New Coil-Over Conversion Suspension

[Chris Bolander]

**A-Body Available in June. B/E Available NOW**
Introducing the latest innovation in suspension performance for classic Mopar muscle cars! If you’re a true enthusiast, you know that a great suspension is the backbone of any high-performance ride. Our cutting-edge suspension geometry was designed using Suspension Analyzer's software to enhance handling and cornering, giving you that exhilarating feel of the open road while maintaining the classic Mopar spirit. Whether you’re tearing up the track or cruising down the highway, this suspension offers unparalleled stability and control, making your muscle car experience even more thrilling.
Get ready to elevate your ride to a whole new level! With easy installation and exceptional durability, the BFS Coil-over conversion suspension kit is perfect for both seasoned racers and weekend warriors alike. Don’t settle for anything less—experience the quality and precision that comes with this state-of-the-art upgrade. Join the BFS family and take your driving experience to heights you never imagined. Check it out now and feel the difference for yourself.
A little about me, I’m Chris Bolander. Welding and fabrication have been my passion for as long as I can remember. From racing and building race cars to working with NASCAR teams, I’ve also had the privilege of teaching welding and passing the trade to future generations. My journey has been incredible so far! But what got me into the MOPAR scene was being part of Gerst Tubular Suspension and working with Carl from its inception until it was sold. I’m excited to for this next journey in the Mopar world.
www.bolanderfabrication.com

 

[mopowers]

Looks nice that's for sure. Couple questions from me:

1. What tickness of material is the coilover upright made of?
2. What sets this setup apart from others on the market?

 

[Chris Bolander]

Looks nice that's for sure. Couple questions from me:

1. What tickness of material is the coilover upright made of?
2. What sets this setup apart from others on the market?

3/16 plate. Our setup has improved geometry over stock and the others on the market. Designed with suspension analyzer software, we have all but eliminated bump steer. I know there are way more factors than bump steer but those things(chamber curve, roll center) are all variable on ride heights, drop/standard spindles etc. I haven’t gotten my hands on any competitors to get real numbers yet, but I can tell you from all the years I handled the original Gerst stuff our is going to be a significant weight saver.
We are not a production facility, we fabricate each suspension one by one by hand to ensure quality and consistency.

 

[DionR]

MII spindles?

 

[Chris Bolander]

MII spindles?

Wilwood Pro

 

[DionR]

Wilwood Pro

Ok, then MII based unless I wrong.

Curious how you overcame the MII short spindle. Are the upper control arms sloping down to the UBJ?

Can you show some of the calcs/images so we can see how the geometry is better? Roll center, etc?

Not bashing you, just curious. Plenty of COC's have claimed better geometry but you are the first to say you ran your kit through an analyzer. At least that I am aware of.

 

[abodyjoe]

oh boy. here we go... this thread will get interesting..

was Gerst the one that had issues then sold to QA1?

for me, i'll stick witht he RMS alter K....

 

[subcom]

Nice looking suspension Chris. You should be commended for bringing a new product and innovation to the Mopar community. Best of luck!

 

[CRUZE 418]

#7. Oh boy, here we go again. I do not understand why several people here think that Carl had so many issues with his suspension, it was so bad, that he had to sell the product line. Please, I have heard so many of the stories. The sale is between Carl and QA 1. Plus, I do know Carl, he lives an hour from me. But, I am sure the haters will go on and on. We will never know what went on behind the closed doors, past that , it's gossip, better left not said.

 

[abodyjoe]

well QA1 did totally redesign it. so thats something.

 

[72bluNblu]

Almost every coil over conversion available for Mopars claims or has claimed improved geometry. Exactly none of them have ever published the improved numbers. On a couple of occasions when customers have checked geometry, the OOTB numbers were not a slam dunk improvement over torsion bar suspension.

Using a suspension program does not guarantee better geometry. It does show it to you, which would make it easy to publish those improvements, whatever they are.

Bump steer isn't even really an issue with the torsion bar suspension. That has been plotted for the A-body suspension and published, and even with factory components and no bump steer correction the bump steer numbers are well within the acceptable range. Zero bump steer over the entire suspension travel is not a thing.

It's hard to tell from the pictures, but it appears that a very tall upper ball joint is used, as well as a very tall spacer on the steering arms to reduce bump steer. So right off, that's not improved geometry. If you need a 1" tall ball joint, the design of the suspension geometry has not been improved. Perhaps the corrected geometry is better, but, you can correct the geometry with the torsion bar suspension as well.

