DOES THE HDK SUSPENSION K-MEMBER HANDLE BETTER THAN A T-BAR SUSPENSION?
- Thread starter racerjoe
- Start date
-
DionR
Well-Known Member
Looks like this kit does away with the stock UCA mounts. Not advocating that it is in anyway better than anything else (HDK or stock), but it does potentially give a clean sheet design.
A-Body Mopar- FRONT BASE KIT-Street Connection Suspension
Introducing the "Street Connection" Suspensions - Chassis Upgrades for A-Body Mopars by Hammer Fab Are you looking to upgrade your Mopar’s suspension for an enjoyable driving experience and superior handling, all while nailing that perfect stance? Look no further! The "Street Connection" by...
shop.hammerfab.com
Mopar_Taxi_Guy
Well-Known Member
Looks like this kit does away with the stock UCA mounts. Not advocating that it is in anyway better than anything else (HDK or stock), but it does potentially give a clean sheet design.
[/URL][/URL]
Hammer Fab does some great looking work. I followed along as they designed that suspension kit. I'm not a fan of how much you have to cut out of the frame raits to install their kit.
There's also no evidence to prove their kit is any better at "handling" or if the geometry is reallyh any better than any of the other current A-body susension offerings.
Mopar_Taxi_Guy
Well-Known Member
DionR
Well-Known Member
Completely agree on both counts. I don’t like the cut either, and no argument that it isn’t a guarantee that the geometry is actually better.
Mopar_Taxi_Guy
Well-Known Member
I believe Hammer Fab had their car at Moparty this year. ;)
It appears the DSE 595 kit is damn near a dead match in frame rail width and track width to an A-body.
DionR
Well-Known Member
Did they run it on the AutoX?
Mopar_Taxi_Guy
Well-Known Member
I think so.
Mopar_Taxi_Guy
Well-Known Member
Here is a "bolt in" A-body kit from Heidts.
I have yet to find a documented install of the above suspension, but here you can see the Heidts B-body version installed:
I have yet to find a documented install of the above suspension, but here you can see the Heidts B-body version installed:
Last edited:
Mopar_Taxi_Guy
Well-Known Member
Heidts A-body rear suspenion acutally had some thought built into it in the fact that the bar angles are adjustable..
The only other Mopar rear 4 link kit that offers any kind of suspension tuning adjust ability is the one from Unlawful Racing.
The only other Mopar rear 4 link kit that offers any kind of suspension tuning adjust ability is the one from Unlawful Racing.
Mopar_Taxi_Guy
Well-Known Member
This guy built his own chassis using all Speedway Motors G-Comp components.
I'm trying to determine if he used the regular G-Comp universal kit or the G-Comp X as a starting point. As he is using a much taller coilover that mounts to the down bar.
Seriously....watch the video and tell me that the vertical image makes sense to use when recording a car on a race track.
And yet no matter what you say, people still record vertically. hurrrrr durrrrrr
I admit, I don't LIVE with my phone in my hand all the time. No Facebook, no Instagram or the chinky Tok Tik here either. Those platforms seem to prefer the vertical video style.
I grew up watching movies and TV. Widescreen was everywhere. I prefer that because 95% of what is recorded looks better that way.
Feel free to record rocket launches, giraffes, skyscrapers and people standing in the vertical aspect but everything else looks better in widescreen mode.
I grew up watching movies and TV. Widescreen was everywhere. I prefer that because 95% of what is recorded looks better that way.
Feel free to record rocket launches, giraffes, skyscrapers and people standing in the vertical aspect but everything else looks better in widescreen mode.
DionR
Well-Known Member
Interesting spindle. I wonder what the original use is.
I seem to look at the UCA angle now, after all these discussions and doing my suspension layouts, and when I see UCA's that slope down to the tire it makes me think it won't have good geometry. At the very least, an UCA located like that probably has a junk camber curve since it will go positive for at least a bit before it starts going negative. It was one of the things Joe talked about in regards to using a taller UBJ with his HDK kit. This assumes a flat LCA, too. Not really sure what the camber curve would look like if the LCA were sloped the same way, but my guess would be it wouldn't make any difference since the LCA is much longer and the LBJ wouldn't move out as far as the UBJ resulting in the same bad camber curve.
Doesn't mean the suspension is shown at ride height though. So I am not saying they don't have good geometry, just an observation.
Heidts doesn't make any mention of geometry or handling either.
Based on the above, my gut says it the only competition that kit would be good for is drag racing or on the grass. Probably cruises fine, good for rolling around the fairgrounds or the highway, but I get it doesn't like roundabouts and wouldn't do well on an autox course. Just a guess though.
To be clear, these are only my opinions. Don't want anyone to think I am making statements of fact.
