250-350 on an aftermarket PDC and fan controller. So right now, it ain't in the cards.

Maybe someday I will road trip it to Moparty and maybe see how it stacks up, but the reality is I'm not sure I care anymore as long as it feels like it drives more like a modern car to me.

that's a cool idea....but I prefer to hang (and build) with hot rodders like me. No big budget, just a desire and will power to get off my *** (or keyboard), go into the shop and make whatever I dream up or need a reality.

too harsh????

 

[Super-Cuda]

Isn't it amazing that buddy baker was able to run over 200 mph in 1970.... with a 4000 lb B body, on torsion bars, leaf springs, manual chrysler steering and 4 wheel drum brakes. All with a OEM designed suspension.

Imagine the speeds he would have attained with the addition of some of the suspension and tire technology that came along since?

Here's his run for those that have never seen it.

Mopar History!!


Video: Buddy Baker Breaks the 200 MPH Mark at Talladega

 

[Super-Cuda]

that's a cool idea....but I prefer to hang (and build) with hot rodders like me. No big budget, just a desire and will power to get off my *** (or keyboard), go into the shop and make whatever I dream up or need a reality.

too harsh????

No.

 

[RustyRatRod]

Isn't it amazing that buddy baker was able to run over 200 mph in 1970.... with a 4000 lb B body, on torsion bars, leaf springs, manual chrysler steering and 4 wheel drum brakes. All with a OEM designed suspension.

.......with ten pound brass balls.

 

[72bluNblu]

Tim aka Racer Joe was not a customer.

I met Tim at MoParty, I recognized his Duster from his posts and thread on FABO but one could not miss how he stood out from the majority of his competitors. I walked over and introduced myself simply 1) because I like to meet my FABO friends and 2) to congratulate him on his skills.

After MoParty, I kept thinking I need to build an Auto-X ride to demonstrate .....
As I closed in on turning 70 and reality checked in, I remembered Tim, who (IMO) was in no way in the coil over / rack conversion camp but had mentioned he was planning a Gen III swap. He seemed like he would be a great candidate so I reached out to him.

My offer was simple, try it (on me).......be honest in evaluation, nothing needs to be hid from anyone. If you do not like, especially if it makes you slower, I will send a call tag, (free to post whatever the results are, good or bad) but if you see its advantages and use for a year, it is yours to do whatever you want.

Since he knew what to expect (baseline) with his already tuned OEM suspension and bad-*** small block, he initially kept that engine / transmission combo to verify the HDK was not going to cause him to go backwards. Only then and as he saw the possibilities, did he slip the Gen III in.....with ease.

Ok, so you sponsored Tim. That's great! But how does that mean he's unbiased?

that the OEM suspension is not superior in any way to my HDK, if fact HDK can hold its own and with the other benefits of the conversion, can be a plus for builders that are continuing fighting for room, particularly header clearance, rear steer component clearances, hard to align to more aggressive specs and ease of different Mopar engine swaps. I had plenty of customers with great aspirations of building an Auto -X I could of reached out to, but wanted a non-bias evaluation.

Right, so, some of these claims still aren't true.

OEM isn't superior in any way? Sorry, but Tim's numbers showed that OOTB the HDK had worse camber gain than even a mild OE based system. Yes, with 2" extended ball joints he made it better, but now that's comparing a tuned HDK vs a nearly bone stock OE set up.

OE is not hard to align to more aggressive specs. In fact, Tim is using the same UCA's as I am- SPC's. My OE based suspension is just as adjustable, and just as easily adjustable, as an HDK. I literally set my alignment the same way as Tim does. Comparing an HDK to factory components is not a genuine comparison, especially when a set up like the one I run still costs less than an HDK. Bolt on a set of SPC UCA's and we're talking about the same level of adjustment. Bolt on your UCA's vs a set of tubular UCA's with additional caster built in and we're talking about the same level of adjustment and range of specs. Only comparing your components vs bone stock components is there an advantage for the HDK, but that's apples to oranges.