Again, this is NOT improved design. This is steering geometry that has been massively corrected. Now, perhaps the end result is very little bump steer. But if you bolt the rack to the steering arm the geometry will be abysmal. Again, any suspension geometry design has some ability to be corrected. If it needs this level of correction, the design itself is likely worse than OOTB factory suspension. And you can make corrections to the factory suspension as well.

 

[CRUZE 418]

Not trying to argue, but guess that I am. Define totally redesigned. Neither one of us knows. Carl had already corrected most of the issues that constantly get brought up here. I have 2 of his front suspensions. My best guess for for QA1 changing things, possibly design, but so that some of the parts can not be inter changed. There has to be a line drawn in the sand, not just a decal.

I'm going to jump out here, I just get tired of people bashing someone when they really don't know. Yes, everyone has an issue here and there, it gets corrected or something else happens.
Take care.

 

[Kern Dog]

Uhh....

How can anyone build a suspension and steering setup then do something as short sighted as this? That is as bad as the RMS design. Single shear, cantilevered with a Heim joint will not outlast a dropped arm like the stock lower ball joint design had. THIS to reduce bump steer?
It probably rides and steers great going on and off a trailer and up to 15 mph on smooth roads.

 

[RustyRatRod]

I'm not crazy about how tall the coil over uprights are. "Only" 3/16" plate with no backup support.

 

[HemiDenny]

Every coil over conversion available for Mopars claims or has claimed improved geometry. Exactly none of them have ever published the improved numbers. On a couple of occasions when customers have checked geometry, the OOTB numbers were not a slam dunk improvement over torsion bar suspension.

Using a suspension program does not guarantee better geometry. It does show it to you, which would make it easy to publish those improvements, whatever they are.

Bump steer isn't even really an issue with the torsion bar suspension. That has been plotted for the A-body suspension and published, and even with factory components and no bump steer correction the bump steer numbers are well within the acceptable range. Zero bump steer over the entire suspension travel is not a thing.

It's hard to tell from the pictures, but it appears that a very tall upper ball joint is used, as well as a very tall spacer on the steering arms to reduce bump steer. So right off, that's not improved geometry. If you need a 1" tall ball joint, the design of the suspension geometry has not been improved. Perhaps the corrected geometry is better, but, you can correct the geometry with the torsion bar suspension as well.

View attachment 1716387002

Again, this is NOT improved design. This is steering geometry that has been massively corrected. Now, perhaps the end result is very little bump steer. But if you bolt the rack to the steering arm the geometry will be abysmal. Again, any suspension geometry design has some ability to be corrected. If it needs this level of correction, the design itself is likely worse than OOTB factory suspension. And you can make corrections to the factory suspension as well.

View attachment 1716387001

Not trying to pee in Chris's punch on his thread, but since a statement was made regarding improved geometry that painted with a broad brush.....I want to correct.

HDK never has claimed improved geometry. HDK claims the ability be more aggressive with alignment specs, to easily add / subtract caster and camber without putting the upper control arm in a bind, especially when trying to achieve a high positive caster number. Also HDK offers adjustability in and out on both upper and lower control arms giving the choice of the wider selection of rims. HDK is designed to use out of the box spindles and automotive tie rod ends which offers lubrication , dirt / dust protection, increased travel and does not interfere with a 15" rim versus a heim / rod end.

As most of you guys know, especially the racers, when venturing out of the OEM box, it's not only adjustability and adapting to individual customer needs. It is often the little details, like capturing the dust boot so it fits and functions properly, using all grade 8, correct length hardware, shocks that rides on the shoulder of the bolt and not threads, and keeping wheels / tires tucked in......all add up, especially when we are looking for the best options for our hot rods.

Good luck Chris, welcome to the party!

 

[72bluNblu]

Not trying to pee in Chris's punch on his thread, but since a statement was made regarding improved geometry that painted with a broad brush.....I want to correct.

HDK never has claimed improved geometry. HDK claims the ability be more aggressive with alignment specs, to easily add / subtract caster and camber without putting the upper control arm in a bind, especially when trying to achieve a high positive caster number. Also HDK offers adjustability in and out on both upper and lower control arms giving the choice of the wider selection of rims. HDK is designed to use out of the box spindles and automotive tie rod ends which offers lubrication , dirt / dust protection, increased travel and does not interfere with a 15" rim versus a heim / rod end.