DionR
Well-Known Member
Not well versed on rear suspensions, but sticks in my head that a 4 link is generally a bad handling design? If rubber bushings are used like in the stock Foxbody or the Heidts kit, I think they bind as the body rolls resulting in infinite spring rate and a really twitchy rear end. I think the Foxbody and other OEM uses got away with it by using u-shaped upper links that allowed for some twist.
The Unlawful Racing one looks to use heim joints which should avoid that.
That's what I remember anyways.
racerjoe
Well-Known Member
You forgot to mention that Tom and George are both incredible drivers. So is Chad Ryker.Took that personally, did ya?
If I was going to go all in and spend a chunk of change, why would I not want something that was designed from the start to be a performance handling piece? You yourself said your kit was designed for making a motor swap easier, and handling never entered the chat beyond designing out bump steer.
On the other hand, the Chebby boys have had to deal with a truly subpar design in the Camaro and had to actually design a completely new suspension for the purpose of handing.
So why not go with a blank slate design that isn't tied to keeping the stock UCA mount? Even if the fab work is certainly much more intense.
On the other hand, if I am going to stay with something that wasn't designed for handling, why not stick with what I have? Saves me a ton of cash and avoids things like loading the frame rails in ways they weren't designed for. Plus I get an actual crossmember tying the frames together instead of a single tube. For my purposes, I think the torsion bars will do fine.
BTW, here's a fun read of a Valiant build and his success in a competitive CAM-T arena, despite being 200+ HP behind the competition
View attachment 1716460831
View attachment 1716460835
Here's one of his event results. Note that even his co-driver beat the Camaro, so it's not just the driver.
View attachment 1716460836
And would you look at that, he even beat all the modern muscle that day. But no 1LE's, GT350's or Mach1's since it was before their time so probably not a fair comparison.
Here's the Camaro they both beat that day:
"Under the hood beats a fiery Mast Motorsports LS3-based 427ci engine that delivers 496 hp to the rear tires, as dyno’d by Westech Performance. It’s backed by a TREMEC T-56 Magnum transmission and Currie Enterprises full-floating rear axle. Carbon-fiber inner fenders from Anvil Auto help tuck massive 18x11 Forgeline wheels and sticky Falken Azenis RT615K+ 315/30ZR18 tires.
The car’s tunnel-vision inducing grip comes courtesy of a Total Cost Involved (TCI) Pro Touring IFS in the front and Torque Arm suspension in the rear. The thoroughly modernized setup uses performance-oriented geometry and extremely stiff components to help the car grip into the corners and plant the power on the way out. JRi coilovers sit at all four corners and aid in the grip-making magic."
[/URL]
Hmm...maybe the Chebby kit's aren't worth the squeeze.
Wonder how Tom would have done in his Valiant with a 600hp G3/T56 setup? Oh, and bigger torsion bars. Towards the end of the build thread he was toying with upgrading from the 1.06 bars he was running, but never did. Plus, he never got bigger than the 11.75" brakes with some small 4p Wilwood calipers using an AFEngineering kit. Seems like he left some on the table.
Car got sold because his sponsor wanted a different brand:
[/URL]
racerjoe
Well-Known Member
They were there last year and admitted their suspension developed for the A-body was for one thing, to get the car very low. They had zero claims of it being developed for performance handling.
racerjoe
Well-Known Member
I love everything about this car! Although with the rocker being 3" off the ground, I wouldn't be able to drive very far around here...
TT5.9mag
Two atmospheres are better than one
I love it as well. But I see a lot of important stuff mounted in single shear.
Mopar_Taxi_Guy
Well-Known Member
Here is a video of the blue '69 Valiant:
DionR
Well-Known Member
So you are saying that 2 incredible drivers beat another incredible driver in a car that was down something like 300 hp on a tire that was around 1.5" narrower, in a car that probably weight more, on an old suspension design? And it wasn't even maximized.
Because my only point with that whole part of the post was to say that the TB suspension isn't too bad. Sure, all three are great drivers, but it's not like the rest sucked. But I didn't see skill as necessary relevant since I was looking at the worth of the suspension. Not saying skill didn't play a part in it, don't take it that way. But as you pointed out, it's not like Chad is a newbie and can't drive, so it become more of a side point as opposed to completely relevant.
Note that it is in no way saying an HDK isn't as capable. It wasn't meant as a comparison. I had read through that thread just recently and while typing up my response to Denny it just kind of flowed into it. So I thought it was worth sharing.
Last edited:
DionR
Well-Known Member
This is a good point to remember, something that I kind of get tunnel vision on. Just because someone designs a new suspension (coil over or not), it doesn't mean they design it for handling. I keep thinking that's the only reason, but it's not.
Bolinger(sp?) says better handling/geometry, so does QA1. But Heidts didn't.
I need to remember there are more uses than just what I want.
-
Similar threads
