The Ultimate Front Subframe Solution?

[tyoneal]

To All:

I know by now I'm probably beating a dead horse, but, I really want to get some thoughts on what I see as a hole in the subframe after market.

As you know I have been asking a lot of questions regarding the different subframes out on the market. From what I can tell, Kevin at, "California Auto Restoration", has the ultimate front subframe for first generation Camaro's for these reasons.

-Everything can be made adjustable, or in a sense can be made into a true, "Road Racing Suspension". (Kind of a Mild or Wild option)

When I spoke with him he sells a subframe and depending on your wants, needs or wallet, he can add as little or as much as you want.

The Big difference is, That HE DOES the install AND your looking at around $4-5 Grand for the install. (Certain additions drive the price up from there) I'm not saying thats a bad deal or he does anything other than top notch work, but the headache as I see it is, I live in Texas, he works in California. You can add about $2500 for shipping on top of everything else.

The Subframe has some really kick ass parts on it, and the customers specs as little or as much as they want, AND they can run 315's on the front end if they want to go with the 335's in back for an ultra cool look.

If someone sold a subframe that could hold up to 315's on the front, then sell SC&C, or whichever made the adjustable upper and lower control arms that you would recommend or prefer, or they could simple put on DSE, Hotchkiss, Speedtech, etc. parts for those that wanted fixed or non-adjustable Control Arms. For the springs someone could do the same run DSE or top of the line Eibecks. (For all I know DSE might be better than Eibecks, this is for the sake of explanation purposes only) Same with Shocks which are already segmented in the market place based on adjustability, performance, etc. R & P Steering, same thing run everything up to the Appleton rack. Same with Brakes, Wheels ect. You could have your own inner fenders for your kit as well. The kit could come assembled or unassembled as your time and expertise allows. It would also be really cool if you could offer thing like a splined sway bar that could be changed out, up to an "in" cockpit adjustable sway bar. (The Oval track parts are really cool)

Since many people already have some of these parts already, (UCA and LCA, Shocks, springs etc) They could purchase the subframe and NOT have to re-buy these parts all over again unless they just wanted to, and it would give them the option of updating at a later date.

From what I keep reading there are a number of subframes on the market, but for the most part DSE, AM are some of the top tier and everything else at different price points below them. Essentially, all the major performance sub frame suppliers have targeted the same demographic segment.

In the current subframes you see prices from $3995 to $7000, with basically similar bells and whistles. From what I see there is a significant market gap between the $7000 DSE Subframe, and the $12,000 Subframe sold by CAR. The difference, other than money, is the move from a standard front subframe (Street/Track), to a more race inspired piece.(Track/Street) For instance, when people ask about a PT rear suspension, the choices range from modified leaf spring system, 4 link, triangulated 4 link etc. etc. usually ending up with the Lateral-Dynamics 3 link, or some other specialized, adjustable, high tech system that is truly race inspired, or simply race equipment set up for the Track and Street. It's not necessarily the easiest to install (Just Bolt in), but rather it's engineered for performance first with packaging being of secondary consideration.

As most people know by now, I have the LD 3-link and it is terrific. I am always surprised at, "What it allows be to get away with when taking some pretty, "Spirited", corners.

That said it seems logical that a front subframe should be on the market that brings the same level of, "performance, adjustability, tuning etc.", to the Market. Together these would yield a truly hard core foundation for a top of the line PT car.

You can get buy engines that make 1000+ "street-able", horse power, You can buy and install the infinitely adjustable 3-link suspension. You can buy Carbon Fiber panels now for your cars. It seems to me that the other part of the suspension should be available for those who want the very top end of technology.

Of course these are two totally different markets, and I think there is a good possibility for a company to tap into and capture this market segment.

This segment certainly isn't huge, but there are a number of engine builders making and selling 1200+ hp, $35,000 engines that wind up in a, "Ultimate Pro Touring", application, and there apparently is enough volume to make a buck.

Packages could be put together that would really give the buyer a choice of some of the best technology on the market. There is lot of oval track suspension parts that would really be trick on a PT car.

Do I need all the adjustability and technology, and huge 315 front tires? Hell no, however if I had a way of buying it complete or a bit at a time if I wanted to, without having to ship my car across the country, I would do it in a heartbeat.

