What is this all about? Better handling, make the car sit higher? What would be the benefit putting these on a 71 Elky? Educate me please, thanks, Scott!

I put the tall spindles on my '68 El Camino for the benefit of the 12" disc brakes. I also got about a 1¾" drop out of the deal.

I put the 1¼" sway bar up front along with the boxed arms and rear sway before I did the tall spindle swap. I kept the stock springs because the ride is comfortable.

With the stock upper arms, the tall spindles required quite a few shims to get the camber where I wanted it and I couldn't get enough caster, but it wasn't any worse than the original setup.

With the tubular upper arms, camber and caster were improved a great deal over stock. Handling is definitely better than before.

There are those who say the tall spindle conversion is a bad thing because of bump-steer. I drive hard every day around bumpy curves and it still handles great. I take curves faster than I ever dreamed possible before, and I can stop much quicker.

I should have quoted everything cjlandry said but instead I'll just say that I couldn't agree more! There are those who don't like the bump steer issue but I honestly haven't noticed it since I did it a year ago. I have Hotchkis springs/A-arms and Edelbrock shocks. I can sail off into a corner a lot faster than is really necessary ;) and I live in New England where "bumps" are a way of life.
I recommend it!

Jeff

Thanks guys for your help! Are taller spindles available from other GM cars or aftermarket only that would bolt up to the front of my Elky and utilize my existing front discs? How would they be with a fast ratio steering box? 12" discs? same question -off other GM cars or aftermarket?

Here's my set up, real quick:

Spindles: '90 Caprice junkyard

Rotors: '92 Camaro 1LE (12" with 4¾" bolt pattern) parts store

Calipers: '75 Camaro, parts store (loaded)

Hoses: '72 Caprice, parts store

Proportioning Valve: '90 Caprice, junkyard

Master Cylinder: '75 Camaro, parts store

Upper a-arms: Home fabricated 4130 tubular

Run a search and you'll find more information than you'll ever need on disc brake conversions.

Better yet, scroll to the bottom of the page and grab it out of the archives. Just click the "Hop To:" button and scroll down to the bottom of the drop down list. You'll find all the info you need.

They belong on the car they were made for. They add toe out gain bump steer. They lower the car about 1 3/4". They increase the track width by about 3/4". They slow the steering down. They screw up the ackerman angle up and the inside tire drags at full lock u-turns. You have to buy or modify later model lower ball joints to press in your a-arms. You have to use later model upper ball joints & tie rod ends. You need aftermarket upper a-arms in order to align the front end. The so called low cast disc brake spindle ends up being about the same cost as buying a set of repo or Hot Rod upgarde brakes. Aftermarket a-arms from a reputable company are in the $500-$600 range with bushings and ball joints. Companies like ECI, Master Power, Baer etc.... make nice stuff that maintains the original integrety that GM designed the car with. You can always rebuild a junk yard disc brake conversion if you can find useable bits. For as many people who know the truth about the conversion and have done the bump steer etc. measurements you will find 10 who love it and really just do not know that thier car is poorley set up. A real circle track racer would never do a spindle conversion that has so many draw backs. Why would so called reputable companies sell a-arms to do this conversion? Because people buy it.

Originally posted by Slo307:
For as many people who know the truth about the conversion and have done the bump steer etc. measurements you will find 10 who love it and really just do not know that thier car is poorley set up.It wouldn't bother me so much if you just listed the cons. But to say that I don't know that my car is poorly set up is to call me stupid.

And a circle track car isn't set up the same as a street car. I'm sure you were referring to either SCCA or road racers.

The day I go SCCA or road racing is the day I'll be driving something other than a Chevelle or El Camino.

Now if that road racing were with nothing but GM A-bodies, I'd bring my car with this setup in a heartbeat, and I bet I'd make a good showing with it.

I'm finished with that.

Hey slo got a burr under your saddle? In case you haven't notice early A bodies have bump steer with the stock spindles and they handle poorly as well. I drive my 64 a lot of miles a year and know all the shortcomings of the stock front end. My 4x4 pick up handles better, corners better and is more comfortable to ride in. Have you owned or even driven a Chevelle with a tall spindle swap or just going by what you have heard? BTW I can only guess the reason for not posting your email address is so you can make accusations without fear of someone contacting you about it.

