What do YOU run for a suspension? Im looking for something that is the best of both worlds. (handling/ride) Also ride height. How low can you go (while driving) and not have problem?

Ohhh, this should be good.

I should add you can check my site for what I run and a big :thumbsup: to Shane sine I am editing after he posted. Good job Shane. I'm still witing for a date to come up and show you boys how an early "A" body handles (I hear you have track time at LVMS)...ohhh, but give me a couple months to finish up.

Yea this is going to be a long and interesting argument, i mean discussion....

Oh man, did you do a search? There is a ton of information on this. Basically, these are the most likely suspects, but I'll just cover the front since the rear is Dennis' baby and I dont want him to cry. I can say that the factory rear suspension is not the best but can be made to work ok for the street (three link in my opinion is the best route, but at this time its a custom venture):

Global West-UCA's do marginal improvement for camber gain (as any do), but have a pretty good caster improvement and are some of the nicest on the market. Their B-body spindle upgrade with the shorter upper control arm give's good camber gain along with the caster but that comes with a bunch of other things that are pretty bad due to the cast in steer arm (bumpsteer, steering ratio, seriously do a search this one's been covered extensively) The delrin bushings are some of the best and they've been doing it forever. I'm not sure of their spring rates so I cannot comment on those, but I'm sure they are in the typical 600-700lb range. I like higher rates for a car that will see track time especially, but I personally like it that way on the street as well. The springs are a typical 1-1.5 drop. They also offer the QA1 coilovers with the beehive tapered spring so they bolt in.

Hotchkis-Has had the sway bars forever that a ton of people on here probably run from their TVS kit which includes springs and rear control arms. A basic bolt on improvement for the street that I have heard some good things on for basic ride and handling for the street. They also offer the shorter UCA for the B-body spindle swap (still not a fan). They too offer the pretty standard springs, but are probably matched with their sway bars for typical street driven cars.

SC&C-now we are getting somewhere for higher performance. The short height of the spindle has always been a problem with most of the early muscle cars by not allowing proper camber gain. Well instead of trying to retrofit the infamous B-Body spindle, Marcus at SC&C, helped develop the taller Howe upper and lower ball joints to achieve this with very good results. The 0.5" taller lower ball joint will lower your car just that much. He has been doing these cars for a long time. He also has spec'd out his own custom SPC ajustable UCAs with greasable race bushings. One of the best choices in my opinion due to their ease of adjustability (2" total range) for caster and camber with no need for shims. Also the Howe ball joints are precision built to last and are totally rebuildable. If you have any questions call this guy he knows these cars better than anyone I know.

ATS- well I must say that we also have a front suspension. We also put our focus on the problematic short factory spindle as Marcus did by making a taller than factory forged aluminum spindle with a sealed C5 bearing pack, the AFX spindle. In fact we worked with Marcus to develop the optimal setup with his custom SPC arms and also to develop a custom steer arm. Geometry wise these are about the same as the taller upper and lower ball joints from SC&C. The AFX spindle has a 7/8" drop. We also can adapt these to those that have already done the B-Body spindle swap. Do a search for more information on these. We also have the Caster-X shaft which is a billet cross shaft that replaces your original one in your factory UCA with slugs to adjust in more caster in without excessive shims. This accepts GW delalum bushings.

Fatman and Heidts-Both have a taller cast steel spindle with a 2 inch drop going after the same geometry improvements in camber gain. Once again do a search to see all the comparisons.

This pretty much covers the typical aftermarket offerings that most people on the site may have. I hope that those running any of these products can jump in an give their inputs.

Shock selection wise I like Penske the best (but definitely not necessary for the street), Bilstein, Koni, Afco.

How low can you go? Well depends on what is the lowest point of your car. I have an exhaust cutout about 1.75" from the ground. Not too fun, but my frame is also about 5.5" from the ground, say roughly 3-4" drop from factory. I believe Dennis is running a drop in this region as well. If you get everything tucked up nice that shouldn't be hard to achieve with the right spring and spindle choice and can be burden free on the street for the most part. You can also use landrum spring adjusters very effectively (check out dennis' site) to fine tune where you want it to sit.

This should get you an idea of the basics available. I'm sure there are other manufacturers as well, but I do not have any experience with them so I also would like to hear about other products.

Dennis - Your ElCamino sits perfect! How low is it from the engine crossmember to the ground? Any problems with the ground clearance? What size rims and tires??