As I mentioned above, true racing technology is slowly creeping into the Pro Touring scene. If I was told 15 years ago that 1000 hp pump gas street engines would be available along with the high tech, weight reducing carbon fiber body panels, 3 piece racing wheels etc., I would of called someone a damn liar, but it's here and it's not even unusual to find these items at local car shows or track days.

I would really like to be able to buy a Front Sub for my car with that class of performance possibilities, whether I do it all at once or over a period of years.
===========================================
What are your thoughts about this?


Thanks for reading.

Ty O'Neal

[68protouring454]

ty, you cannot run a 315 with stock dse or other tube arms, no matter if the frame will allow it, the rims will hit the arms very quickly not allowing any turning radius, among other things, so now you buy that aftermarket frame, you need different arms already, so to base a frame off stock style arms is not the best idea. there are better options out there, and to have really good adjustability you do not need sc/c arms or howe arms etc, its how the susp geometry was set up, its very easy to set a susp up with 1.0 to 1.5 camber for street then have it go to 2.0-2.5 for track duty, caster is typically fine non adjustable just as long as there enough of it, i like 5-7 degrees, other then that as long as the susp has been computer designed, and the rack width, height been designed, along with proper height steering arms, you will end with a very nice chassis.
also before calling a chassis the ultimate, do you know anything other then parts about it? ie, camber gain, initial camber adjust ability,caster, caster adjust ability, bump steer? these things should be known in a properly designed chassis.
goodluck
jake

[TravisB]

Kinda hard to say something is the ultimate when know one.....will publish there numbers. Not CAR, not ART, or DSE. I guess they all think they are building top secret space shuttles or something. Someone needs to come up with one thats not affraid to post the numbers.

[ProdigyCustoms]

Well, first of, I love ya like a brother Ty, but your over thinking this my friend! I will bet there is little chance you will ever see the outer limits of any good subframe / Lateral Dynamics combo, so it is all pencil pushing.

The DSE and Art morrison are both proven perfromaer in real world seat of the pants testing, but as travis said the numbers are not readly available. But we do not race numbers anyway.

SpeedTech Subframe does what you are asking for, uses stock type components. And Blake is going to publish the numbers.

But my guess is you will be thrilled with whichever frame you choose, as long as you avoid the obvious "street rodder frames" out there

[Stuart Adams]

Kinda hard to say something is the ultimate when know one.....will publish there numbers. Not CAR, not ART, or DSE. I guess they all think they are building top secret space shuttles or something. Someone needs to come up with one thats not affraid to post the numbers.

What numbers do you want to know?

[TravisB]

What numbers do you want to know?

Personally I dont need any of them.....but if I was going to sell a product based on its performance I would publish things like camber gain per in, static caster, bumpsteer, roll center, instant center, etc etc

Its not like these numbers are top secret anyway....anyone with some fab skills, some good friends and a couple computer programs can figure out a good suspension set up that will work for them and there needs. So why not say our sub gains .65 per in, caster is 7 degrees, and bump is less than one. Guess I just dont understand why they dont.

[wiedemab]

I'm not sure if this is what you are looking for, but here is what DSE has posted on their site.

http://detroitspeed.com/images/Product/Subframe/specs_lg.jpg

http://detroitspeed.com/images/Product/Subframe/camber_curve_pic.jpg

http://detroitspeed.com/images/Product/Subframe/caster_curve_pic.jpg

http://detroitspeed.com/images/Product/Subframe/toe_curve_pic.jpg

[jonny51]

What are your thoughts about this?


Thanks for reading.

Ty O'Neal

Im not sure of your backround with racing but I would take some driving classes and get the sub you want.

[mazspeed]

ty, you cannot run a 315 with stock dse or other tube arms, no matter if the frame will allow it, the rims will hit the arms very quickly not allowing any turning radius, among other things, so now you buy that aftermarket frame, you need different arms already, so to base a frame off stock style arms is not the best idea. there are better options out there, and to have really good adjustability you do not need sc/c arms or howe arms etc, its how the susp geometry was set up, its very easy to set a susp up with 1.0 to 1.5 camber for street then have it go to 2.0-2.5 for track duty, caster is typically fine non adjustable just as long as there enough of it, i like 5-7 degrees, other then that as long as the susp has been computer designed, and the rack width, height been designed, along with proper height steering arms, you will end with a very nice chassis.
also before calling a chassis the ultimate, do you know anything other then parts about it? ie, camber gain, initial camber adjust ability,caster, caster adjust ability, bump steer? these things should be known in a properly designed chassis.
goodluck
jake

Actually the CAR chassis you can run 315's with an excellent lock to lock with the stock body.

