abodyjoe
Well-Known Member
bigger bars (.920 min.) are perfect for daily driving. improves things light years.
suspension upgrades?
- Thread starter mopar56
- Start date
-
bigger bars (.920 min.) are perfect for daily driving. improves things light years.
redfastback
Don't ask me... my garage is empty
I agree, I have the 1.00" T bars, and it handles amazingly. I had original 340 bars(.870), and they sucked....I had the .890 bars, better, but still not enough.
We all have our opinion on how a Mopar handles and how we like it. Really sit down and think how your going to drive it, and then make your decision.
Stock everything else with just a torsion bar, shock and sway bar upgrade, you will end up just improving upon an already great design....
Helwig front sway bar has been only true bolt on part on my duster...
I agree with swapping new bushings and ball joints.
Use moog offset bushings on upper control arms.
Mine 72 duster has stock bars on front and it fells good. 318 and some weight losing mods on front
I agree with swapping new bushings and ball joints.
Use moog offset bushings on upper control arms.
Mine 72 duster has stock bars on front and it fells good. 318 and some weight losing mods on front
The Duster can absolutely be made to handle as well as that Neon R/T, and better with the right components. Before swearing off new cars completely, I drove a 2004 Dodge SRT-4. I upgraded it with Mopar stage 3 adjustable coilovers w/custom springs, it was slightly lowered, had bigger sway bars front and rear (26mm front, 19mm rear), larger tires (245/45/17), and a few horsepower mods as well - Stage1 ECU, Lorenzo throttle body, Borla cat back, a few other things I've forgotten. It's been a few years, but I'm confident my Duster set up as it is currently could eat my old SRT4 for lunch in most situations. The Neon r/t's and Neon-based SRT4's aren't a difficult mark actually, unlike brand new cars they don't have any traction control options, no electronic steering, or computer controlled suspension. Nothing magic, just struts/coilovers and rack and pinion steering. Very attainable.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with the design of the torsion bar suspension.In fact, it offers some really nice advantages, although all suspension designs are about trade offs. Ma Mopar just didn't run enough spring rate, especially on the front torsion bars. Granted, that was because of crappy tire options and the fairly lousy shocks available at the time. But those are easy things to remedy now, and with larger torsion bars, better shocks, sway bars, a good alignment and most importantly modern compound tires, your Duster can handle just as well with the torsion bar suspension as any aftermarket coil-over set up for a fraction of the cost.
My car is set up like this....
1.12" Firm Feel torsion bars
Magnumforce tubular UCA’s (non-adjustable)
Adjustable strut rods
Solid tie rod sleeves
LCA boxing plates
Greasable LCA pins (Firm Feel w/ poly bushings)
Hellwig Sway bars (Tubular front 1 1/8” #55904, E body solid rear 7/8” #6908 ) Afco leaf springs (20231M -121 lb)
Hotchkis Fox shocks (non-adjustable)
13" front rotors (cobra style kit from Dr. Diff) w/ 15/16 late style master cylinder
11"x2.5" rear drums (for now)
Torque boxes, subframe connectors, and "J" bars (firewall to forward frame rails, shock mounts tied in)
1/2" rear spring offset
275/35/18 front tires on 18x9" rims
295/35/18 rear tires on 18x10" rims
Flaming River 16:1 manual steering box
There's probably a few things I left out, but that's most of it. All the info is in my build thread for my Duster, link is in my signature. It's obviously a very different driving experience than something like a Neon R/T, but from a handling performance standpoint you can definitely even the playing field.
All of that isn't necessary just to improve the handling to daily driver levels. The suggestions of rebuilding the front suspension with offset bushings, using larger torsion bars, better shocks, sway bars and a good alignment are all right on. But you can go a lot further than that depending on what you want to do with the car, and you don't have to go to complete coilover replacement systems like RMS (although it is a great set up) to get your car to handle well. A properly set up torsion bar system can do just as well for most situations.