And yeah sure, more header clearance to run the same headers as everyone with torsion bars does anyway. And a rack, which is nice.

Engineers have examined HDK products, always amazed at not only the quality but the attention to detail for strength with function. For those in Australia where I have sent numerous products, they are required to go thru extensive examination for certification. Following signed / acknowledged non-discloser statements from all involved, I provided (years ago) samples of all required components along with PDFs with specs for testing. They not only passed but the engineers remarked that they thought they were superior in construction to the OEM components.

As far as lasting performance......20 plus years speaks for itself.

BTW, you guys can talk **** all day (and night) long......my $$$ will always be on the best driver.

Mopar to ya'
Denny

Hey, that's awesome. Getting through Australia's certification is a huge deal, and it definitely a credit to the build quality of the HDK. As I said, there are a lot of builders out there that have made great stuff without actual engineering.

Spend a ton of time experimenting with the stock stuff and miss enjoying your ride (especially as you get older) or upgrade (yes, I said upgrade) to either of these incredibly well built and engineered aftermarket systems and still have a car that performs exceptionally well.

So far , all the naysayers on here have only used the stock or modified stock components and have never tried HDK or RMS. There are several, including me who have tried both. You are correct. Its a vast improvement in ride, serviceability, header clearance and performance.

I don't think some of these comments are fair either. Spend a lot of time experimenting with the stock stuff?

The basic formula for making a torsion bar car handle well has been around since before the green brick, and that was 32 years ago. Yes, there are some tweaks to that as tire compounds continue to get better, but you can look at the builds of any of the torsion bar cars that are participating in track events and autoX and see that they are all quite similar.

And I think Tim has shown quite well that you STILL need to tune the coil over conversions. You still need to mess with extended ball joints, you still need to "experiment" with wheel rates and sway bar settings, etc. Getting to a high level of suspension tuning with EITHER system takes time. An HDK OOTB is no closer than say, buying everything on my component list for the OE based system and running it. Both still need tuning, you can literally see all of the tuning Tim has done in this thread. He didn't just "bolt it on and go".

Hats off to the guys who know how to make the factory components work well but trying to diminish the innovators such as HDK or RMS for trying a new approach is very closeminded.

I, for one celebrate their imagination, innovation and tenacity to improve our cars.

I'm not trying to diminish Denny's accomplishments or contributions. Not at all!

I'm just trying to get through the salesmanship and advertising exaggerations to the real physics and geometry. I keep seeing claims of "superior" being made, by guys that are still losing events to torsion bar cars. The evidence, the geometry that has been shown, well, none of it points to coil overs being "superior". They're a spring and a shock with a less efficient motion ratio than the torsion bar based system.

I’m happy to see I’ve set this thread on fire again. It’s so comical how quickly panties get bunched up in y’all’s asses. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. The thread was intended to provide information based on my personal experience with the two setups.
I also love the speculative engineering from people who likely never even took a calculus class let alone define failure points of steel using formulas. I realize there are likely some engineers here making valid points, but I don’t see yall designing a new mousetrap.
Also, please tell me how this is a pinto/mustang 2 front end. The geometry is nothing like an M2. Sure it has an m2 spindle, but that’s it. If you put a Miata seat in your car, does that make it a Miata? I could use a GM A body spindle on my HDk if I wanted to, I just don’t want to spend $800 to “try” it. I guess maybe I should then I could say I have Camaro suspension on my Duster.
I’ll see my way out of this **** show. I’ll be out driving and autocrossing my HDK setup without any worry of crashing and burning, while most everybody’s car is sitting in the garage and never sees the light of day.

Yeah, it's not me whose "panties are in a bunch". Seriously, I just pointed out that the observations you made don't prove the conclusions you reached.