Ty, I'm not sure where you are going with this? I think you're a lot like me in wanting a bad ass car that can out handle a vette. Problem is, there is a lot of subs to choose from that will get you close if not right there. DSE, Art's and CAR's chassis will all get you to where you want to go, it's just how much do you want to spend? You also have to design the rest of your car around the chassis to get your desired effect. How bad ass do you want your car to be with the amount of money you are willing to throw at it? CAR's chassis may be the very best for the track, but do you really need it? Even Kevin will tell you this. If this is just a street car, most other high end subs will be just fine as long as the builders know what they are doing. Also, like Jonny said, you might want to take some driving classes to fully learn how to drive a 3500 pond car with a good chassis at the limit. This of course is not knowing your driving skill.

[68protouring454]

maz, i relize that, i said using stock replacment arms, dse,and others, of course you can run a 315 with a certain designed control arm.
at least ty is doing research rather then just going out and buying dse or the most high dollar chassis.
goodluck ty
jake

[TravisB]

I'm not sure if this is what you are looking for, but here is what DSE has posted on their site.


thanks brandon that is the first I have seen of that....

[mazspeed]

maz, i relize that, i said using stock replacment arms, dse,and others, of course you can run a 315 with a certain designed control arm.
at least ty is doing research rather then just going out and buying dse or the most high dollar chassis.
goodluck ty
jake

Sorry Jake, I misread it. :thumbsup:

[68protouring454]

also on the c.a.r.s set up, i always have read that it is the ultimate however they blamed shock tuning for its poor performance in the phr testings with the orange car, however, i assume they have sold a few, i am not sure why there are tuning issues since there chassis has been available for a long time, and been in more then a few cars??

[68protouring454]

Well, first of, I love ya like a brother Ty, but your over thinking this my friend! I will bet there is little chance you will ever see the outer limits of any good subframe / Lateral Dynamics combo, so it is all pencil pushing.

The DSE and Art morrison are both proven perfromaer in real world seat of the pants testing, but as travis said the numbers are not readly available. But we do not race numbers anyway.

SpeedTech Subframe does what you are asking for, uses stock type components. And Blake is going to publish the numbers.

But my guess is you will be thrilled with whichever frame you choose, as long as you avoid the obvious "street rodder frames" out there
frank sounds good, however why has he not posted the numbers? the frames are available for sale correct?
i bet he does not have them yet.
jake

[ProdigyCustoms]

frank sounds good, however why has he not posted the numbers?
jake

They absolutly will post the numbers when they are ready to go to market. But are not going full bore yet until some final details are worked through. I give them a lot of credit for holding off until it is exactly where they want it. We are also doing R and D at our end fine tuning the one in EmptyNest. I am not going to over step my boundries and post any numbers, but I can tell you from personal measurements the Camber gain is excellet, the bump steer is acceptable, and it has 295s on it right now with full lock to lock turning. Parsons and I are going to be working out some details after the PRI show in a couple weeks.

[mazspeed]

also on the c.a.r.s set up, i always have read that it is the ultimate however they blamed shock tuning for its poor performance in the phr testings with the orange car, however, i assume they have sold a few, i am not sure why there are tuning issues since there chassis has been available for a long time, and been in more then a few cars??

The Orange car which is my buddy's car has a 572 heavy big block in it, and you have to have tuning time to get it to handle correctly. The car is a 54f 46r distribution due to the big engined car. The great thing about that and all chassis from CAR is that they were able to tune the car afterwards. They just got that car finished without testing the car before going to the PHR test grounds. They figured out they needed more spring, and more bar and a few other minor adjustments to make it right, and they didn't have time before hand. Also the car blew the clutch in 5th gear down the 1/4 mile during that same test while posting a 130+ trap. This comes from not being able to have time to sort that car out. Now that car is a 1g car able to run low 10's high 9's in the quarter on street tires. It's an awesome car. Once they tune the chassis for each car, it's the best one you can have due to the fact that you can tune everything, that's one reason why they insist on doing the work themselves.