Shane - Your Chevelle is wicked! Too much work for a simple person like myself. You gave me alot of info, and I want to say thanks! I guess what Im looking for is someone to tell me what will bolt on, and where to get it. Ive had other cars in the past, and Id say my best handling one was a 78 Trans Am. (stock) The Chevelle is alot heavier. Can you make these cars handle better than the Trans Am. ( I know, dont laugh too hard)

I was thinking about running Currie UCA/LCA on the rear. Any thoughts? What about springs/shocks???(rear) Also like it to sit like Dennis Elky (if he doesnt have clearance issuse) I was wanting to run a 17x11 - 315/35-17 on the rear. I know it will fit, but never seen a car with them on that sit low. As for the front there are so many opions out there, I dont know which way to go.

I also here that TRZ is going to be making a rack and pinion kit for the 68-72 A bodies. Any thoughts on that? Would a kit like that change my options (for the better)

As someone who reads pretty much everything that goes by on suspension setups, and what is in this thread so far...

My input is that you may want to distinguish between what is here now and what may be coming. ATS is working with Marcus at SC&C to put together a nice spindle package for our favorite A-body. But I do not believe you can buy it today. Real soon now perhaps, but not today :)

I have also read hints that Marcus is working on a 3-link setup for the rear. I have faith that it will be good, how long do you want to wait?

If I were buying today I would order the SC&C stage II from Marcus. Tall upper and lower Howe ball joints and SPC adjustable upper control arm. I suspect you could add the ATS spindles later if you swap out the ball studs on the Howe ball joints with this combo.

I would fabricate up my own rear 3-link setup designed to use stock UCA as the link and probably a late Camaro PHB. I would leave it rubber bushed for lower NVH but that is a personal tast issue.

And finally I would do some measurements and figure up spring requirements using natural frequency calculations/estimations. For the street and mountain roads, I suspect fronts around 600 and no idea about the rear. Would likely look at stock car products for springs and adjusters.

The Currietrac arms are an excellent choice. They use johnny joints that combine the firmness of polyurethane with the travel of spherical or heim joints. The SC&C Stage II is also a great choice. SC&C carries the currietrac rear control arms too.

My project, as it is now, is just a bare frame with the motor and trans sitting in it. I pulled EVERYTHING off and sold it. ( it was all stock stuff) My gold is to have it done in three years. I have ALOT of work to do! Im trying to plan ahead, so when the time comes, I know what to order. What is this 3 link, and how well will it work?? How will the ride be?
Thanks for the input!!!!! Keep it coming!!!

Dennis - Your ElCamino sits perfect! Thanks! I like it.

How low is it from the engine crossmember to the ground?2 1/2"

Any problems with the ground clearance? Ohhh, speed bumps make me cringe as do very poor highways, there is actually one section of highway near by that I wind up going out of my way to avoid. Header to ground contact at 75MPH+ really sucks!

What size rims and tires??Right now they are 17X9.5 and 17X11 with 255/40 and 285/40. I will be running 275's all the way around shortly.

Can you make these cars handle better than the Trans Am. ( I know, dont laugh too hard)Abso-friken-lutely! The body or shape has virtually zero to do with how well it handles. With proper part selection and tuning you can easily keep up with the C5 guys (although it could get expensive if you are not a good fabricator)

I was thinking about running Currie UCA/LCA on the rear.Currie "Correcttrac" arms are nice, anything utilizing a Johnny Joint style configuration will work well.

Any thoughts? What about springs/shocks???(rear)Can't go wrong with the classics; Koni, Bilstein, QA1, even Edlebrock.

Also like it to sit like Dennis Elky I wanna be like Mike

I was wanting to run a 17x11 - 315/35-17 on the rear. I know it will fit, but never seen a car with them on that sit low.I had 315's for a while, they rub at that height...A LOT!

As for the front there are so many opions out there, I dont know which way to go.275's on 9.5 wheels are perfect

I also here that TRZ is going to be making a rack and pinion kit for the 68-72 A bodies. Any thoughts on that?Tough to do without bump steer issues. Almost every fabricator out there is doing them for the show circuit, to add that level of technical difficulty to the project. Almost all of them have enormous bump steer issues When all else fails; function over form (ie. 315’s, rack and pinion).

TT402LS1, I'm having the exact same issues as you are. I've got a 70 Chevelle that is almost down to the frame and I'm really trying to get the best of all worlds. It's really tough to read through everything and pick out the best setup for what I'm looking for. What I was looking for was the EASY button answer to what to buy. The 'ultimate' kit for a 70 A-body...