With the exception of the SpeedTech stuff out there using a corvette spindle, most of the coil over conversions for these cars are MII based. That's Pinto suspension. Using the MII spindle means that some of your base geometry is absolutely the same. It's too short a spindle, for example, which is why you're running 2" extended ball joints. What about the steering rack and all of its geometry? MII. What would you call the suspension on my car? It's about as much Duster as your suspension is MII. I use the spindle and control arm mounting positions, everything else is pretty different from factory. Your suspension is actually a mix of MII and Mopar geometry that was never evaluated by either manufacturer. Hell we use the SAME UCA's, which is why the claims that your suspension is easier to align or has better specs are just ridiculous. I literally adjust my alignment the same way as you do.

And yes, I have an engineering degree, so I've taken lots of calculus which is only the entry level requirement to even begin to understand engineering calculations. My actual area of focus was structural analysis, so yeah, lots of materials science classes too. Of which "failure points of steel" may have come up a few times. No, I haven't designed a "better mousetrap". I have a full time job, and quite frankly no one has proven yet that they've actually made a system better than using the OE based torsion bar set up. All suspension is a trade off, there are pros and cons to ALL of it. I can do everything I need to do with the set up I have, so, why would I design a new one?

I drive my car thousands of miles a year in my less active years. So, swing and a miss on the garage queen insults too.

You did breathe fire back into this thread, by once again making claims that just aren't true and twisting the argument against the coil over conversions. No one talked about corner weights, people have talked about structural loads. Saying the corner weights are almost the same doesn't mean much of anything, other than it once again shows that the "superiority" of the coil over conversions isn't at all clear cut if a car with OE based suspension has corner weights in the same ballpark as one with a full conversion. So where's the advantage? Again, it's awesome you haven't blown apart any spot welds or developed any cracks, but if you had that would show a MASSIVE issue. A couple years of operation without catastrophic failure does not prove that everything is perfect.

By all means, go drive your car and enjoy it! But don't think for a second that I don't do the same.

 

[fishmens67]

then I could say I have Camaro suspension on my Duster.

You pretty much do. lol

 

[HemiDenny]

You pretty much do. lol

like I said....some will never get it and maybe that is a good thing.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Ok, so you sponsored Tim. That's great! But how does that mean he's unbiased?"

sponsored, hardly.....I was looking for someone that knew what they were talking about to put it to the test with an honest (good or bad) review. From what I knew about Tim, he drag races, Auto-x's and street drives / road trips....all with pretty much the same set-up, exactly what I was looking for. Believe me, Tim doesn't sugar coat anything. Let me ask you, how else do I get that without letting him try it out?....no strings attached. I find many after laying down serious money on anything will tell you what they bought is the best thing since sliced bread.

Tim changed to 2" extended ball joint, from a 1" extended and I bet you have no idea if the spindle he is using is shorter than the Mustang II either (I don't). Do you think the normal hot rodder could even tell the difference?....only on a graph. You are just picking fly **** out of pepper.

 

[HemiDenny]

72 blueNblue.....lets see you get 6 degrees caster out of OEM UCAs....and still go up / down fluidly.....with correct camber

mission impossible!

 

[92b]

Ok, so you sponsored Tim. That's great! But how does that mean he's unbiased?



Right, so, some of these claims still aren't true.

OEM isn't superior in any way? Sorry, but Tim's numbers showed that OOTB the HDK had worse camber gain than even a mild OE based system. Yes, with 2" extended ball joints he made it better, but now that's comparing a tuned HDK vs a nearly bone stock OE set up.

OE is not hard to align to more aggressive specs. In fact, Tim is using the same UCA's as I am- SPC's. My OE based suspension is just as adjustable, and just as easily adjustable, as an HDK. I literally set my alignment the same way as Tim does. Comparing an HDK to factory components is not a genuine comparison, especially when a set up like the one I run still costs less than an HDK. Bolt on a set of SPC UCA's and we're talking about the same level of adjustment. Bolt on your UCA's vs a set of tubular UCA's with additional caster built in and we're talking about the same level of adjustment and range of specs. Only comparing your components vs bone stock components is there an advantage for the HDK, but that's apples to oranges.

And yeah sure, more header clearance to run the same headers as everyone with torsion bars does anyway. And a rack, which is nice.