[tyoneal]

To All:

Before I start addressing your advise, input, suggestions etc. let me first say, "Thanks", for taking the time to write.

The input from everyone is what makes this site so great.

Just for future information, I am going to enroll in a series of driving lessons so I can raise my level of driving and knowledge as high as possible. I agree that lessons should always be a central part of appreciating any device and learning how to be safe when doing it. (As I mentioned before, I used to Shoot competitively in, "Action", pistol matches, and 3-gun matches. Lessons were a central part of being competent if you plan to advance and place in your particular class.

All this being said, I'll start answering your post.

Thanks again,

Ty O'Neal

[68protouring454]

The Orange car which is my buddy's car has a 572 heavy big block in it, and you have to have tuning time to get it to handle correctly. The car is a 54f 46r distribution due to the big engined car. The great thing about that and all chassis from CAR is that they were able to tune the car afterwards. They just got that car finished without testing the car before going to the PHR test grounds. They figured out they needed more spring, and more bar and a few other minor adjustments to make it right, and they didn't have time before hand. Also the car blew the clutch in 5th gear down the 1/4 mile during that same test while posting a 130+ trap. This comes from not being able to have time to sort that car out. Now that car is a 1g car able to run low 10's high 9's in the quarter on street tires. It's an awesome car. Once they tune the chassis for each car, it's the best one you can have due to the fact that you can tune everything, that's one reason why they insist on doing the work themselves.
cool.

[68protouring454]

They absolutly will post the numbers when they are ready to go to market. But are not going full bore yet until some final details are worked through. I give them a lot of credit for holding off until it is exactly where they want it. We are also doing R and D at our end fine tuning the one in EmptyNest. I am not going to over step my boundries and post any numbers, but I can tell you from personal measurements the Camber gain is excellet, the bump steer is acceptable, and it has 295s on it right now with full lock to lock turning. Parsons and I are going to be working out some details after the PRI show in a couple weeks.
great, glad there doing it right.

[ProdigyCustoms]

[QUOTE=mazspeed] Also the car blew the clutch in 5th gear down the 1/4 mile during that same test while posting a 130+ trap. QUOTE]

Holy smokes what rear gear has that thing got in it to use 5th gear at the dragstrip! Our Chevelle runs 130MPH in 4th gear going through at 6600RPM with a 3.73. That thing must leave like a monster! I bet it is a blast to drive!

[mazspeed]

[QUOTE=mazspeed] Also the car blew the clutch in 5th gear down the 1/4 mile during that same test while posting a 130+ trap. QUOTE]

Holy smokes what rear gear has that thing got in it to use 5th gear at the dragstrip! Our Chevelle runs 130MPH in 4th gear going through at 6600RPM with a 3.73. That thing must leave like a monster! I bet it is a blast to drive!


3.08 I think.
They hit the NOS and poof went the clutch in 5th.

[tyoneal]

Ty, you cannot run a 315 with stock dse or other tube arms, no matter if the frame will allow it, the rims will hit the arms very quickly not allowing any turning radius, among other things, so now you buy that aftermarket frame, you need different arms already, so to base a frame off stock style arms is not the best idea. there are better options out there, and to have really good adjustability you do not need sc/c arms or howe arms etc, its how the susp geometry was set up, its very easy to set a susp up with 1.0 to 1.5 camber for street then have it go to 2.0-2.5 for track duty, caster is typically fine non adjustable just as long as there enough of it, i like 5-7 degrees, other then that as long as the susp has been computer designed, and the rack width, height been designed, along with proper height steering arms, you will end with a very nice chassis.

TY:
Whether the stock DSE control arms would work with a 315 tire, I do not know, however I do know a 315 tire can be run under a stock '69 body, as CAR has already done it. What arms they use I do not know. I'm not so much trying to mix and match everyones parts, as I am trying to say that there seems to be several types/brands of parts on the market that can accomplish a specific task on a suspension. Some use one method, others use another. Some are fixed, others are adjustable. As I have been reading, many of the adjustable "Racing", parts offer a pretty impressive range of flexibility, So much so, that I think they would cover what needs we have and then some..