That's why his Momma named him "Slo", 'cause he's stupid! He pulled the same stunt with me a few weeks back. He said that the front and rear control arms need to be level with the ground, if that was the case then the rearend housing would hit the frame. He's STUPID! And I think he just wants to cause trouble so ignore him and maybe the directors of Team Chevelle will cancel his subscription.

Team Member
Elmo

Originally posted by Slo307:
poorley Do you figure that a guy who can't spell poorly would know if something was or not?

Look Mr. Slo307, if you don't like the tall spindle conversion, don't do it. I wouldn't mind if you just said what the drawbacks are and left it at that. But your constant bashing of people who do it is getting old. If you think GM made the "ideal" suspension when they designed the Chevelle, you're seriously mistaken.

Anyway, I normally ignore what you say about the tall spindle swap seeing as I've done it and like it but this time, you've gone too far.

Originally posted by jpete:
Do you figure that a guy who can't spell poorly would know if something was or not?On the contrary, jpete, he spells quite poorly. tongue.gif ;)

Well, Well, Well........... What do U wnat good grammer or good taste?
A few years ago I installed the full meal deal from Global West. (http://www.globalwest.net/) I mean everything from the power steering pump to the rear control arms.

I cannot even begin to tell you how much better it changed the handling of my '67 Elcamio!!!
Currently the car has ran a best 1/4 mile of 12.20 at 113mph and pull .94g's on a skid. The only changes I made for drag racing was adjust the Koni's, disconnect the sway bar and swap out the street wheels & tires for the MT ET Streets and front pizza cutters.
The Elcamino handles SOooooo much better that it's actually fun to drive into corners especially when your rounding out with a Porsche in your rear view mirror :D
Last year it got a (drag racing) Top Ten Editors Choice Award at the Super Chevy Show in Seattle.
Understanding the negitive roll concept is a big part of making the swap. I would do it again in a NY second providing I plan on keeping the car.
My opinion for Global West negitive roll suspension, I give it two graemlins/thumbsup.gif graemlins/thumbsup.gif

CARDIAC;

What spindles did you use? The reason we ask, is Global West currently "May" have a group purchase, and they stated they have 2" dropped spindles available.

We almost went with Superior Spindles S-10 2" Dropped Spindles (Turned down lower balled joint), however, everyone stated we couldn't get a large enough disc brake to bolt up to them.

Clint Hooper had us contact a friend of his in Texas who builds drag racing cars using the S-10 Spindle Conversion, and he "Loves" them.

graemlins/thumbsup.gif graemlins/beers.gif

Are you guys compairing the cornering characteristics of your Chevelles with the stock front suspension to the tall spindles WITH 1-1/4 inch sway bars?

That's hardly a fair way to judge the handling effects of the spindle.

Tim.

Well...heres my .02 cents.
Front drums Suck...period.
I wanted a good disk setup instead.
I looked at the "Professional" packages that were available for my 71. Complete Baer, Global West, Hotchkis, Waaaaaay out of my price range :(
I needed to do a complete rebuild while I was in there with limited budget.

I decided to do the B-body swap with Hotchkis upper arms and shorter springs. HOEngineering lower graphite bushings, turned down Hotchkis lower balljoints, and all new McQuay-Norris links, ends, etc. Final cost was around $1100 for Complete conversion and front end parts. This was my budget range.

How does it work? Yes it lowers the car ( So I cut 1-1/2 turns off the rear coils, installed BMR upper arms and SSM lift bars and made the rearend pretty level), yes it pushes the front wheels out about 1/2" (little problem with BIG bumps while running 275/50/15 on 4" offset wheels on the front!) Had no problem with alignment and the front tires are wearing very even inside and out.

In my opinion, best conversion I made. Car handles and rides great. Could it be better?? Sure..could have bought a "Professional" setup and probably noticed some difference but for a "Street" car, its fine and the extra $1000-1500 I saved went into the Overdrive transmission swap graemlins/thumbsup.gif

Now compared to my 2002 Trans-Am Firehawk...There is no comparison, never will be. But compared to my car before the conversion..night and day difference graemlins/beers.gif

Both CJLandry and myself feel we have had great success with this swap. Others, as you can see cant stand it. Depends how hard core you are and how much $$$ you got.

http://home1.gte.net/res096qi/71Elky.htm

Originally posted by TronDD:
Are you guys compairing the cornering characteristics of your Chevelles with the stock front suspension to the tall spindles WITH 1-1/4 inch sway bars?