Hey, that's awesome. Getting through Australia's certification is a huge deal, and it definitely a credit to the build quality of the HDK. As I said, there are a lot of builders out there that have made great stuff without actual engineering.


I don't think some of these comments are fair either. Spend a lot of time experimenting with the stock stuff?

The basic formula for making a torsion bar car handle well has been around since before the green brick, and that was 32 years ago. Yes, there are some tweaks to that as tire compounds continue to get better, but you can look at the builds of any of the torsion bar cars that are participating in track events and autoX and see that they are all quite similar.

And I think Tim has shown quite well that you STILL need to tune the coil over conversions. You still need to mess with extended ball joints, you still need to "experiment" with wheel rates and sway bar settings, etc. Getting to a high level of suspension tuning with EITHER system takes time. An HDK OOTB is no closer than say, buying everything on my component list for the OE based system and running it. Both still need tuning, you can literally see all of the tuning Tim has done in this thread. He didn't just "bolt it on and go".



I'm not trying to diminish Denny's accomplishments or contributions. Not at all!

I'm just trying to get through the salesmanship and advertising exaggerations to the real physics and geometry. I keep seeing claims of "superior" being made, by guys that are still losing events to torsion bar cars. The evidence, the geometry that has been shown, well, none of it points to coil overs being "superior". They're a spring and a shock with a less efficient motion ratio than the torsion bar based system.



Yeah, it's not me whose "panties are in a bunch". Seriously, I just pointed out that the observations you made don't prove the conclusions you reached.

With the exception of the SpeedTech stuff out there using a corvette spindle, most of the coil over conversions for these cars are MII based. That's Pinto suspension. Using the MII spindle means that some of your base geometry is absolutely the same. It's too short a spindle, for example, which is why you're running 2" extended ball joints. What about the steering rack and all of its geometry? MII. What would you call the suspension on my car? It's about as much Duster as your suspension is MII. I use the spindle and control arm mounting positions, everything else is pretty different from factory. Your suspension is actually a mix of MII and Mopar geometry that was never evaluated by either manufacturer. Hell we use the SAME UCA's, which is why the claims that your suspension is easier to align or has better specs are just ridiculous. I literally adjust my alignment the same way as you do.

And yes, I have an engineering degree, so I've taken lots of calculus which is only the entry level requirement to even begin to understand engineering calculations. My actual area of focus was structural analysis, so yeah, lots of materials science classes too. Of which "failure points of steel" may have come up a few times. No, I haven't designed a "better mousetrap". I have a full time job, and quite frankly no one has proven yet that they've actually made a system better than using the OE based torsion bar set up. All suspension is a trade off, there are pros and cons to ALL of it. I can do everything I need to do with the set up I have, so, why would I design a new one?

I drive my car thousands of miles a year in my less active years. So, swing and a miss on the garage queen insults too.

You did breathe fire back into this thread, by once again making claims that just aren't true and twisting the argument against the coil over conversions. No one talked about corner weights, people have talked about structural loads. Saying the corner weights are almost the same doesn't mean much of anything, other than it once again shows that the "superiority" of the coil over conversions isn't at all clear cut if a car with OE based suspension has corner weights in the same ballpark as one with a full conversion. So where's the advantage? Again, it's awesome you haven't blown apart any spot welds or developed any cracks, but if you had that would show a MASSIVE issue. A couple years of operation without catastrophic failure does not prove that everything is perfect.

By all means, go drive your car and enjoy it! But don't think for a second that I don't do the same.

To me it seems at least some of the dispute over claims comes from a three way comparison. 1. Coilover ( like Denny's and others with varying degrees of qualily and performance) vs 2. stock production suspension (like off the assembly line and what many who are considering an alternative are starting with) vs 3. modified production suspension ( like your car with varying degrees of modification and a varying blend of aftermarket parts. Such as t bars, sway bars, balljoints, control arms,etc. Or even factory parts that did not come on the car originally ).