Further reading on this subject has opened up a New World of possibilities. The racing technology that is available is impressive and in some cases just flat out unbelievable. The needed settings that you mentioned above are well within the range of many of the adjustable parts that are offered. For better or worse the adjustability settings can get, "Out of Control", as far as different combinations if you were not careful. (There are definitely some Anal Retentive Engineers out there)

JAKE:
Also before calling a chassis the ultimate, do you know anything other then parts about it? ie, camber gain, initial camber adjust ability,caster, caster adjust ability, bump steer? these things should be known in a properly designed chassis.
goodluck
jake

TY:
Jake, you are right saying something is the, "ultimate", was a poor use of the word. I guess what I was trying to say is, the subframe that I would really like to have on my car, so "ultimate to me", would be a better way of expressing myself.

As far as my knowledge regarding the settings you mentioned above. Yes, I have read about all of them and I think I have a reasonable understanding of them (Hopefully better as time goes on). What settings are preferred, depends on the intended use and the specifications of a specific vehicle. "Bump Steer", issues seem to have been understood and corrected by the designers of most of the parts that would influence this issue.

I know I am not mentioning any specific parts in my response. I am just trying to clear up some of the Broader questions you have mentioned. This thread was/is intended to address the original question from a wider perspective rather than a specific one. Further, I have no intension in designing my own front suspension, rather see if I can extract additional items from the Racing side, that would be fun to have on our cars.

As you know, the world of Racing is technically complex, however there are many facets of Racing that can be brought over from the pure Racing side to the Street Side, where most of our vehicles reside. As I mentioned earlier, some of them are already here.

I know this was long winded and probably redundant in some places. I just hope it clarifies further my questions.

I hope this was helpful in answering/addressing some of your questions.

Thanks,

Ty O'Neal

[tyoneal]

Travis:
Kinda hard to say something is the ultimate when know one.....will publish there numbers. Not CAR, not ART, or DSE. I guess they all think they are building top secret space shuttles or something. Someone needs to come up with one thats not afraid to post the numbers.

TY:
I agree that a comparison of apples to apples is difficult to do without the specifications of each sub frame.

That said, I believe there are some who do post some of the information you are requesting.

I do think that some of the Racing Companies are a little more open with their specifics.

Take Care,

Ty

[mazspeed]

Travis:
Kinda hard to say something is the ultimate when know one.....will publish there numbers. Not CAR, not ART, or DSE. I guess they all think they are building top secret space shuttles or something. Someone needs to come up with one thats not afraid to post the numbers.

TY:
I agree that a comparison of apples to apples is difficult to do without the specifications of each sub frame.

That said, I believe there are some who do post some of the information you are requesting.

I do think that some of the Racing Companies are a little more open with their specifics.

Take Care,

Ty

What numbers are you looking for? Performance numbers or suspension geo numbers?

[tyoneal]

Frank:
Well, first of, I love ya like a brother Ty, but your over thinking this my friend! I will bet there is little chance you will ever see the outer limits of any good subframe / Lateral Dynamics combo, so it is all pencil pushing.

The DSE and Art morrison are both proven perfromaer in real world seat of the pants testing, but as travis said the numbers are not readly available. But we do not race numbers anyway.

SpeedTech Subframe does what you are asking for, uses stock type components. And Blake is going to publish the numbers.

But my guess is you will be thrilled with whichever frame you choose, as long as you avoid the obvious "street rodder frames" out there.

TY:
Likewise, thanks for the kind words.
You are right. I am over thinking it from a certain perspective, and I am certain you are also correct that I would never see the outer limits of any good sub frame.

The main difference between your statement and my perspective is that, while being technically correct in your statement, you are addressing it from a, "Practical", point of view. "Is it Practical to seek the Ultimate Street Sub Frame for my car?"

The answer is a big fat, NO!"

On the other hand I have moved past that line of thinking and am addressing from the, "Their is nothing truly practical about 99% of these cars and the stuff we put on it or in it. I'm pencil pushing because as unpractical as I'm being with my current questions, I'm still in a search to find the, "Ultimate Subframe", from my perspective for my car".

I concede, you are 100% correct in your statement. True practical performance has nothing to do with it.

I would like to build the best car I can. (From my perspective) This is absolutely not just transportation. It's an exercise in creating something I/We are passionate about. Bleeding edge technology coupled with classic looks. I am a kid with a big imagination, and a desire to try and fulfill that dream. Nothing more, Nothing less.

This is a project that gets my mind off of the mundane part of the world I live in, and replaces it with something, in some cases, that makes it worth waking up for, in the morning to go to work again.