That's hardly a fair way to judge the handling effects of the spindle.

Tim. Maybe some people are but I'm not. It's got the same spaghetti diameter front sway bar and no rear bar. The only other upgrade was urethane bushings up front.

I'm new to posting to this site but I have personally been involved in building Chevelles, 1st and 2nd gen Camaros, and Corvettes from solid rear axle to C4 cars. I had done this sway early on in 1988 when it was sold by HO racing in Hawthorne, Ca. Well, I'm here to tell all of you here this is a **** poor cheap brake conversion, all that slo307 says is true, the toe out bump steer, the track width problem,...ETC. You are trying to disprove his facts with name calling and not with facts yourselves, well you people should be ashamed of yourselves, you have retreated to the actions of good college liberals. This swap is not cheap when figuring in the cost of the Global West arms, and then rebuild the front suspension. Everyone who has said "best handling change they have ever done", are you comparing a worn out 35 year old with stock soft springs to rebuilt, lowered, higher spring rates, and new Disc brakes, you think that is even a apples and oranges comparison? This is an example of Leming mentality, one runs and the others follow.

Well I am in the process of the tall spindle, C5 brakes, pole position uppers, quick ratio power steering swap....I am sure that this will be my best improvement over my manual drum, all over the road, slam wore out set-up. smile.gif If it isn't all I think it will be, I will surely let yall know.

Welcome to Team Chevelle, Rouge68. Glad to have ya'. graemlins/thumbsup.gif

If "everything Slo307 says is true", then you're calling me stupid too. That's where the "name calling" started, my good man, when he implied that we don't know that our cars are set up poorly.

The only thing I'm ashamed of is that I get so damned defensive about this. I probably need to talk to a monk about it (I can't stand shrinks).

I have several college liberals among my friends. While I disagree passionately with their political views, they're still my friends and I'm not ashamed to be associated with them.

I, for one, am not comparing it to a worn out suspension. I had all new bushings and front end parts with the original suspension and drum brakes. I then added the large front sway bar and rear sway bar with the same stock suspension and drum brakes all around. (Huge improvement by itself, I might add).

Next I installed the tall spindles with discs using stock upper arms. The steering rate was the only difference I noticed.

Next, I fabricated the arms and installed them and everything was better than ever.

I drove the car for a few weeks in each incarnation before the next step took place.

I've yet to install the fast ratio box and pump that are sitting on my shelf.

Those are facts, not BS. And I'm not trying to disprove anything. All I'm saying is that it's not as horrible as you guys make it out to be. My god, you act like we're reverting to an original Model-T setup or something.

Again, I'd like to reiterate that this is not a road racing machine. And I'll say again that if you want to go road racing, using a classic GM A-body isn't a very good choice unless you're racing against other classic GM A-body cars.

Yes, I'm a little passionate about this. Why? Because the conversion works just fine for a street car.

Telling us how poorly set up it is from a road racing stand-point is like a drag racer telling me that my small block, 700R4, and 3.55 ten bolt rear are lousy because they aren't the best ways to get a heavy car down the 1/4-mile as quickly as possible.

You're all absolutely right from a racing stand point. But it's excellent for a multi-purpose street car. It definitely doesn't "suck".

My dad's daily driver is a '90 Mustang LX 5.0. He's driven my car recently and he's amazed at how much better this old beast handles compared to his former Texas Highway Patrol car. Yes, his suspension is all stock, but it has all new bushings and shocks/struts all the way around.

I guess I lied earlier when I said, "I'm finished with that".