So what might be true in making a comparison between a Hemi Denny conversion and a stock production suspension might not be true when comparing a hemi Denny to a modified production suspension. That's not even taking into consideration that not all coil over conversions are created equal as well as not all modified stock suspensions are created equal.

With all these variables in play contradicting claims are easily supported by facts and opinion on both sides. Also one reason this thread is so popular.

 

[Kern Dog]

72 blueNblue.....lets see you get 6 degrees caster out of OEM UCAs....and still go up / down fluidly.....with correct camber

mission impossible!

Uhhh....I got that with offset bushings in stock UCAs in my Charger....

I went with the QA 1 UCAs just to get a bit more...

 

[DionR]

that's a cool idea....but I prefer to hang (and build) with hot rodders like me. No big budget, just a desire and will power to get off my *** (or keyboard), go into the shop and make whatever I dream up or need a reality.

too harsh????

I am going to interrupt that as an intended dig. Which is funny, because my comment wasn't point an anyone at all. I was just wishing out loud, but you seemed to have taken it as a challenge to your manhood.

And I will add that your idea of "no big budget" is significantly different than mine.

Lastly, I'm not unfamiliar with dreaming something up and making it a reality myself. But nowhere near the scale you are.

Edit - I should add that I am definitely slow. Something about having a 40 hour job and not able to pay someone to do my fabrication for me.

 

[Kern Dog]

Is that to mount a 518 Transmission?

 

[DionR]

Is that to mount a 518 Transmission?

G3/T56. I specify the engine only because I am using Holley mounts so the transmission isn't in the stock location front to back.

 

[RustyRatRod]

This is like any other parts. Ignition, camshafts and on and on. HemiDenny offers a quality product for those who want it. Not everyone runs stock Mopar ignition. Some (like me) swear buy it. Use whatever works for you. If you want an aftermarket suspension, use it. I happen to think HemiDenny's is about the best on the market. I've said for years though, that's it's tougher to really, honestly improve on the stock suspension than people really realize, and that's the truth. Wouldn't yall say the HDK setup helps with bigger tires and wheels? I ask that question as a complete novice to the HDK products, but it would seem to be the case. Maybe it's not. Regardless, he's obviously found a niche in the market, because he's pretty successful. It's an easy way to get a new Hemi in something. It gives more room for headers. It allows for a rack and pinion. So if you're a person wanting that stuff, then it's a good choice. Are all yall gonna go around to car shows telling people their aftermarket suspensions aren't worth a ****? All I can say is get ready to get familiar with the emergency room.

 

[RustyRatRod]

G3/T56. I specify the engine only because I am using Holley mounts so the transmission isn't in the stock location front to back.

Just curious......do you have any idea how close that would be to working with a Ford T5 transmission?

 

[mopowers]

Some people just like pissin' in others' Cheerios.

I never understand why some folks can't just provide their input and move on. I don't see the same argumentative posts over and over in the same thread changing anyone's mind. A certain gif comes to mind-

 

[HemiDenny]

Uhhh....I got that with offset bushings in stock UCAs in my Charger....

View attachment 1716445669

View attachment 1716445670

I went with the QA 1 UCAs just to get a bit more...

View attachment 1716445671

nice.....but I know how hard the control arms move when the eccentrics are opposite ( backside full in, the outside full out) and then adjust camber. Where do you go? ....not to mention, that is the wider B body arm. The wider the arm , the more caster movement achievable. I do like how you went aftermarket / offset bushings to try to get more. Unfortunately Qa1 puts the receiver in the same location as OEM....it's not rocket surgery, locate the receiver rearwards on the arm for crying out load. Obviously engineered by someone who do not hot rod and are clueless what hot rodders want with todays tires.

 

[HemiDenny]

I am going to interrupt that as an intended dig. Which is funny, because my comment wasn't point an anyone at all. I was just wishing out loud, but you seemed to have taken it as a challenge to your manhood.

And I will add that your idea of "no big budget" is significantly different than mine.