What I'm seeing is that there isn't any solution to that, at least nothing available right now. From just this thread alone I can see that the following suggested parts might be the best.

Front suspension--
Sway bar--Hotchkis
UCAs--SC&C
Spindles--ATS
Shocks--Bilstein/Koni/Penske/Afco
Bushings--Delrin

My fear, though, is that by buying parts from each company they might be superstar parts separately but together they won't perform any better than a Model T.

I would love it if someone could turn me on to the 'ultimate' list of suspension, brakes & steering. Does anybody have any experience with this setup? I think it'd be interesting to see what someone will come up with. I'm ready to buy today but I'm just not sure what direction to go. Also, is it worth swapping out the a-arms and spindles?

Thanks, Mike

My fear, though, is that by buying parts from each company they might be superstar parts separately but together they won't perform any better than a Model T.

Also, is it worth swapping out the a-arms and spindles?

Thanks, MikeUnfortunately no one manufacturer builds all the necessary parts to correct the ailments that affect the early "A" body. Mixing parts from different sources becomes a necessary reality as a result. Handle like a Model A; hardly. You will find by taking the best each manufacturer has to offer and combing them in the correct configuration you will have one hell of a handling car.

Are spindles necessary? No, but something has to be done to increase the pivot points between the ball joints. Whether you choose a taller spindle, taller ball joints, spacers or some magical device not yet discovered; something has to be done.

Control arms a different story as they offer no tangible performance advantage on their own. Lowers do nothing for the suspension at all, there is currently no one offering a longer control arm which would be the only advantage to utilizing a tubular lower arm. Uppers offer an advantage only in that with taller spindles it becomes difficult to attain a decent alignment as the arms are too long. Some arms also offer the advantage of having a bit more positive caster built into them although it is not necessary to run those arms to gain positive caster.

WOW! 2 1/2 inches! Your oil pan has to be lower than that, isnt it?? What brand springs are you running. From what I gather, theirs no need for tubular control arms??? I just need to make a good spindle choice?? Delrin bushings and the right springs/shocks? Do you prefer progessive springs over linear? What about sway bars? Hotchis is going to be coming out with a new sway bar for the rear. Have you seen it yet? How well do you think it would work over the regular type? I see you made a cross bar set up on your Elky. How well does that work??

Thanks - Ron

Since Denny doesn't post during the day, and he says I'm his mini-me, I'll field these for him :D

WOW! 2 1/2 inches! Your oil pan has to be lower than that, isnt it?? With a stock pan, it shouldn't hang lower than the X-member. Denny also forgets to mention he's not running inner-fenders. There's no way you could go that low with stock inner fenders, unless you ran a ridiculously small diameter tire.

What brand springs are you running.His are Tru-Way 5" x 9.5" with the taller style Speedway adjustable spacers. I think they were 750# and he recently replaced them with 1000#.

From what I gather, theirs no need for tubular control arms??? I just need to make a good spindle choice??UCAs may be necessary to get a good positive caster setting. Also, depending on ride-height, spindle height, and header clearance, you may not be able to shim the stock uppers inward enough to get enough negative camber. If you're looking for the best available right now, SC&C's stage II package is a good choice. In a few months, Denny may have his Coleman spindle setup sorted out, or ATS may have the A-body spindle & steering arms available.

Do you prefer progessive springs over linear? What about sway bars? Hotchis is going to be coming out with a new sway bar for the rear. Have you seen it yet? How well do you think it would work over the regular type?Linear rate provides more predictable handling. Your shocks can be set control your springs at one rate. The only place I would use a progressive rate, would be in a wagon or el camino I intended to haul heavy loads with. What sway-bar works depends on your spring-rates. If you use soft springs, you need big bars... with stiff springs, you use a small sway bar.

I see you made a cross bar set up on your Elky. How well does that work?I'm assuming you're looking at the Panhard bar... This moves the roll-center height down to the height of where the panhard attaches to the axle from the height where the upper arms attach. Chevelles have a Front RCH that is too low, and a rear RCH that is too high. You want them as close to equal height as possible, and this drops the rear RCH considerably. The problem I see with this, is mechanical bind. The UCAs and the Panhard bar are both trying to control the lateral location of the axle. The PHB in an arc, and the UCAs pretty much vertical. The length of the PHB makes it a very small lateral change through its arc, but IMHO, you would want rubber bushings in the uppers to allow them to "give" a little so that they aren't fighting the PHB.