Let all that would take heed... Don't ever get a coona$$ riled! :D

(I know, my own Lake Charles roots'll show every now and then as well)

Originally posted by Rouge68:
You are trying to disprove his facts with name calling and not with facts
are you comparing a worn out 35 year old with stock soft springs to rebuilt, lowered, higher spring rates, and new Disc brakes

Originally posted by Rouge68:
You are trying to disprove his facts with name calling and not with facts

are you comparing a worn out 35 year old with stock soft springs to rebuilt, lowered, higher spring rates, and new Disc brakes The only "FACTS" in my situation are a comparison to what I had, then the B-body swap and then getting into my Audi A4 and saying, "Gee, this 30+ year old battle tank doesn't handle half bad!"
I suppose now the Germans are "lemmings?" and, as Slo307 said that parts "belong on the car they were made for" we should all just restore our cars to stock and stick them in a museum. He also negates all your years of expirience as well.

My only point is and always has been, it's better than stock. Period. I can take a high speed corner with confidence, and I don't need an appointment to stop. I have not had any bad tire wear, and it doesn't wander all over due to the bump steer problem. I'm not disputing the fact that there is a bump steer problem, I'm saying that given the pluses and minuses, it's better than stock. If it really was a problem, how can Hotchkis and Global West be selling the A-arms? I know I know, because those of us with more money than brains will buy it. I can see the marketing meeting now, flames in the back ground and all the marketing guys rubbing their hands together and laughing maniacally. I'm positive that's how it happened. Please. Yep, you're right, we've all fallen victim to mass media coverage in the magazines.
Well, maybe you should just hope you're right and I'll soon dart off the road into a tree due to my "**** poor" front end. Then we can end this thread.

Please! Some one lock this.....before I post AGAIN!!!!! graemlins/clonk.gif

Jeff

jpete

I think thats what CJ and myself have been saying.
Its better than stock, but not as good as it can get.

Now before theres anymore graemlins/angry.gif :mad:
Lets all have a graemlins/beers.gif
So we dont cause anymore :confused:
and we all dont become graemlins/boring.gif
and lets keep this site what it is, a great site graemlins/thumbsup.gif

http://home1.gte.net/res096qi/71Elky.htm
C ya graemlins/waving.gif

Roger that!
graemlins/beers.gif

Definitely not going to arque that the B-body or tall spindles upgrade is not without a few faults, but I really like mine! Also, I suppose some of you anti-tall-spindle bigots would really hate to see that several people on this site have actually done the swap using STOCK upper arms! So that shoots ANOTHER of your biased, marketing based theories about HAVING to use the tubular upper control arms right out the window! Oh and yes, one car that I know of with the stock upper arms and tall spindles actually uses LESS alignment shims per side than my car WITH the GW upper arms! And both are well under 1" per side, so don't tell me you will need at least 1 1/2" of shims per side!

And if you think there is no difference in using 12" disk brakes versus the stock 11" disk brakes... again, you are sadly mistaken.

It's your car scotty, build it how you want it and I'll gladly let whomever wants to travel to Colorado Springs test drive my car so you can see if you like it or not!


Bill C.

Hi guys I'm one of the "Anti-tall spindle bigots" as BC called SLO307 and Rouge68. An uninformed decision will come back and bite someone in the butt, all of us who know the problems that the "Great Tall Spindle" causes are trying to enlighten those who ask the question as to what are the down sides. Those who love the "Great Tall Spindle" swap you still have not done a true direct comparsion of a good stock set up, and big sway bars ain't gone to cut it. I have built cars using the "Great Tall Spindle" with and without stock upper control arms, and the cost is too high for it to be considered a cheap swap (ya ya cj but I don't consider my time free!). I have built cars using Stock spindles with Eibach springs, and even springs of my own design, bigger sway bar which as CJ says is a great improvement, lowered the car to where the lower control is level to the ground (yes it is possible no matter what you've heard). I have even gone and converted a car from the "Great Tall Spindle" back to the "inferior stock spindles" that was the only change made and the inprovement is truly worth changing back to the "inferior stock spindles". As to CJ claiming that the A-body can't be a true corner carver will you better not tell that to my rides, I have run SCCA Autocrosses and beat Mazda Miadas resoundingly!

All antagonism aside you are free to do to your car what ever you wish, just go in with full knowledge. I'm not here to tell CJ, BC, or anybody else that they are "stupid" for making any modification to there car, if you like it stick with it, just don't down play anybody elses opinion when they have facts to back up there opinion (can't we all just ge along) just cause you don't like what they are saying.

Remember the words of Ben Franklin....
"An ounce of prevention is worth of cure"

Don't mind me boys...I have NO IDEA what I'm talking about...