While I agree with most of what you are saying, I have a 96 Neon ACR. First Generation ACR's, R/T's included, could pull over a G on a skid pad and are amazing in corners. I have almost no transition going from the ACR to the 66 Formula S, but I'm absolutely fearless in the corners with the ACR. The 66 Formula S is stock, with factory 16:1 box, rebuilt by Firm Feel, stock .87 TBars, all MOOG ball joints and bushings, factory front sway bar and HD factory 48 year old rear leaf springs. What I'm trying to say is, not many cars can pull over a G on the skidpad, so when someone has a 1st generation Neon, they know what a great handling car is. Not much will touch one of them in the corners. But a well set up A is a great handler, do some reading up on the Mopar Action Green Brick.
mopar56
Well-Known Member
again, great info, thanks, these " off set bushings" that keep coming up any one have a part number?, also the larger torsion bars, are these aftermarket or used bars your using?, if used what application are they from?
redfastback
Don't ask me... my garage is empty
K7103 for the bushings. Be careful how they get installed. Thin part of bushings faces to tire in front and to engine in rear. That will help.maximize caster.
All the larger t bars are after market.
All the larger t bars are after market.
Comparing an ACR to a stock '66 Formula S is comparing apples to oranges. Stock for stock isn't a comparison at all. But you can absolutely make an A-body pull over 1g on a skidpad, with the torsion bars and leaf springs. I'd be willing to bet that my car is close with its BFG KDW's, and could probably do it with race compound tires.
In fact, you can do it with '74 Charger if you want. I know this because it's been done. Recently, on the show "Americarna", they found a 1974 Charger NASCAR, stored for 40 years in the same condition it was when it was raced. They put it through its paces against a modern 2014 Cup car in a slalom, 0-100-0, and skidpad. The '74 Charger pulled 1.2g's on the skidpad. The modern NASCAR pulled 1.3g's. The new car handily won the 0-100-0, but the brakes on the new car are light years ahead. The slalom wasn't too bad, but I bet the Charger could have done better with an old school driver than it did with Kasey Kahne, he didn't seem nearly as comfortable with the old manual steering ;). It still wasn't that far behind, and a Neon ACR is no Cup car. Sorry. And I do know what an ACR is capable of. I had a first gen Neon as well, and my SRT was intentionally set up above and beyond a factory ACR, although the 1st gens had the advantage of being a bit smaller.
You can watch a clip of the show here, although it doesn't show the final competition. I had it recorded for a bit but I lost it so I don't have the other numbers, there's probably somewhere you can watch the full episode. The 0-100-0 was the only place the '74 got killed, but it had a restrictor plate on the 426, and it didn't seem tuned quite right. And of course, the brakes were '74 tech. http://www.velocity.com/tv-shows/americarna/videos/untouched-classic-nascar.htm
Keep in mind, that '74 Charger was set up as it was in 1974. That means torsion bars and leaf springs. The torsion bars were probably around 1.24", possibly larger as a lot of the oval track folks used C-body torsion bar sockets so they could go larger. But that's not anything fancy, and on an A-body you wouldn't need that much rate. You can get 1.18" bars from Firm Feel if your really want, but unless you're running race compounds those are probably unnecessary with the sway bars available now. The rest of the parts are comparable, or even less improved than most of the stuff that you can get from Hotchkis now.
And really, skid pad numbers are more about tire compound than anything else. Even with all the parts I listed, if you tossed a set of BFG T/A's on my car it would handle like crap. Unfortunately that pretty much means going to 17 or 18" rims, but that does give you more room for brake rotors.
72bluNblu it is not really fair to compare much to a NASCAR car of any era to a street car. Or your car to be honest. But it does show what the basic A body is capable of. The 66 Formula S is very capable and will embarrass most cars. I definitely agree with you about tires.
Trojmn
Well-Known Member
i currently drive a SRT in GS and a have recently retired my regular neon in STC. this season i started to also drive my 67 barracuda in CAM. Car is mostly stock 1.03 + hellwig FSB, 3/4 rear swaybar, FF UCA, 73+ abody disks and willwood proportioning with manual disk/drum brakes. 17x8 and 225/45 ZII's, and a shot power steering chuck and slow federal pump.
the A-body has potential. even with my weak 273 commando, slaloms where pleasantly surprised by the turn in even with PS going out on the 3rd cone. no doubt that is mostly due to RWD.