If I can possibly manage it from a possibility standpoint, and a financially standpoint, I want to build it just because it's fun!

I want a Car to have 315 mm, Big Fat Meats on the Front just like the race cars I remember seeing as a kid. So I can stop them with my practical 6 Piston, 14 inch, two piece rotor brakes, so I can feel the bite of a $400, 200 mph speed rated tire, mounted on a beautiful 3 piece wheel with a powder coated center.

I really need this because if I didn't have it, I might not be able to slow my $35,000 Classic, 550 hp engine, down from 45 mph, to 20 mph as I enter that school zone.

You have to be safe you know, and of course, "It's all about the Children!"

..... and you wonder why I'm so concerned about finding the right sub frame? ;-)

All kidding aside, I'm really just looking for what I would like, not what I need or could use. Yes, I will be taking Driving lessons, but I know needing this technology is ridiculous. Truth be known a properly set up stock sub frame would probably be rarely maximized, if ever.

Is this understandable?

Ty

[tyoneal]

Im not sure of your backround with racing but I would take some driving classes and get the sub you want.

This I would do if I only had a VW bug as Transportation. I've ALWAYS wanted to do it, so this will be completed.

Thanks,

Ty

[tyoneal]

Actually the CAR chassis you can run 315's with an excellent lock to lock with the stock body.

Ty, I'm not sure where you are going with this? I think you're a lot like me in wanting a bad ass car that can out handle a vette. Problem is, there is a lot of subs to choose from that will get you close if not right there. DSE, Art's and CAR's chassis will all get you to where you want to go, it's just how much do you want to spend? You also have to design the rest of your car around the chassis to get your desired effect. How bad ass do you want your car to be with the amount of money you are willing to throw at it? CAR's chassis may be the very best for the track, but do you really need it? Even Kevin will tell you this. If this is just a street car, most other high end subs will be just fine as long as the builders know what they are doing. Also, like Jonny said, you might want to take some driving classes to fully learn how to drive a 3500 pond car with a good chassis at the limit. This of course is not knowing your driving skill.

Jake

==========================================

Jake:

#1 Goal for the car, have FUN!

Out handle a Vette? Sure, but most of it would probably be dependent on the Driver and who was less worried about wading up their car.

I have done very little to the car since I got it because I do realize that Suspension, Engine/Drive Train and Looks, all have to be planned. I don't want to have to buy things twice,

Once again, I don't even need the car much less the special subframe.

I want something different. (and In this crowd that is a challenge)

Something I have been seeking for quite a while.

Maybe a cop out answer, but a true one never the less.

Thanks,

Ty

[tyoneal]

also on the c.a.r.s set up, i always have read that it is the ultimate however they blamed shock tuning for its poor performance in the phr testings with the orange car, however, i assume they have sold a few, i am not sure why there are tuning issues since there chassis has been available for a long time, and been in more then a few cars??

Even if they are NOT the ultimate, I'm surprised one of the other builders hasn't considered offering something like this?

I'm sure there would be aspects of a frame like this that would appeal to others in this group. Am I wrong?

Ty

[tyoneal]

The Orange car which is my buddy's car has a 572 heavy big block in it, and you have to have tuning time to get it to handle correctly. The car is a 54f 46r distribution due to the big engined car. The great thing about that and all chassis from CAR is that they were able to tune the car afterwards. They just got that car finished without testing the car before going to the PHR test grounds. They figured out they needed more spring, and more bar and a few other minor adjustments to make it right, and they didn't have time before hand. Also the car blew the clutch in 5th gear down the 1/4 mile during that same test while posting a 130+ trap. This comes from not being able to have time to sort that car out. Now that car is a 1g car able to run low 10's high 9's in the quarter on street tires. It's an awesome car. Once they tune the chassis for each car, it's the best one you can have due to the fact that you can tune everything, that's one reason why they insist on doing the work themselves.


Mazspeed:

Was this car in a recent article, or an older one? Is this car on a web site somewhere to take a look at it?

What type of rear suspension was it running?

Will there be a follow up article with this car showing the additional performance once dialed in?

What is their shop like?

I've spoken with Kevin He seems like a nice guy. During the update do they communicate well with the customer?

How long does it take them to install their sub frame?

Anything else you can mention is sure welcome.