As most of you guys know, especially the racers, when venturing out of the OEM box, it's not only adjustability and adapting to individual customer needs. It is often the little details, like capturing the dust boot so it fits and functions properly, using all grade 8, correct length hardware, shocks that rides on the shoulder of the bolt and not threads, and keeping wheels / tires tucked in......all add up, especially when we are looking for the best options for our hot rods.

Good luck Chris, welcome to the party!

Quite frankly I think you're splitting hairs, but I'll give you that you don't specifically claim "improved geometry" on your website. I changed my previous post. I'm probably recalling a discussion I had with an HDK customer here and that's not the same thing to be fair.

As for adjustability, the torsion bar suspension is a set of adjustable UCA's away from any camber/caster settings you'd like. I've run as much as +8° on my Duster, it doesn't put the UCA's in a bind, I actually check. With SPC UCA's you can dial in extremely aggressive camber and caster settings, specs that would be considered race only and would not be suitable for street use. You don't need a coil over conversion to have substantially more adjustability than the factory offered or to run modern alignment specs.

Personally I do not understand why the companies that make coil over conversions don't publish any suspension geometry plots, especially if they are making claims of improved geometry like BFS does. If Bolander knows the geometry is improved, then he must have plotted it out, so why not say how it's improved, and compared to what? Better camber curve? Better roll center? Better toe change? Better than factory specs or a car running the same ride height and alignment specs as the converted car? So that the customer can look at the comparison, look at what's being compared, and decide if the improvement is actually beneficial to them? Because not all geometry improvements necessarily represent something that the average customer will notice, especially for a street car.

Maybe the end result is better geometry than factory, but in this case I think it's pretty clear that the extra tall ball joints and large spacers are actually correcting less than ideal geometry. Maybe I'm splitting hairs now, but that's corrected geometry, not an improved design. Maybe the plot looks better, but having a 1"+ tall spacer at your steering arms has real world consequences that don't show up in a graph. And if someone is comparing corrected geometry vs factory geometry and saying theirs is better, well, there's nothing to stop anyone from plotting out and using corrections on the factory geometry. Just lowering the torsion bar suspension improves the geometry vs factory, that's already been shown. Running a taller FMJ spindle can improve the camber gain, which is an improvement vs factory for cars with wide, modern tires.

I get it, these are marketing claims to sell parts and ultimately it's on the customer to decide if they need the parts being sold. I just don't like seeing all these claims being made without anything to back them up.

 

[racerjoe]

**A-Body Available in June. B/E Available NOW**
Introducing the latest innovation in suspension performance for classic Mopar muscle cars! If you’re a true enthusiast, you know that a great suspension is the backbone of any high-performance ride. Our cutting-edge suspension geometry was designed using Suspension Analyzer's software to enhance handling and cornering, giving you that exhilarating feel of the open road while maintaining the classic Mopar spirit. Whether you’re tearing up the track or cruising down the highway, this suspension offers unparalleled stability and control, making your muscle car experience even more thrilling.
Get ready to elevate your ride to a whole new level! With easy installation and exceptional durability, the BFS Coil-over conversion suspension kit is perfect for both seasoned racers and weekend warriors alike. Don’t settle for anything less—experience the quality and precision that comes with this state-of-the-art upgrade. Join the BFS family and take your driving experience to heights you never imagined. Check it out now and feel the difference for yourself.
A little about me, I’m Chris Bolander. Welding and fabrication have been my passion for as long as I can remember. From racing and building race cars to working with NASCAR teams, I’ve also had the privilege of teaching welding and passing the trade to future generations. My journey has been incredible so far! But what got me into the MOPAR scene was being part of Gerst Tubular Suspension and working with Carl from its inception until it was sold. I’m excited to for this next journey in the Mopar world.
www.bolanderfabrication.com

View attachment 1716385885

View attachment 1716385886

View attachment 1716385887

View attachment 1716385888

Welcome to the brutal world of Mopar aftermarket suspension. I wish you the best.

I have a few questions/comments and do not mean anything negative, so please don't take it the wrong way. As many people have stated, if you mention improved geometry, people that actually understand geometry will want to know what is improved. I realize it is very dependent on tire size/ride height, but I think you should be suggesting these things. Companies like Detroit Speed and Total Cost Involved recommend a tire height to use with their suspension systems. How are your customers to realize the improved benefits if they don't know what tire to run? I'm really curios what the camber gain per inch is along with the roll center height.
I'm sure you are prepared to hear people call it another Mustang 2 suspension when the only component that is M2 is the spindle. I hear the same thing with my HDK. This leads me to my next question. Did you look at using an aftermarket GM type spindle? There are tons of options out there for height and steering arm configuration options, which make them attractive to me. There are even options for spindles made to accept a corvette or late model mustang hub. I'm not familiar enough with them to know how different the SAI is compared to the M2 spindles. Speedtech makes a killer forged aluminum spindle that I'd love to try on my HDK. They are kinda cost prohibitive just to "try".