Lastly, I'm not unfamiliar with dreaming something up and making it a reality myself. But nowhere near the scale you are.

Edit - I should add that I am definitely slow. Something about having a 40 hour job and not able to pay someone to do my fabrication for me.

my comments were not specifically aimed at you. heck, I get "input" from what seems like every human with all kinds of ideas, some very good but most simply cost restrictive. My point was talk is cheap......... show me what you've done.

with that.....kudos to you, your mount looks good .... reminds me of the Holley 2-piece mount.

It is no secret, some of my best stuff involved simple improvements from something already made but missed it's mark.

 

[goldduster318]

The hotchkis arms and rod end type strut rods it's easy to get 7 deg of caster and also be bind free, been going for 11 years on them even with the rod ends (I have the boots on them) and all is good. And I live in Michigan where the road beats the absolute crap out of the car.

Fact of the matter is, if the front tire is limited to the OP's 235 and not at least a 275, you already lost with the narrower tire with competitive drivers head to head. 10 years with a 275 on the front for me. What is the max tire you can turn or even fit?

I am going to interrupt that as an intended dig. Which is funny, because my comment wasn't point an anyone at all. I was just wishing out loud, but you seemed to have taken it as a challenge to your manhood.

And I will add that your idea of "no big budget" is significantly different than mine.

Lastly, I'm not unfamiliar with dreaming something up and making it a reality myself. But nowhere near the scale you are.



Edit - I should add that I am definitely slow. Something about having a 40 hour job and not able to pay someone to do my fabrication for me.

Looks good. It's very much like my ToddRon Crossmember I've had since 2018 for the T56 Magnum. The top part having a 3D shape and not being a loop of 1/2" bar stock (which btw you can bend with your hands if one end is in a vice) is key for structural stiffness. If you weld that in to what's left of the original crossmember and the floor like I did it will be excellent. I may need to make a new bottom crossmember or at least part of it for mine since it took a large road construction rock in IL on I-80 on Power Tour.

 

[72bluNblu]

72 blueNblue.....lets see you get 6 degrees caster out of OEM UCAs....and still go up / down fluidly.....with correct camber

mission impossible!

Why?

I mean, seriously, why is that the comparison you want to make?

I've run +8° caster with non adjustable tubular UCA's. I can get any number that Tim can get with his SPC UCA's, because I use the same ones.

Since your system uses A-body spec UCA's and the factory UCA mounting points, could your HDK get +6° of caster with OEM UCA's? No? So why do you insist on comparing Tims's HDK with SPC UCA's against a factory UCA? I can put that same SPC UCA on my car (and have), and have every bit the same adjustability as Tim without the coil over conversion.

And I've never had any issues with binding. Not with the stock UCA's and offset bushings, not with the magnumforce non-adjustable tubular UCA's I bought used and ran with offset bushings at +8° of caster, and not with the GenI SPC's I run now. I have checked every one of those set ups for binding on my Duster, cycled them bump stop to bump stop looking for resistance, and have never had an issue with it. As far as I'm concerned, the ball joint over-angling claim that was made by Ehrenberg back in the day is a myth. I've run many different versions of modifications to the OE based torsion bar suspension, and I've never encountered binding within the range of travel that I could't tune out of the system with the adjustability of the parts I was using. Which was very little in some of those cases.

And before anyone says I had to run all of these different versions of the torsion bar suspension to get to where I'm at, I did not. My planned use for my Duster has changed dramatically since I started working on it, originally it was just gonna be a /6 commuter I wasn't going to work on while I built my Challenger. If I had known I was going to end up where I'm at, I could have just bought my current set up on day 1.

I run +6.5° of caster now with -1° camber, and the only reason I don't run more is because I still run a manual 16:1 box with 275's on the street. +6.5° is enough to control the 275's, and while more is easily possible it dramatically increases slow speed steering effort without noticeably improving anything else.