Oh, btw, I've got an extra $500 left over from this swap because I used the stock upper arms...what am I going to do with that now?

BTW, I second BC offer to auto-x the car in Colorado...sorry, can't make Nationals this year, my SCCA license just expired last year!

I agree with you Q-ship in that we should all play nice together, but if you go back and re-read not just this post, but just about every one that has to do with the tall spindle swap, you will quickly see that those against the swap are instigating the so-called name calling and antagonizing. All we are trying to do is answer the question someone has asked as best we can from our own experience and let them know the options that are available. If you don't like the tall-spindle swap, fine, but there is no reason for people like Slo and Rouge and yourself to make fun or start the name-calling. And you quite well know that this is not the first post that this has happened! And as for myself, yes, I have done pretty extensive testing between the stock spindle and tall spindle. What you and the others fail to point out is that the stock spindle is no where near the optimum design and has lots of inherent flaws itself. The Tall spindle swap fixes some of the problems and provides a better geometry overall, but it also has some issues of it's own that you are quick to point out. I have no problem admitting that the tall spindle swap has some issues, I just feel that the benefits of better handling and cheap bigger brakes is worth the trade-off. If you feel the need to rebuild the stock suspension with all hi-po stuff and add on an expensive big brakes kit, then by all means, I wish you all the best. Just please try to refrain from calling or implying that anyone who does not wish to follow in your footsteps is an idiot.

Scotty,
I apologize this topic has gotten off track, I'll try to now answer your original questions! The tall spindle swap basically involves putting some taller spindles, usually from a B-body car, on your Chevelle. This helps improve handling and if you use the right spindles, you can then add 12" front rotors to your car for better braking. The tall spindles will not make the car sit higher... in fact, it actually lowers the front end about 3/4" to 1". Have you have noticed, the benefits are arguable, but many here will make testaments to better handling and better braking.

Anyway, hope that answers the original questions!

Bill C.

I fully agree with BC. Slo and Q-ship, I respect your opinion that you don't like the TS. However, what respect I have for your opinion is quickly lost by your antagonistic statements when you speak of the TS swap. I have the data about the bumpsteer, and I am still planning to do the TS swap, this doesn't make me stupid, unlike your statements about anyone that does the TS swap. I interpret the data differently than your do, I don't see that it will be as large as a problem as you point out. Each time both of you bring up this topic the sky is falling. I am not attacking your opinions, I dissagree with them, I am attacking your presentation of your opinions.

Rouge, I agree that the name calling is not needed. However please take some time to search this site for this topic. Until this post, there has been two people that stated that they didn't like the TS swap and why. Obviously we now have three. Many people are very happy with this setup, and their opinion is just as valid as anyone elses. As I stated before, it is not Slo, and Q-ship's opinins that I don't like it is thier way they present their point of view as if they are right and everone else is wrong. Q-ship and I have had several discussions about this and we don't agree, but he has shown me a few things and hopefully we can learn from each other and be happy with disagreeing. And BTW welcome to TC, hopefully we can talk suspension stuff next time. :D

Scott, sorry this post has gotten so far of course, I hope you do get some answers to your questions.

Boy do I love a good heated discussion, but the name calling has got to go, "just the facts mam". smile.gif

I'll tell you how I feel, I know nothing about the changes in geometry tall spindles bring that would cause trouble other than the bump steer problem. I assume the location of the tie rod end on the steering arm makes the tie rod follow a different arch than the contol arm causing the trouble. I understand the change in the roll center the long spindle brings and that is about it.

I personally see no reason to change the basic design that the General made for the marginal difference the tall spindles will make. I have to assume that with the tall spindles any of you have installed, you also installed some new tires, shocks, sway bars, urethane bushings, etc. along with the spindle swap. Therefor, you really don't know what the spindles alone actually did.

I have two '65 A bodies and have owned about 10. My current cars are a near stock Skylark with the stock front sway bar, gas shocks all the way around, 7/8" rear bar, 21570R14 Goodyear (wimp cilvillian) tires on 14x6 road wheels (Buick "rallies) late seventies Skyark finned aluminum drums and power brakes. It is by no means an auto cross terror. However, I drive it every single day and have put 180,000 miles on it in every form of driving. I'll hit a corner hard for fun now and then and I have towed a 2000 lb camp trailer all over California. I can't for the life of me understand the "marginal" design comment. I will hop in it tomorrow morning and drive it to work the same as it has done for the last 13 years (between my wife and I) and enjoy the darn thing again.