 

[NC Engine Builder]

Looks like nice fabrication, but it appears to be another "solution" to a problem that doesn't exist. And that's coming from someone who actually RACED these cars competitively against all kinds of cars, WITH the torsion bar suspension.

 

[DionR]

I'm sure you are prepared to hear people call it another Mustang 2 suspension when the only component that is M2 is the spindle. I hear the same thing with my HDK. This leads me to my next question. Did you look at using an aftermarket GM type spindle? There are tons of options out there for height and steering arm configuration options, which make them attractive to me. There are even options for spindles made to accept a corvette or late model mustang hub. I'm not familiar enough with them to know how different the SAI is compared to the M2 spindles. Speedtech makes a killer forged aluminum spindle that I'd love to try on my HDK. They are kinda cost prohibitive just to "try".

This is why I asked if it was an MII spindle. I was hoping someone would leave the well beaten path and build something around a new option. I don’t know, maybe it isn’t possible but it would be nice to used something that fit the chassis a little better (i.e. taller). Add that there are options for ABS and wheel speed sensors with those options. That’s why I am trying to work out a custom spindle that uses the S550 rear hub/bearing assembly.

 

[RustyRatRod]

Looks like nice fabrication, but it appears to be another "solution" to a problem that doesn't exist. And that's coming from someone who actually RACED these cars competitively against all kinds of cars, WITH the torsion bar suspension.

As did a LOT of factory backed race teams before any type of torsion bar eliminating suspension was invented.

And to be clear, I'm not knockin any of the aftermarket stuff. They all have their place. Hard to argue that the torsion bars are not in the way of some good exhaust headers.

 

[NC Engine Builder]

As did a LOT of factory backed race teams before any type of torsion bar eliminating suspension was invented.

And to be clear, I'm not knockin any of the aftermarket stuff. They all have their place. Hard to argue that the torsion bars are not in the way of some good exhaust headers.

I mean Buddy baker drove the first over 200 mph lap in I believe 1970, with a 4500lb car, manual steering, manual drum brakes, and with bias ply slicks with torsion bars and leaf springs. The suspension shown here would fold up like a pretzel under the g force loads he experienced.

 

[RogerRamRod]

This is why I asked if it was an MII spindle. I was hoping someone would leave the well beaten path and build something around a new option. I don’t know, maybe it isn’t possible but it would be nice to used something that fit the chassis a little better (i.e. taller). Add that there are options for ABS and wheel speed sensors with those options. That’s why I am trying to work out a custom spindle that uses the S550 rear hub/bearing assembly.

I know this is a name we haven't seen in a long time, but wasn't XV doing something with Aluminum Control Arms & Spindles? I thought I remember seeing something years ago. I don't know where they went, but they did have a 68 Charger I really liked.

 

[RustyRatRod]

I mean Buddy baker drove the first over 200 mph lap in I believe 1970, with a 4500lb car, manual steering, manual drum brakes, and with bias ply slicks with torsion bars and leaf springs. The suspension shown here would fold up like a pretzel under the g force loads he experienced.

I've always said it's a lot harder to really improve on the factory platform than most people realize.

 

[DionR]

I know this is a name we haven't seen in a long time, but wasn't XV doing something with Aluminum Control Arms & Spindles? I thought I remember seeing something years ago. I don't know where they went, but they did have a 68 Charger I really liked.

Your right, I think they did use Corvette uprights with their suspension. The guy(s?) working that stuff now look to be using Corvette uprights, anyways.

B/E Body only thought.

XV VTR FRONT SUSPENSION for B and E Body Mopars

 

[Scody21]

Those strut towers need some more triangulation. Since the car and driving load is moved to the tower, the amount of force pushing on those towers, with an almost vertical back, I could see the tower folding up in a short order.

As NC engine noted about racing, aftermarket style suspensions are not allowed in the Vintage TransAm racing clubs. So this leaves the street crowd, that don’t understand the old saying of it ain’t broke don’t fix it…