This is like any other parts. Ignition, camshafts and on and on. HemiDenny offers a quality product for those who want it. Not everyone runs stock Mopar ignition. Some (like me) swear buy it. Use whatever works for you. If you want an aftermarket suspension, use it. I happen to think HemiDenny's is about the best on the market. I've said for years though, that's it's tougher to really, honestly improve on the stock suspension than people really realize, and that's the truth. Wouldn't yall say the HDK setup helps with bigger tires and wheels? I ask that question as a complete novice to the HDK products, but it would seem to be the case. Maybe it's not. Regardless, he's obviously found a niche in the market, because he's pretty successful. It's an easy way to get a new Hemi in something. It gives more room for headers. It allows for a rack and pinion. So if you're a person wanting that stuff, then it's a good choice. Are all yall gonna go around to car shows telling people their aftermarket suspensions aren't worth a ****? All I can say is get ready to get familiar with the emergency room.

I agree. I have always said that ALL suspension systems are a trade off, every single one has pros and cons.

I've never argued that Denny doesn't offer a quality product. I have tried my best to keep my questions and my criticisms based on the information that we know is true. And as for true...

- The HDK does not improve clearance for larger tires and wheels any more than a set of tubular UCA's does. I run the same, or larger, wheels and tires on my Duster than I've seen on any of the HDK cars. The wheel/tire limits for an A-body with 18" wheels are almost entirely bodywork related, not suspension.
- It allows more room for headers, but the only aftermarket GIII hemi headers out there are made for the torsion bar system. And as far as I know, everyone with a GIII hemi is running headers that would fit on a torsion bar car too. I could be wrong on that last bit, but I'm not aware of any GIII headers built specifically for coil over conversions.

Yup, it gives you a rack and pinion. No argument there. It does.

I don't go around telling people their aftermarket suspension isn't worth a ****. But I also don't let people with coil over conversions make unproven claims about their suspension without questioning them. Is it "superior"? No. No one has ever proven that it is. All the numbers out there, and all of the race and competition results seem to indicate the opposite in fact. Run what you want, I honestly don't care. But don't make claims you don't have evidence for either. You like a rack and pinion? Awesome. It was easier to get a GIII in there because you just bought the right mounts and it worked? Great. It has superior handling and ride? Nope. Absolutely zero evidence of that still.

 

[75slant6]

HDK doesn’t allow bigger/wider wheels/tires than oem style suspension EXCEPT when it comes to 17’s. I can bolt a 17x9 with a 275/40/17 on my HDK where a 17x8 is the widest you can go on oem due to tierod clearance. Is that a reason to switch to a COC setup? Not unless you just REALLY don’t want to go up to 18’s. I do think 92b was spot on though, the factory oem suspension has lots of room for improvement, it just comes down to how you want to do it, COC or upgraded stock style.

 

[DionR]

Just curious......do you have any idea how close that would be to working with a Ford T5 transmission?

It would be absolutely cavernous. I am sure it would fit, but it would be way overkill. And no idea how the mount would land compared to mine.

 

[DionR]

Looks good. It's very much like my ToddRon Crossmember I've had since 2018 for the T56 Magnum. The top part having a 3D shape and not being a loop of 1/2" bar stock (which btw you can bend with your hands if one end is in a vice) is key for structural stiffness. If you weld that in to what's left of the original crossmember and the floor like I did it will be excellent. I may need to make a new bottom crossmember or at least part of it for mine since it took a large road construction rock in IL on I-80 on Power Tour.

Not going to say I didn't take some inspiration from the ToddRon crossmember. But with my motor about 1.75" further forward than stock, and the $700 that Modern Driveline wanted, plus the fact that they seemed to be perpetually on back order, I figured I would work up my own. So I got my motor and trans where I wanted it and started taking measurements and laying out my own. Pretty sure even if I had started with a ToddRon one, I would have had to start over anyways.

And yes, it will be welded to the floor.

One small advantage to the having the motor forward is, I think I was able to keep the crossmember higher than the ToddRon one. Not for sure, just going off some eyeball measurements and other hints. But it's not much higher, maybe only 1/2".