I have 2 different rears that I switch occaisionally.The 12 bolt is out of a '71 Monte Carlo, open w/ 2.73s.It now has 4.56s w/ mini spool.
the other rear is the original 8.2 10 bolt.It was open w/ 2.56s and now has 3.73s w/locker.
I understand that the Chevelle and Monte Carlo use the same rear,but on my 12 bolt the upper SSM control arms rub the housing pretty badly on the driver side.It has "clearenced" itself now but it still seems odd.Anyone else ever see this happen?
I also use the SSM lift bars,has anyone used no hop bars in conjunction with these?This is something I had been considering,but the other thread about the bushings has got me thinking about the rear geometry.
This car is a daily driver that does see strip time,and also needs to hook on the street.
Any thoughts are appreciated.

edit:I guess this should be in suspension forums.

When you say SSM lift bars. Can you discribe them? Also the no hop bars. I am hoping someone will discribe how these work. Differnt angles doing what & why. Thanks.

Yeah, you should ask this in the suspension forum to get a thorough response. Denny lives there. He can explain.

No hop bars are the upper control arms. Lift bars are lower control arms. In both cases they're used to change the instant center of the rear suspension. This is the point were if you extented both the upper and lower arms forward they would meet. No hops raise the upper control arms at the axle, liftbars lower the lower control arm at the axle. In both cases this moves the instant center towards the rear of the car. Now the IC is the point of lift on the car of the rear suspension. The farther forward the IC the more front end lift, rear end squat, original design. No-hops, liftbars move the IC back so the lift point is back, less front end lift, less rearend squat, more rear tire bite.
Perhaps Dennis can fill in the holes or correct any errors. I'm not an expert in this area, just did a little reading on the subject.

EDIT: As you can see you probably don't want to use no-hops and liftbars, one or the other.

EDIT: As you can see you probably don't want to use no-hops and liftbars, one or the other. [/QB]This is what I was getting at,using both.The lift bars work very well but I'm always looking for more.If both were used would I.C. be too far back or is there such a thing?What I am more concerned about though is a geometry problem,perhaps the both combined working against each other.I broke one of the stock uppers(pulled through at the forward mounting bolt) so I have the SSM uppers(stock location)and have reinforced the mounting point on the frame.I'd hate to rip something else out.

Well now I think you're going to have to wait for Dennis. I don't know if you can move the IC back 'too' far. What type of bushings in the no-hops, what did you have in your stock uca? SSMs have delrin, no deflection. The arm is also beefier than a stock lca, no flex. If you have a similar type bushing in the no-hops something has to give. Stock uca will flex some but the stock rubber bushings are designed to deflect as well. Putting in no-hops removes more deflection/flex. Only thing left in the equation is the frame mounts, like I said, something has to give. I don't have personal experience but some claim liftbars, stock uca, and airbag is pretty good setup. Assuming you don't want to completely replace your rearend setup. Dennis will probably say truck arm suspension, definately better but not cheap.

Dennis please jump in.

70 beater, I apologize if my first reply seemed off course. It was directed at answering ASB's question, I know it didn't answer your's.

I suspect the torn mount was related to the age of the vehicle and the amount of bind in the rear suspension. Dennis would be able to tell you the best methods to eliminate the bind.

As far as moving the IC back too far I can only guess, if I had to I would say yes you can move it too far back. As you move it back more of the lift is forced down on the rear axle. Seems as you move it back you would also lose weight transfer from front to rear. I suspect the no-hops/liftbars are designed to provide as much lift as possible without losing the benefit of the weight transfer, just a guess.

The left upper stock arm I broke had poly.Something popped launching at the track and when I got under it the arm was up against the floorboard,the bolt stayed and the arm just ripped out.My SSM have been in a few years and are in excellent shape still,they have steel bushings in these,btw.The car launches well and lifts evenly but my 60's still aren't where I want them.A looser converter is going to help that some though.My friend has some of the no hops on his El Camino,I think we're going to put them on mine and see what happens.

You got me curious on the subject so I did a little research, nothing in depth. Here is what I read. You want the IC or lift point at the center of the weight distribution. In this way you're trying to lift the entire weight of the car with the rear suspension. If you move it to far back you don't have enough weight on the rear and the rear end will actually lift during launch. You know what happens when it's too far forward.
Anyway that's what I read and it makes sense to me. I said delrin before but I thought SSMs were actually poly. You have steel and poly in the uppers, sounds like a lot of bind, could be why you're uca tore loose.
Well good luck, if you do the no-hops let us know the results. The more I learn about this stuff the more interesting it becomes.

You have steel and poly in the uppers, sounds like a lot of bind, could be why you're uca tore loose.[/QB]The stocker had poly/poly,the SSM has steel/poly on the 12 bolt,steel/rubber on the 10 bolt I just put back in.It was a stocker that broke.

I haven't tried the no hops yet but there is a difference in the poly vs. rubber when launching.With the poly the car tracks straight as an arrow.With the rubber,when the front is unloaded the car tracks slightly to the right,until it settles or is corrected.Same on asphalt and concrete so far,on street tires,I'll find out on slicks this evening.

You said the car lifts evenly so I doubt changing the IC will help. I think Mr 4 Speed could help here. Maybe try a new post, 'Mr 4 Speed'. Maybe airbags, that can be adjusted individually, more pressure on passenger side to pull it back straight or adjustable shocks. I don't have enough experience to help, wish I could. Try Chris, Mr 4 Speed. Good guy, ton's of experience.

Not to hijack the post, but what affects (if any) do no-hop bars have on the stance of the car?? I have them on my '69, and was wondering if they are the reason my car seems to squat a little..

Right now I have the rear end & rear suspension out of the car, & was contemplating not putting the no-hops back in... However, the car seems to hook pretty well as is (no-hops & boxed lowers), maybe I should just leave well enough alone.. What do you guys think..

Scott