More suspension stuff

[BelvedereII]

I've been running my '67 Belvedere II with S/S springs and the original 318 T-bars although it's supporting a 440 up front now. The car's original springs seemed pretty weak, so I bought the XHD set from MP. No change in ride height, although it did stiffen things up. Next up was the S/S springs and even mounting them via the lower of the 2 holes on the front hanger adaptors the height raised maybe 1" over stock.

Turned out, the T-bars had been adjusted down pretty far-nearly to resting on the rubber buffers, the 440 made things worse, so I cranked them up a little. Still, the headlights don't project very far downrange and I've hesitated to bring the front end up more with the understanding the suspension should be free to move under launch. I don't think my car's lifting the wheels, but still believe it should have a good range to work with. Maybe that's not quite correct?

Not a big deal, the car works fine, but in looking back at images of the stock racers from '66 and '67 those cars' trunks sat overall higher and the front bumpers looked to sit higher as well. The Silver Bullet looks up on its toes, still with a downward rake (MP Chassis book recommends something like a 2" drop, back to front, and I don't recall what mine measures), and at that the front bumper looks over knee high while mine is below knee height.

The nag in the back of my head is wondering why the race cars doing all the winning back in the day (Stiles, Sox, etc) sat so high. Although they were 1.5 sec or more quicker than my car (7.6 in 1/8th mile so far) and the Bullet ran 10.3 up on its toes, I would think their setups would benefit lesser running cars like mine.

I'll be measuring my car's current height and rake, then raising the nose up closer to level to see if there is any change from that small adjustment. Typical 60' times are around 1.72 lately, best this past spring with really good air was a 1.66. Trap speed is 88mph.

Meantime, how are your '66 and '67 cars set up?

Kirk

 

[Cranky]

I don't like my cars sitting high in the rear.....low as possible and with no more than a 1" rake. When my 66 Belvedere was together, I also ran the front end within 1" of the rubber bump stops. As for the 318 bars, those should work well. Had a 68 Road Runner that had /6 bars and a ladder bar rear set up and ran 10.68's. The car would launch with the fronts in the air about a foot but wouldn't keep them up. It would land and unload the rears and spin. Back then, adjustable shocks were not all that cheap so I just swapped out the light duty shocks for a pair that were more heavy duty and that did the trick.

 

[1badgtx]

I have mopar performance rear springs in my 67 gtx...Stock shackles too...The t bars are cranked up about halfway...I like the front of the car a little lower than the rear...I,m due t bars though...The left one is about bottomed out...I,m runnin the edelbrock shocks with a larger diameter front sway bar from just suspension.Handles pretty good for a boat!!!I got the rear sway bar but I don,t like cutting holes in my subframe to install them...


Petty blue 67 gtx

 

[BelvedereII]

Saturday I raised the front end a bit, measuring from a flat surface at the center of the front bumper it went from 17" to 18 1/4" and the oil pan came up from 3 5/8" to 4 1/2". Measuring from the body seam front and back extremes, the difference was 1 3/8" and is now only 9/16".

The car used to feel like it was pointing slightly downward from the driver's position, now it's leveled off and that from a 1 1/4" lifting of the nose.

Lifting the car via frame lift shows not a lot of front end travel before the tires grab air, but we'll see what happens on the track at the end of the month.

 

[Cranky]

Can you post a side view pic of the car?

 

[BelvedereII]

Nothing good, but here's a few cameraphone shots. Middle one has the back of the car slightly low as the driveway drops away a little:

 

[BelvedereII]

Better shots from yesterday's local cruise night. Blue '66 Coronet is owned by a fellow club member. Need to use better camera and work on leveling the frame!

 

[Cranky]

Looks like it's sitting pretty much at the stock ride height. The drag cars back in the day were winning not because they were sitting up in the air but mainly because they had the power. Suspension technology wasn't like it is today and they used heavy duty springs to handle the power. Those springs evolved into SS springs and they raised them up in the back. I think many found that if they left the front end way low, it affected traction and improved it when they raised the front end on up. If you read back about the old High and Mighty car, it'll tell you why they raise it up so high. It was about center of gravity and traction. A high center of gravity is great for traction but sucks to drive on the top end. A buddy has a small block Demon that's set up like the old Super Stockers and it gets to be a bit of a bear to drive once it hit the 1000 ft mark. My first race car sat high in the rear but drove pretty good at 125 mph but at the launch, it would jerk the front wheels up over 6" and the unload the rear when they dropped back down. After trying different ladder bar settings, I lowered the rear 2", raised the front 1", changed the front shocks and the car launch a lot better. Front tires only come off the ground about an 1" but it carried them longer and the rear didn't unload anymore and top end driving became much better.