My other car is the '65 Gran Sport convertible. It has disc brakes from a '71 Cutless, quick ratio steering box from a '71 GS Stage I, gas shocks, 1 1/8" front sway bar with urethane bushings on the frame pads, and ONE end of the links (I didn't want the full urethane harshness), 7/8" rear bar, 21565R15 Goodyear GT+4's on 15X7 Buick road wheels. This car handles SUPERB! It does just about everything I have ever asked it to do. I have surprised many a BMW, Benz, Late Camaro etc drivers with what this car does. I have a buddy with a LOT of autocross and racing experiance (he now is restoreing a vintage racing 63 Vette and races on a regular basis his wifes 2002 ZO6) the first time he drove my Gran Sport he was blown away. He actually thought I had done much more to it.

If you need more than this for a daily driver, weekend canyon carver, I don't have any answers for you.

I can't imagine doing one single thing to the car that would alter the geomotry and cost so much when this works so well.

Though I may not have any experiance in the tall spindles, I do know one thing. When ever you make one change, it leads to many more. By the time you are finished, you have spent much more time and money to make it worth while.

Whether or not it is a "NOTICABLE" difference installing the tall spindles is the issue I think. Unless you were to have some sort of skid pad test, which still doesn't tell you if you have created other problems that will give you less handling at other times. You really may not know anything other than the "placebo" effect after spending all that hard earned cash.
graemlins/waving.gif

I feel I should chime in my 2 cents about observations I made when I put tall spindles on my car, since I went from all new stock style to the tall spindles, I have a little different viewpoint compared to those who upgraded from old worn out stuff to tall spindles. I was also using the same rolling stock (Michelin Pilot Sports on 17 x 8 TT2's on all 4 corners) with my old setup, and I'm using the same now with the tall spindles. This gives me what I feel to be a pretty good "feel" for a dialed-in stock spindle setup, and also for a tall spindle setup.

Just before putting tall spindles on, my old front suspension setup consisted of stock upper and lower arms with polygraphite bushings, all new balljoints/tierods/etc, 1.25" front sway bar. I was running Edelbrock/Eibach 2" drop springs all the way around, with Edelbrock IAS shocks, GW lower arms in the rear, stock upper rear arms with fresh rubber bushings, and no rear sway bar.

When I upgraded to tall spindles, I changed to front lower and upper a-arms to Global West, put in GW front springs (same ride height as the Edelbrocks, about the same rate) and dropped down to a 1.125" sway bar in front. In the rear I went to GW springs, which were a hair softer than the Edelbrocks I took out and also about .5" lower.

Keep the above facts in mind when reading my impressions.

Also remaining constant and pertinant to the swap is that I am running a fast ratio steering box. Had it in before the TS swap, and kept it in after.

Here are my impressions:

The stock spindle setup handled quite well. Ride was quite good, and cornering limits were good. However, as you drove harder into a turn the nose would start to slide. It was a controllable understeer situation. There was no discernable bump steer as I jacked the car up or during driving. Turning the wheel left to right as the car sat in the driveway demonstrated a bad-for-handling caster setup which kept the outside wheel about neutral for camber, while the inside wheel would go negative (the wrong way). Upon compression the outside wheel would go positive camber, again, bad for handling. This is what probably contributed to the understeer/push condition in fast turns. Jacking the car up showed a tendency for the wheels to show a negative camber gain, again, not quite ideal for handling as this will work against the inside tire "leaning into" a turn.

