(Non-Chevelle, but similar rear suspension question)

As you can see in my sig, I've got a '95 Caprice wagon. It has a 2.56:1 open rear, and the big wagon drums. I'm parting out a '95 Caprice 9C1 (cop car) with a 3.08 posi and rear discs. The frame and rear axle are 3" wider on a wagon than the sedan, and the LCA mounts on the housing are also spaced out 3" wider.

Much like a Chevelle, the lower arms are angled slightly outward, rather than parallel. If I were to use lower control arms with spherical bearings on each end, and stuck the sedan rear in the wagon, would I have any problems if the arms were parallel, or even angled inward slightly? I'd probably keep the stock uppers and put new rubber bushings in those.

I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't work, but I'm no expert by any means... It would sure be nice to have a little lower gear than the 2.56s - 4600lbs is a lot to move :D

Anyone?

Derek,

If I'm reading it correctly, the arms would be angled in towards the pumpkin on the rear end. I'm sure it would work, but you may not have the proper lateral control you're looking for. Might make for a squirrely ride. The LCA's don't do as much lateral control as the uppers, but they still carry quite a bit and the 'angled out' is important to the system.

Ryan

If I'm reading it correctly, the arms would be angled in towards the pumpkin on the rear end. I'm sure it would work, but you may not have the proper lateral control you're looking for. Might make for a squirrely ride. The LCA's don't do as much lateral control as the uppers, but they still carry quite a bit and the 'angled out' is important to the system. I haven't actually measured yet, but I think they would be pretty close to straight (parallel)

After the Chevelle is on the new chassis and running, the wagon is getting lowered and possibly some similar suspension mods if I like how the Chevelle rides.

If the angles are slight on the LCAs I cannot see it making any significant difference if they are angled in, out, or parallel. Consider how the RC is located for the C4L rear suspension: it has zero to do with the LCAs and all about the UCAs.

The lateral location is provided by the upper arms. The LCAs are just responsible to keep the axle A) located fore and aft (including steer tracking) and B) from rotating.

I might be more concerned about what 1.5" would do to the wheel track and clearance on each side.

Sounds to me like it is time to switch gears and carriers rather than housings and axles.

I might be more concerned about what 1.5" would do to the wheel track and clearance on each side.

Sounds to me like it is time to switch gears and carriers rather than housings and axles.I know that's not a problem, as there are several people on the impala ss forums who have relocated the lower brackets to fit the sedan rear in a wagon. I'm just looking for an easier way.

How long are the lower arms? You could draw some pictures and do a little math and figure out how much stuff would move around with the different angles.

Not that I would recommend it ;) but if there are "several people" who have moved the brackets, I would bet there are also at least a few who have swapped without moving the brackets. If you didn't know any better do you think you could tell the difference? :)

Would definitely be an easier way.

Derek, as long the skewed angle is less than ~10* it's not going to make a difference 10* in, 10* out or dead on viewed in plan view. I wonder if the brackets are the same height....that would make a difference in SVSA and roll steer characteristics if the brackets are at a different height.

Thanks guys :cool: I was thinking if it wouldn't work, I'd probably put the axle up for sale to try to get a few more bucks to stick into the Chevelle, but since it could work, I'll hang onto it for my wagon.