I believe that Derek meant to say "UCAs may be necessary to get a good positive *caster* setting".

Put another way, tubular LCAs are merely eye candy while tubular UCAs may be shorter and have a flat profile for the arm->ball joint mounting plate as required by tall spindle or extended ball joint conversions. The tubular UCAs can also move the ball joint rearward to change to more modern positive caster. Whether a particular tubular UCA does in fact incorporate these changes is a very good question to ask the vendor before buying.

The cool thing about the SC&C arms compared to most other tubular UCAs is they adjust without shims.

I believe that Derek meant to say "UCAs may be necessary to get a good positive *caster* setting".Yes I did, thanks... Fixed now :clonk:

Derek got it, well almost. The PHB vs. UCA bind theory is just that...a theory. Of course it makes sense and it’s also possible I have limited travel so much that I don't have the opportunity to experience this phenomenon. Thanks Derek

.

Denny, with the PHB and UCAs trying to do the same job, wouldn't the RCH move to whichever one was taking the most of the lateral load? I'm just trying to understand why it wouldn't cause a problem, so this is just my own little theory here. If you were taking a left turn, and the lateral load was on the PHB, then you hit a bump (axle shifts very slightly to the left) so then the UCAs are taking more of the load... RCH just jumped from the height of the PHB to the height of the UCAs, correct?

Interesting theory but the PHB is so stiff that there is no way for the axle to move enough for the UCA's to have an impact on the lateral placement of the axle. If the bar were short enough and axle travel were to extend enough that the lateral position moved than the UCA’s would fight to position the axle resulting in bind and RRCH conflict.

I guess I'll have to take your word for it... just get your damn 3-link done so I don't have to think about this anymore :D

Have you seen the new rear sway bar Hotckis is comming out with, for the A body? Would that have any advatages over the old design?

Have you seen the new rear sway bar Hotckis is comming out with, for the A body? Would that have any advatages over the old design?
Does it bolt to the LCAs or do they attach it in another way?

It has brackets that mount on the axcle tubes. The sway bar than goes to forward on each side and mounts to a small link that is mounted to the LCAs.

Im also looking at the Tru-Coils from Speedway. Where would be a good place to srart as far as spring rates? Are these springs any good on the street? My car, I believe, will weigh about 4000lbs. I would like at least a 3" drop from stock height. Also looking at the weight jacks. How and where do they mount? How much adjustmet (ride height) can they make? Would I need anything else to mount these springs? Any mods to the frame, to make the weight jacks work?

Thanks - Ron

I don't think there's any way that a single thread here can answer the question originally posed :). It's totally subjective.

Have you seen the new rear sway bar Hotckis is comming out with, for the A body? Would that have any advatages over the old design?
The *only* benefit of this design is that is allows some side-to-side freedom of movement between the LCAs and the sway bar. Do you need this movement? I doubt it, in fact I can see some benefit in preventing the LCAs from moving in that direction. I would expect it to reduce lateral axle movement. Of course as always with this rear suspension at the expense of some added bind.

But guessing at the angles and lever arms and pivot points relationship all of the movements are probably exceedingly small and irrelevant.

Now if the sway bar links attached to the frame instead of the LCAs... THEN you would be talking about a different and better design.

As their new design goes, it still maintains a parallel relationship between sway bar and LCA. Thus functionally equal to old design sway bars.

Regarding the weight jacks, there are two types. The first is simple. It goes on top of your spring and seats into the upper spring perch. These can have a threaded sleave on them that makes them adjustable. The other type requires cutting a hole in the top of the frame above the perch so that the threaded bolt may fit through it. Then the plate is welded to the top of the frame and the rest comes from underneath and is threaded into the plate. The second way is much more involved but will allow for easier adjustment. However, once your ride height is set not many people will be adjusting it. These types of weight jacks are common on race cars to make quick adjustments to the nominal weight of each corner of the car without jacking up the car.

Note that the screw jack that comes through the frame conflicts with stock shock mounting on A-body.

Could some give me a good spring # rate to start out with (front and back) If I was to use springs without adjusters, can I cut the spring to get the right ride height Im looking for? How much does that change the spring rate? (per coil cut off) On the front. If I use SC&C stage 3 kit, when they come out with the spindles, wont the shorter spring make a big differance in front end geometry?