Now, tall spindle impressions:
First thing I noticed after the tall spindles was the amount of bump steer. It toes out pretty good when you jack the car up. The outer tie rod mount point is changed from stock, and thus the dissimilar arcs of the control arm travel to the tie rod travel result in unfavorable bump steer. I will admit this worried the hell out of me. Once the car was on the ground, the different caster was immediately noticeable when you turned the wheel: the outside wheel went to negative camber, the inside went positive (good for handling, so the tires lean into the turn.) Same goes for camber curve with compression/rebound of the suspension-- much more advantageous for handling than the stock spindles. Driving impressions: I did notice the slightly slower steering responce-- the tall spindles push the outer tie rod mounting point out more, meaning it takes a larger input to produce the same angle of rotation. However, it isn't bad at all with a fast ratio box. It was just a different "feel" for me after driving for 5 years with the fast ratio box on the stock spindles. Going down bumpy roads (both straight and in turns) I to this date have not noticed any bump steer. All I can figure is that in the normal operating range of the suspension the bump steer is minimal, and is only extreme at the upper and lower limits of the suspension travel. The level of cornering adhesion is MUCH better-- the front end will still push, but you have to go into the turns much hotter to get it to push. Compared to stock, I can carry almost 15mph more through one of my favorite turns now before the front tires start howling and the push starts.

Can a well sorted stock spindle handle good? Yes. I drove my car with a well sorted stock spindle setup for 4 years and was VERY happy, but decided to give tall spindles a try. Are there disadvantages to the tall spindle swap? Yes, and I will admit it. The bumpsteer issue is the most prominent. Is there a handling advantage to going to tall spindles? In my opinion, yes, and a noticeable one at that. Are the disadvantages of the tall spindle swap enough to make me go back to the stock setup? No! Other than the concerning amount of toe-out gain when I jack the car up I have yet to come up with one negative concerning the tall spindle swap in MY normal driving routine, and I drive pretty hard.

I have tried to make some objective observations about stock vs tall spindles, and I'm not making a recommendation one way or the other. Hope everyone finds my observations helpful.

Troy

I really love that this thread has attracted a few people who I don't normally see in this forum! :cool:

The only reason I did the tall spindle swap was to get the 12" brakes at a reasonable price, using all stock GM replacement parts. I did it first with stock upper a-arms, and it worked fine.

The only reason I made my own tubular control arms was to prove to myself (and others) that it could be done at home with a minimal investment. The the tubulars work better for me than the stock arms because of the improved caster and "negative roll" camber.

I still plan to make some tubular lowers in the not-too-distant future. I have a stock lower arm(thanks Derek) to use as a template for making a jig. They will be made of mild steel rather than 4130. Much easier to work with and tig welding isn't required. Again, it's just to show that it can be done by a "backyard gearhead". I might even make a set for coil-overs. :cool:

I think, all in all, we've all managed to learn a little something from this thread. Even if it's just "I don't ever want to get this upset over nothing again". graemlins/thumbsup.gif

GoKou, excellent, excellent stuff. Very interesting, thank you so much. I'll tell you this, I sure have learned something.

Let's put this all into persective now. You are happy you did the swap, it sound's like you really drive that car hard and you are getting your moneys worth. You wanted to go even more than you had with the stock spindles. You sure as heck had MANY more mods than I do. So, you have went to the outer limits with the stock spindles and then went to the tall spindles.

I am obviously miles from where you were even before the tall spindle swap and am very happy with my car. I know that it is HUGE difference from my Skylark so I know what the changes can make.
I think this is a great couple of looks at what you can get with and without the swap. It may give others the info they need to make the decision to do the swap.

By the way, what are the specs you are running? I think the increased pos caster you undoubtably have is the reason for the "lazy" steering. graemlins/waving.gif

The only reason I made the swap was I couldnt stop fast enough with my drums one day and slid past 3 stopped cars on the shoulder of the road :eek: I was going to disk no matter what. I could not find a commercial disk swap kit which included all new front end parts for under $1800.
My budget was $1000, I came in about $1100 cuz I had to do the conversion in 2 days so car was ready to drive to work and didnt want to chance trying with stock upper arms so I spent $420 and bought a pair of Hotchkis from Summit. I did notice slower steering response, I did notice the front tires didnt roll under when making hard turns or understeer when driving the local canyons, I havnt noticed bumpsteer that bothers me, but I did notice a 1000% improvement in fast, reliable breaking, especially when it rains and they get wet.

Is this the best...no, is it affordable, yes.
My number 1 reason for making the change was purely for the safety reasons of installing disk. The added handling benefit (which I believe I have) was secondary.