Neon SRT4 track and WB weight
58in 105in 2900LBS
Abody cuda
57.5 108 3200lbs(?)
so its approximately the same "size" as a neon (minus the overhang) and RWD and better FWD geometry, nearly unlimited mods allowed in CAM and only a few hundred pounds . Yeah it SHOULD be faster in RAW. however it needs to beat my SRT by 1.14 seconds on a 60second course... add power, wider wheels and tires, thats doable but is going to take some work. the SRT is turn and burn and top 5 on index every time.
AutoX is won by weight and wheelbase and track, period. IMO the A body is in the ballpark and could be locally competitive without getting wild.
the A-body has potential. even with my weak 273 commando, slaloms where pleasantly surprised by the turn in even with PS going out on the 3rd cone. no doubt that is mostly due to RWD.
Neon SRT4 track and WB weight
58in 105in 2900LBS
Abody cuda
57.5 108 3200lbs(?)
so its approximately the same "size" as a neon (minus the overhang) and RWD and better FWD geometry, nearly unlimited mods allowed in CAM and only a few hundred pounds . Yeah it SHOULD be faster in RAW. however it needs to beat my SRT by 1.14 seconds on a 60second course... add power, wider wheels and tires, thats doable but is going to take some work. the SRT is turn and burn and top 5 on index every time.
AutoX is won by weight and wheelbase and track, period. IMO the A body is in the ballpark and could be locally competitive without getting wild.
Exactly my point, and you're still running 225's and relatively small torsion bars for racing.
The change in handling when I went from 1" bars to 1.12" bars on my Duster was massive. Same for changing the 225's out for the current 275/295 combo. That alone is nearly night and day. With the 2.94 gears I still have out back I have to try pretty hard to break loose the 295's, and that's with 400+ hp. There's a lot of grip there.
My car isn't anything crazy. It's street driven, and will soon be my daily driver. All of the suspension modifications are "bolt on" and off the shelf with the exception of the welding I did to box the LCA's and move the rear perches in a 1/2". The chassis stiffening I did isn't mandatory to pull 1G on the skid pan, although its beneficial. Even just adding subframe connectors would get you most of the way there. And everything I did was done in my driveway or garage, no fancy fabrication necessary. I also probably have about half as much money into it compared to a full coilover replacement.
Even that '74 Charger started life as a "real" charger. Sure, it was a factory "body in white" that's now a full cage car with a Charger skin, but all of the suspension points and geometry are the same- its a torsion bar and leaf spring car. Sure, its a ton lighter and stiffer, but the suspension itself isn't anything you can't get from Firm Feel, Hotchkis, etc now. And honestly, that Charger has a massive disadvantage in the weight bias category with that 426 up front. A small block stroker will make just as much power and push the front/rear bias to much more manageable levels.
replicaracer43
Grumpy Old Man
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,051
- Reaction score
- 7,867
actually a early 70s mopar stock car is VERY comparable, because they used factory unibodys, and the same torsion bar/leaf spring design as the street cars. Back in those days, they were much different from today
Exactly. The suspension set ups they use are easily duplicated with our torsion bar suspensions with off the shelf parts. No, you won't have the stiffness of that cage, but everything else is very doable.
And then there's Tom with a Hotchkis TVS set up. He has a few more mods to fit those tires than I do though...
This is what 285 front and 305 rear look like, winning last weekend...
Trojmn
Well-Known Member
i'd like to see those CAM results compared with the rest of the field. Say a newer Mustang in ESP or anything ESP or even C, D, F stock.
and yes i need more tire. I'd like to go to 255 or so on a 17x9. I've become a convert of not overtiring wheels.
and yes i need more tire. I'd like to go to 255 or so on a 17x9. I've become a convert of not overtiring wheels.
autoxcuda
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 8,838
- Reaction score
- 3,793
You mean too wide a tire on a narrow(er) rim?
If you could run a 275 on a 10" wide rim would you prefer that over a 255 on a 9" wide rim??
2 Darts
A-body Addicted
If this is the son's daily driver, recommend new rubber bushings f/r, good quality gas shocks f/r, a 7 inch wide rim f/r, a set of decent 205-225/60s tires all around, and a max. street performance alignment. I also advocate a properly mounted front anti-roll bar. This won't break the bank and will transform the car. If you like what you get, then do the springs and T-bars.