Thanks,

Ty

[tyoneal]

What numbers are you looking for? Performance numbers or suspension geo numbers?

Mazspeed:

Good question. Since I have seen very little information with any of the new sub frames regarding performance once installed, I don't know how to create a target number.

That is why if it is possible to find the, "Best", now there would be a benchmark. Since I have a 69 Camaro, I figure that alone will give me the greatest amount of data.

I will be putting in a LS2/7 either supercharged or turbo. Supercharged seems easier and more cost effective, turbo charged is cooler. In any event, shooting for 700 hp at the flywheel and 550 hp at the wheels.

As mentioned, have the LD 3-link in the rear. (3.90 Tru-Track) 315's Currently, will run 335's once I upgrade to 18 inch wheels.

Six pot Wilwoods for the front, 4 Pot Wilwoods for the rear. Two piece rotors and 14 inch and 13 inch rotors respectively.

I did add air, and will be putting a Mark VIII fan in it asap. other than that it is pretty empty.

Based on those numbers, what would you expect?

I'm guessing it will be plenty fast. Handling characteristics,???????

Your Thoughts?

Ty O'Neal

[tyoneal]

What numbers are you looking for? Performance numbers or suspension geo numbers?

Mazspeed:

At this point, I'd love to have all of it, with 100 individual cars, all "F" body's, running LS engines and a 3-link.

Sorry, I know that was a Smart Ass remark, however, I would like to have as much as possible.

Ty

[68protouring454]

Mazspeed:

Was this car in a recent article, or an older one? Is this car on a web site somewhere to take a look at it?

What type of rear suspension was it running?

Will there be a follow up article with this car showing the additional performance once dialed in?

What is their shop like?

I've spoken with Kevin He seems like a nice guy. During the update do they communicate well with the customer?

How long does it take them to install their sub frame?

Anything else you can mention is sure welcome.

Thanks,

Ty
first off, wow can you type, wish i could type that fast, second some of your replies are hard to follow.
the 69 orange car, that c.a.r built is really now where on the web and it was built at car with there front and rear susp, and ohlin coilovers however other then the few page article in phr awhile back thats all thats been scene or heard of it, it needed tuning as it did poorly in the phr testing, would like to see it tested again.
ask c.a.r. maybe they have more pics.
i understand what your looking for, however i am glad you stated ultimate for your car, as like you said no one can tell which sub is ultimate because not everyone has posted numbers, track times etc, you'll find a chassis you'll like i am sure and you moe then likely will not drive it to its limits
jake

[Steve Chryssos]

In the late nineties, I bought one of the first available aftermarket Camaro clips made by Art Rasmussen Design and Fabrication --RIP-- The company later became Wayne Due. Mark Steilow received one of the other first clips for the Mule. I don't like to be kept waiting, so I talked them out of their trade show "demo" unit. The price? A mere $1500 bare. I scored a set of 1987 A-arms and spindles for free and then picked up a "Fairmont" power rack which used to be popular with the local roundy-round Asphalt Modified racers.

From there, I was on my own in terms of steering arms and a sway bar. But I was thrilled to have a tubular clip with forged aluminum A-arms and spindles. I would brag to my buddies about having a tubular clip and vette suspension when in reality the clip was essentially junk. With no fabrication or suspension design skills, I spent --are you sitting down?-- $14,000 to make that clip right. You can bet I'm embarrassed to admit that fact. I spent about $3500 TWICE with the wrong fabricator (shame on me) and then dropped another $7500 to make the clip right. That sum can be typical for a hot rodder with limited fabrication skills and loose money to burn. It happens. Steilow relied on his fabricating skills and engineering background to fix his clip for free. His experience paved the way for TRUE bolt on clips.

I share that little embarrassing nugget to remind folks just how EASY they have it now. There are myriad choices of highly capable BOLT-ON subframes available. It is truly amazing that these clips exist when you think back to how things were less than ten years ago. 21st Century, Art Morrison and Detroit Speed ARE ALL the ultimate clips. And I'm sure there are other capable products available or one the way. There is no need to nit-pick them or take them for granted. There is no need to search for better--at least not within the context of Pro-Touring, multi-faceted hot rods. Hundredths, tenths, or even seconds are irrelevant with regards to your favorite winding road or even in terms of lap times. Until active suspension arrives, any future performance gains will represent only the tiniest of incremental improvements. And these are largely unrealized improvements. Your brain cells would be better spent asking which clip offers better header clearance or which clip is wrapped and packaged nicely for shipping purposes. As far as I can tell, the only thing these clips lack is a suitable jacking point just behind the core support.