This is a run down of what Im currently thinking of using.
Front -
SC&C Stage 3 w/ATS spindles
Tru Coil springs #??? (maybe QA1 coil overs)
Bilstein shocks
Hotchkis sway bar
Durlin bushins
stock LCA

Rear -
Currie Currec Trac UCA/LCA
polygrafite bushing on axcle housing (maybe rubber?)
Tru Trac springs #????
Bilstein shocks (QA1 if I go coil over in the front)
Hotchkis sway bar

I was looking at rear control arm braces. Do they get in the way of the mufflers? I hear Edelbrock ones gives more room. Any thoughts?

Thanks for helping me sort all this out! - Ron

Anyone???

Some tuning may be required to get it balanced, but I believe this will be a good starting point.

Spring rates Front/Rear
Mild performance 550/135 w/ sway bars 1.125/.875
High performance 700/175 w/ sway bars .9375/0
streetable race-car 950/200 not sure on the sway-bars... Denny, are you running a front bar? What size?

For the axle housing bushings, use rubber or sphericals from wolferacecraft.com

I was looking at Wolferacecraft.com. Would thoses axle housing bushings be noisey? What are your thoughs on a complete Wofecraft rear suspention setup? Looks like good stuff, but how would it be on the street? Would the sway bar (single adj) help the car though the twisties?

see my reply in the brakes & suspension topic about the wolfe products.

I bought them when they had a 20% off sale, but if I had to pay full-price, I probably would have gone with UMI arms for just a little more, primarily for the upgrade to QA1 teflon-lined rod ends.

No bar right now, it needs a small bar though. I have a speedway style bar planned for the future.

No bar right now, it needs a small bar though. I have a speedway style bar planned for the future.Denny, if you're looking for a cheap small bar, some of the 64-67 cars had a real small one, like 5/8 or 11/16 if I remember correctly.

Naw, needs to be a custom deal. The OE sta-bars won't work with my ride height, the bends are all wrong and get in the way of the steering linkage (thats why I have no bar now).

Just got back from the SEMA Hotrod & Resto show. It seems like every street rod outfit is jumping on the muscle car bandwagon now. That would be great except as a rule street rod parts look cool but work like hell. :( Some of the stuff just left me chuckling and shaking my head.
A few notes pertaining to the best street suspension. I talked to Gary Heidt about their tall spindles. If you MUST have a 2" drop spindle (and BTW nobody MUST have them) theirs would be the way to go. It`s 1.5" taller than stock and the steering arms holes are in the factory location. FatMan`s is 2" taller but has the steering arm holes lowered .514" to improve bumpsteer on *Camaros*,this roughly DOUBLES the bumpsteer on a Chevelle. They both have the other problems inherent in 2" drop spindles.
For those who have been waiting (begging,praying???) for a well engineered rack and pinion for an A body the light may be at the end of the tunnel! I can`t say too much about it but I spent about an hour going over all the details and potential pitfalls with the designer/engineer (who you`d all know by name and reputation) and he seems to have dotted all the i`s and crossed all the t`s. The configuration used to circumvent the normal geometry/ bumpsteer/ackerman problems is really rather brilliant. We`re gonna be keeping a real close eye on this one! *IF* it turns out as good as it looks/sounds well be one of the first to carry it. Mark SC&C

If you MUST have a 2" drop spindle (and BTW nobody MUST have them)Mark SC&C
I do, to maintain the desired ride height as well as provide the very best geometry possible requires a 2" drop spindle on my particular application. Results may vary depending your personal tastes.

Any thoughts on the Wolfe sway bar set up???

Too much added rear roll stiffness. Those bars act as true stabilizer bars vs. the half-ass wimpy things that attach to the rear arms. When the bar is attached to the rear arms the end links effectively become over 18" long as the arm is the link. With end links that long, the bars added stiffness is very low which is why the small 3/4" bars on there from the factory do so very little to actually control rear roll. Adding a true anti-sway bar would seriously increase rear stiffness, to the point that you would need a 2" bar or 75 lbs rear springs (which you couldn't run) to combat over steer.

The Wolfe bar is built to combat torque loading of the chassis, to ensure the chassis remains flat during standing start launch (ie. Drag racing).

I do, to maintain the desired ride height as well as provide the very best geometry possible requires a 2" drop spindle on my particular application. Results may vary depending your personal tastes.

Naturally Denny,but then you`re special. :) Mark SC&C