#1  
Old 05-30-2019, 11:48 PM
Goat-Racer's Avatar
Goat-Racer Goat-Racer is offline
Chief Ponti-yacker
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lompoc, CA
Posts: 716
Default Strut rod length and bind

Hi guys,

We have my son's '62 up and running after the V8, trans, and rear end swap.
The front suspension was mostly original so I have changed all of the control arm bushings and sent the pitman arm off to Rare Parts for rebuild.

When putting things back together I realized that the location of the frame where the strut rods pass through is no where close to being "in line" with the LCA mounting bolt.
This creates a pretty significant bind as the suspension travels from top to bottom.

For a stock application, this has obviously not been an issue, but for those who have drag raced with factory front suspension, has anyone addressed this? I'd like to either make my own strut rods with double rod ends and mount the rear back at the frame rail, or possibly reverse the strut rods and shoot forward like the Mustang arrangement. Tie rod clearance can be adjusted.

A 3/4-16 female threaded rod end (heim joint) fits the stock strut rod and provides the extra length to share the same centerline as the control arm bushing.

Any thoughts?

__________________
Brian Rock

'65 GTO - Pump gas 496" IA2 w/ High Ports, 200-4R trans, 3.73 gears, 275 Hoosier radials, and 3925 lbs.
9.88 @ 134 N/A on Cali 91 octane.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJEIY5OJ68g
  #2  
Old 05-31-2019, 08:27 AM
Radman's Avatar
Radman Radman is offline
Chief Ponti-yacker
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Tippecanoe, OH
Posts: 765
Default

Some pictures might help.

__________________
If you built it, drive it.
red 62 Tempest total stock restoration.
white 62 Tempest modified, 61 389 Tri-Power, and a conventional drive train.
  #3  
Old 05-31-2019, 09:28 AM
Goat-Racer's Avatar
Goat-Racer Goat-Racer is offline
Chief Ponti-yacker
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lompoc, CA
Posts: 716
Default

Well, I think I described things pretty clearly. I'll take that as a "no" that you have not considered this to be an issue.

Thank you..

__________________
Brian Rock

'65 GTO - Pump gas 496" IA2 w/ High Ports, 200-4R trans, 3.73 gears, 275 Hoosier radials, and 3925 lbs.
9.88 @ 134 N/A on Cali 91 octane.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJEIY5OJ68g
  #4  
Old 06-01-2019, 09:42 AM
hobbygto65's Avatar
hobbygto65 hobbygto65 is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Jan 1970
Location: Brainerd,MN
Posts: 1,767
Default

You didn't accidentally get the bottom control arm switched from side to side.

  #5  
Old 06-01-2019, 04:41 PM
Goat-Racer's Avatar
Goat-Racer Goat-Racer is offline
Chief Ponti-yacker
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lompoc, CA
Posts: 716
Default

They appear to be identical arms. Same features when side by side. Upper arms are different for sure, but lowers look good either way.

Even just looking at the frame and visualizing from a two dimensional top view, the hole in the frame where the strut rod passes through does not share the same centerline as the lower control arm pivot bolt.
Like I mentioned before, in a stock application where the car just needs to "drive" and go down the road, this is obviously just fine.

From a drag racing perspective, I want the upper and lower arms as free from bind as possible and I will control the suspension with shocks.

I know that many guys have raced these cars with factory front suspension but I can't be the only one that has noticed the problem.
My thought is that there guys who back half big tire) these cars with moderate to decent power and really don't need the front end to contribute much for the car to leave because of the big tire out back. Most small tire guys are dealing with lesser power and don't really need the front end to contribute due to the more moderate power level.
We are on the small tire plan right now and more power is coming in the near future. I need to ensure that the FE travel is sufficient and I am free of any bind whatsoever.

__________________
Brian Rock

'65 GTO - Pump gas 496" IA2 w/ High Ports, 200-4R trans, 3.73 gears, 275 Hoosier radials, and 3925 lbs.
9.88 @ 134 N/A on Cali 91 octane.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJEIY5OJ68g
  #6  
Old 06-07-2019, 09:58 PM
rod cole rod cole is offline
Chief Ponti-yacker
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 790
Default

I have 28-10.5 slicks and regularly run 10.80 with completely stock front end and shocks. Another thing to consider is these are negative caster cars. I adjusted mine to 2 degrees positive so even more bind. And have run several 9.90 on spray at different tracks. So it is all in how fast you want to go. Mine is ladder bar rear,. scarebird brake conversion front, 62 tempest They have fair rear overhang which helps

  #7  
Old 06-08-2019, 09:43 AM
Goat-Racer's Avatar
Goat-Racer Goat-Racer is offline
Chief Ponti-yacker
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lompoc, CA
Posts: 716
Default

Thank you for the feedback! I noticed the negative caster deal in an old alignment specification sheet online, but adjusted the car "positive" the same as you did.

I ended up with 3/4-16 female rod ends on the end of the stock strut rods. The strut rods received a little heat and bend and now they attach to tabs I welded to the frame rails. Still not optimal but zero deflection, less bind than before, and now I can trim away the stock strut rod mounting structure and have more room for headers and header removal/install with the engine in the car.
The plan is to run them forward down the road if we convert to a rack and pinion setup.

Again, thank you for the input. Glad to hear that the stock front end is not holding you back with the small tire. Our engine was intended for boost but is NA at the moment. Should be an 11 second ride as is and then only faster from there.
Rear suspension is split mono leaf/Caltracs deal with sliders.

__________________
Brian Rock

'65 GTO - Pump gas 496" IA2 w/ High Ports, 200-4R trans, 3.73 gears, 275 Hoosier radials, and 3925 lbs.
9.88 @ 134 N/A on Cali 91 octane.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJEIY5OJ68g
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:10 AM.

 

About Us

The PY Online Forums is the largest online gathering of Pontiac enthusiasts anywhere in the world. Founded in 1991, it was also the first online forum for people to gather and talk about their Pontiacs. Since then, it has become the mecca of Pontiac technical data and knowledge that no other place can surpass.

 




Copyright © 2017