Originally posted by MARTINSR:
By the way, what are the specs you are running? I think the increased pos caster you undoubtably have is the reason for the "lazy" steering. graemlins/waving.gif The steering isn't lazy with the tall spindles; turn in is very sharp! It's the fact that steering rate has changed because of the longer arms on the tall spindles-- compared to stock spindles you physically have to rotate the steering wheel more with the tall spindles to take a turn compared to the stock spindles. The longer arms on the tall spindles effectively slow the steering rate. An exaggerated example: say I needed to rotate the steering wheel 1/2 turn with the stock spindles to negotiate a turn; with the tall spindles I would need to turn the wheel 5/8 of a turn to negotiate that same turn in the road. The difference in real life isn't that much (it's a pretty minute difference) but when you've been driving a car which has been setup the same way for 4 years it's easy to tell even a slight difference in the suspension/steering setup.

I also neglected to mention that with the tall spindles the car doesn't "tramline" (a.k.a. follow) irregularities in the road. On the freeway near my house there's a whole section where there is a stripe of asphalt sealant between the two lanes. With the really grippy pilot sports and the stock spindles, during a lange change when I'd hit the sealant the car would dart and pull in the direction I was changing when I would hit the stripe of sealant. With the tall spindles, it no longer darts/pulls when I run over the same sealant. The dart/pull issue with the stock spindles was NOT an issue until I went to the sticky 17" rolling stock.

Martin, I know what you mean when you say rebuilding your suspension was a HUGE difference. When I went from 30 year old worn out springs, bushings and tie rods to all new stuff, it was a HUGE difference in handling, and that's an understatement! On the other hand, going to the tall spindles over the all new stock spindle stuff I was running was a relatively minor improvement compared to when I first rebuilt the 30 year old stuff.

As far as specs I'm running with the tall spindles and GW Gen-2 uppers. I'm running -0.5 degrees negative camber on both sides, 4.5 degrees positive caster on driver's side, and 5 degrees positive on the passenger side (just like stock, the caster differs side to side to compensate for the crown in the road, it's a compromise between all out performance and even tire wear), and I'm running 5/64" total toe-in. FWIW, for competition GW recommends +6 degrees caster on both sides, -1.25 degrees camber both sides, and 1/16" total toe in.

Troy

wow, I'm glad I asked this question! Thanks to all of you! Is there any way to get 12" discs on the front of my 71 Elky without going to taller spindles? Thanks, Scott!

Scott the only way I know to get 12" brake with the stock height sinpdles is to use one of the kits that uses PBR brake stuff like that from Baer, and yes it will be expensive I'm not even going to try to tell you different. If you possess better fab skills you could try to make your own caliper brackets to mount to the stock spindles, but read this as very complicated an there is more than just bolting on brakes, it takes math, alot of math, you needed to match caliper to the rotor, and the master cylinder. It also will make a difference what you have for rears. I bekieve some of the others here have mention a link to a web site that talked about caliper brackets, I believe it was to the Team Camaro site but would not stake my life on it, maybe someone here will be willing to help you out on this.

I want to make one thing very clear when I started to give out the information that I possessed on the Tall Spindles I was poo poo like I did know a damn thing about what I was talking about, so the offencesness started from the other end, and will admit I have been lured in to the offeciveness and for that I'm sorry to those who I have offended. I have been trying to get the correct information to the persons asking the questions and do it clearly.

So can we all agree to disagree on this, sit down and have graemlins/beers.gif

graemlins/beers.gif

graemlins/beers.gif Careful now, that's hot coffee in my cup! ;)

graemlins/beers.gif and I'll even buy the second round! graemlins/beers.gif


Scotty,
To address the question of being able to put 12" disks on the stock spindles... well, it can be done, but you do need to fab some stuff like Q-ship already stated. The "easiest" way, IMO, is to use a drum hub on the spindle, then slip a larger 12" Corvette rotor over the hub and mount it that way. Then you need to fab a caliper bracket that will position the caliper in the right place, depending on what caliper you are going to use.
I did something similiar on my B-body spindles... I used an old rotor to make a hub, then slipped on a Corvette rotor. I then used Suburban calipers that bolted on to the stock caliper mounts and then done! It actually turned out pretty well and braking is very good! And most people that drive the car don't believe it has manual brakes because pedal feel is pretty easy.

Anyway, good luck,
Bill C.