MoparFins

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

We changed servers, which is good, and lost all passwords, which is bad. See above.

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Rear suspension  (Read 1601 times)

Jason Goldsack

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Posts: 990
    • View Profile
Rear suspension
« on: November 08, 2010, 08:07:18 AM »

Since the C bodies use the same front segment length as the B bodies.. why couldn't you use the 4 bar/coil over kit in a C? I understand there is probably a width difference between the frame rail so the crossmember for the coilovers would have to be lengthened and same with the panhard bar.. but otherwise you would think the kit should work on a C?

Logged
Jason

(Eileen)1965 Chrysler Windsor, 361/727/2.76 16.49 @ 86 mph

Jason Goldsack

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Posts: 990
    • View Profile
Rear suspension
« Reply #1 on: November 08, 2010, 08:21:53 AM »

Logged
Jason

(Eileen)1965 Chrysler Windsor, 361/727/2.76 16.49 @ 86 mph

Guests

  • Guest
Rear suspension
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2010, 03:01:14 PM »

Why would one want to go backwards in front suspension torsion bar suspension design? I will take a torsion bar suspension system over a coil spring suspension system any day. and the next thing is a rear torsion bar system, which I saw a couple months ago in a Rod and Custom or something a couple months back, used in Indy racing back in the late 30s I believe. Four torsion bar system with swaybars is by far the most efficient system available.
Logged

Jason Goldsack

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Posts: 990
    • View Profile
Rear suspension
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2010, 03:18:24 PM »



I was only talking about the rear suspension..for my car.. but since your talking about the front I'll throw my two cents in the mix..

I do think that the coil over is far superior in the front. The new systems are lighter with less unsprung weight, minimal bump steer and reduced ackerman issues.

The system in the 1960's didn't have the advantage of CAD trial and error and the precision in manufacturing that is available today. You can swap in any engine you like because of clearance.

If I had the cash, and they made a C body kit I would certainly scrap every little bit of the factory steering and drop in a new front section with the tubular control arms and coil overs.  Lots of room for headers and oil pan removal..

Goodbye slopping Chrysler steering and hello tight rack and pinion.

1965Windsor3612010-11-08 20:19:38
Logged
Jason

(Eileen)1965 Chrysler Windsor, 361/727/2.76 16.49 @ 86 mph

Snotty

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Posts: 3972
    • View Profile
Rear suspension
« Reply #4 on: November 09, 2010, 08:27:33 AM »

Are you talking about "coil-over shocks" or swapping to coli springs on the rear?  If the former, I installed a set on my Newport.  They work, but I would rather have new leafs instead.  Can't budget the money at this time to do so.
 
As for coil springs, the Gremlin uses them on the front suspension.  Me no likey!  Honestly, I broke my little finger when one snapped the retainer I was using.  I don't like changing McPherson struts for the same reason, but I do them.
 
Like with your above comment, I think it's a matter of what you like.  I don't like working with them; can't comment about the ride.
Logged
It's green here in Chico!!

Jason Goldsack

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Posts: 990
    • View Profile
Rear suspension
« Reply #5 on: November 09, 2010, 09:28:19 AM »

For the rear they make a 4 link rear suspension that swaps in with minimal work...

If you follow the link I put you can see some picks.. It's really slick I think..

As for the front I would love to swap out every bit of this 45 year old technology for something new and up to date.


Logged
Jason

(Eileen)1965 Chrysler Windsor, 361/727/2.76 16.49 @ 86 mph

Guests

  • Guest
Rear suspension
« Reply #6 on: November 09, 2010, 07:10:09 PM »

It's all about setup. Tubulars and such are simple semantics over stock components, there is no drastic improvement over stock other than looks, and other than being newer and slightly lighter, job gets done the same. You are actually making an unfair comparison. I would easily take and make a comparison of an era Mopar over an era GM or Ford, including Mustang, but I would have to agree when you mention CAD and testing, which wasn't available back then, so yes, newer is better, but major improvements can be made with stock torsion setups with larger diameter bars and poly vice rubber bushings. 
 
As far as the rear end goes, still prefer leaves over coils of the same era, but when you start talking about IRS and stability control and anti-roll systems on top of it, compared to 40-50 year technology, not a fair comparison.  If the new spring ratings on coil springs was available 40-50 years ago, it might be a different story also.
 
I would go with a rack and pinion steering, that I can agree on.
Logged

Jason Goldsack

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Posts: 990
    • View Profile
Rear suspension
« Reply #7 on: November 10, 2010, 01:34:09 AM »

I wish it was as easy as swapping spindles side to side to make front steer..

From what I here you need to use a drag link to fix the ackerman...  I think I saw that in a Mopar Mag where a guy put a hemi in a duster and moved to a rack with swapped spindles side to side..

Front steer would be one less thing to route your headers and oil pan around..


Logged
Jason

(Eileen)1965 Chrysler Windsor, 361/727/2.76 16.49 @ 86 mph

summer scheifer

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Posts: 29
    • View Profile
Rear suspension
« Reply #8 on: November 24, 2011, 09:18:04 PM »


Quote from: Snotty
Are you talking about "coil-over shocks" or swapping to coli springs on the rear?  If the former, I installed a set on my Newport.  They work, but I would rather have new leafs instead.  Can't budget the money at this time to do so.
 
As for coil springs, the Gremlin uses them on the front suspension.  Me no likey!  Honestly, I broke my little finger when one snapped the retainer I was using.  I don't like changing McPherson struts for the same reason, but I do them.
 
hi mate apology for this up but i just wanna ask if where did you bought your coil spring? i just looking for a cheaper price for that but i dont know where is a good store to buy. i was hoping for your help. thanks a lot.


Logged
Every accomplishment starts with the decision to try

Steve

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Posts: 8653
    • View Profile
Rear suspension
« Reply #9 on: November 25, 2011, 12:51:02 PM »



Better off beefing the rear leaves and adding a sway bar.
Logged
Favorite Expression. . . Damned Kids.  Lots of projects.  Donations accepted

Guests

  • Guest
Rear suspension
« Reply #10 on: November 25, 2011, 08:39:49 PM »

http://www.xvmotorsports.com/products/detail/index.cfm?nPID=66&cid=38&cdesc=B%2DBody%20Products

This is the setup for a B body, and it is a full front suspension system. XV Motorsports has quite a few products to do coil front springs, but the only good I see in going away from torsion bar suspension is about two inches of clearance on each side of the frame rails, but heavier bars do help a LOT in the heavier engine cars.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

© 2008-2014 Steve Hobby • © 2015 Allpar, LLC