Trojmn
Well-Known Member
right! too wide of a tire for the width of the wheel. While it works in some cases in others it feels "wallowy" though it depends on driving style/setup if that works for you. When in doubt save money and tire shoulders and enjoy steering response. or if you have deep pockets test back to back. More tire is not always better unless you have enough wheel to support it. In both of your examples i don't think either is overtired. A 275 on a 8" would be too much, but people do it all the time i think to a placebo or even detrimental effect. Either way in your examples I would fit the widest wheel.
In my heavy~ish FWD cars I prefer a 205 on a 7" rather than a 225 on the same wheel. The 225s the barracuda feel awesome on on 8" wheel, and i would have gone 245 if i had came across a similar deal. I'm still building it out and trying to not get serious ;-)
autoxcuda
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 8,838
- Reaction score
- 3,793
In your opinion, is a 275/40/17 on a 9" too small and better to run 255/40/17 on a 9"?
Would you pick 275/40/17 on a 17x10 over a 255/40/17 on a 17x9?
:coffee2:
I was referring to rubber over urethane for the street when I said that. Sway bars are always a help unless you're only goin in a straight line.
I was referring to rubber over urethane for the street when I said that. Sway bars are always a help unless you're only goin in a straight line.
mopar56
Well-Known Member
this is an awesome thread thanks for the help, I am going to start with the basics hear and add mods as required and as listed, I do have one question on the torsion bars though as I have never changed them before, do the larger bars require different mount brackets or do you simply upgrade the bar size meaning the ends are the same diameter, thanks
Trojmn
Well-Known Member
Personally I would lean toward the 255's on a 9" rim especially on the front. A nearly 11" wide tire is going to be bulgy on the rim and allow a lot of movement. if you can get 10" rims on there, yeah I can see the 275s working, its worth a test anyways.
This was a very tight autox test course 225/45/17 17x8. Sorry for the weird angle. You can see that in the tight 360 the entire car is on the very edge of the shoulder.
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srZvHIsBR0c"]8-2-14 CCSCC Test_n_Tune - YouTube[/ame]
Another extreme example but miatas commonly run 225/45 on 15x9 UL wheels. YMMV
The hex ends are the same size, so only the bar changes. The hex ends are 1.25" diameter, so any bar up to 1.24" has the same ends. The larger bars are a little tricky to get new dust boots onto, but it's a lot easier if you put the dust boots in boiling water for a couple minutes and then install them.
You aren't really trying to tell me that a NASCAR suspension is like a street car suspension? Other than basic design. I have too much respect for them. The roll cages tying everything together, the adjustability, the spring rates, attention to detail, and the ability to run 200+ mph.
Efregoso
Member
I'm currently rebuilding a 73 duster special, and honestly i just bought a pst suspension kit for a couple hundred, and it was well worth it
There's a reason they used to call it "stock car" racing. They left the factory as stock cars. Yes, cages were added, and that makes the chassis super stiff. And the UCA's were tubular and more adjustable than stock, and were obviously set up to maintain geometry with the car lowered that much. The strut rods were also adjustable. Rear suspension was still leaf spring. Keep in mind that adjustable UCA's, adjustable strut rods, even tubular LCA's are all easily obtainable now, and probably offer more adjustment than was available back then, even for NASCAR.
And, you don't even have to believe me! Courtesy eBay, an original '69 Daytona NASCAR.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/426-Hemi-Daytona-4-Speed-Real-Original-NASCAR-48-Jame-Hylton-1969-and-1970-/121505751008?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&forcerrptr=true&hash=item1c4a4e9fe0&item=121505751008&nma=true&si=7jAyiZ5sckZsGGuyFDAyC1W75FM%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557
Download all the pics before the ad goes away, as its been removed.
But you can see in these pictures what I'm talking about (these are resized, the originals are bigger). The stock frame rails are still there. The K-frame started life as a stock piece that was modified. You can see the torsion bar set up and giant torsion bars, and parts of the LCA socket that appear somewhat stock. And take a look at that cage! Yikes!!! NASCAR's of the '70s were nothing like today's NASCAR's. And as far as 200mph, that had a lot more to do with aerodynamics than suspension. And the giant brass one's the drivers had to take this bucket up to 200mph...
-