We are spoiled by the availability of some truly amazing products. Damn junkies that we are, we keep looking for ultimaterer parts. And ultimaterer is not a word. No it ain't.

It is in everyone's best interest to stop second-guessing. Pull the trigger by spending that hard earned money; getting your car done; AND DRIVING IT. I promise you that bench racing minutia will melt away with each passing mile. Every once in a while, someone asks me how much bumpsteer my car has and I must go look it up. I keep forgetting and I don't care. I'm standing here on the other side and there ain't a spreadsheet or bumpsteer graph in sight. Over here on the "done" side, it looks like this:
http://www.xvmotorsports.com/media/POC1007-10.jpg

[mazspeed]

Hey Ty, you can see his car called "Orange Crush" in last months PHR. There is a 5 to 6 page spread on it. BTW he hates that name. :lol:



Mazspeed:

Was this car in a recent article, or an older one? Is this car on a web site somewhere to take a look at it?

What type of rear suspension was it running?

Will there be a follow up article with this car showing the additional performance once dialed in?

What is their shop like?

I've spoken with Kevin He seems like a nice guy. During the update do they communicate well with the customer?

How long does it take them to install their sub frame?

Anything else you can mention is sure welcome.

Thanks,

Ty

[mazspeed]

Mazspeed:


What type of rear suspension was it running?

Will there be a follow up article with this car showing the additional performance once dialed in?

What is their shop like?

I've spoken with Kevin He seems like a nice guy. During the update do they communicate well with the customer?

How long does it take them to install their sub frame?

Anything else you can mention is sure welcome.

Thanks,

Ty
Was this car in a recent article, or an older one? Is this car on a web site somewhere to take a look at it?
They have a special 3 link they built for his car as well. It's a killer 3 link. The shop is like a big candy store of cool cars that they work on. They told me the SQ FT but I don't remember, but it's not super huge, but it's pretty big. Kevin is an educater when it comes to cars and is very good when talking cars to the customer. He's able to explain to you what it is you need or understands what your vision is with your car. All the guys in the shop are great. I cannot tell you a time it takes to put their subframe in someone's car, because it can vary with whatelse is being done to the car. I have never really seen them install one, but they have cars there that have them in it. I think it takes a week to 2 weeks to build each subframe, but the frame is built to each car, so each subframe may be different then another one depending on needs.

[mazspeed]

Mazspeed:

Good question. Since I have seen very little information with any of the new sub frames regarding performance once installed, I don't know how to create a target number.

That is why if it is possible to find the, "Best", now there would be a benchmark. Since I have a 69 Camaro, I figure that alone will give me the greatest amount of data.

I will be putting in a LS2/7 either supercharged or turbo. Supercharged seems easier and more cost effective, turbo charged is cooler. In any event, shooting for 700 hp at the flywheel and 550 hp at the wheels.

As mentioned, have the LD 3-link in the rear. (3.90 Tru-Track) 315's Currently, will run 335's once I upgrade to 18 inch wheels.

Six pot Wilwoods for the front, 4 Pot Wilwoods for the rear. Two piece rotors and 14 inch and 13 inch rotors respectively.

I did add air, and will be putting a Mark VIII fan in it asap. other than that it is pretty empty.

Based on those numbers, what would you expect?

I'm guessing it will be plenty fast. Handling characteristics,???????

Your Thoughts?

Ty O'Neal

Ok, you already have a great 3 link in the rear, but also what kind of tires will you be running? 335 what? Are you going to run a race spec "R" compound on the road, or a goodyear f1 street tire, or what? This will also be a big factor in what you have. The LS motor is a great start because it's light weight. The DSE or ART frame will be great for this as well. The CAR frame will just give you a ton more adjustability for track and street use, but it's all how much you want to spend. I think with this kind of combo, you will get the numbers you may want. I think places that make subframes cannot give you a number, because of the differences in these cars. A new vette will have a baseline with all the others, and they will all handle the same, you put a few mods on it to handle better, and that's it. These cars are really torn apart and rebuilt, so the baseline is hard to get by putting in a new subframe and hitting the track. What motor tires, suspension ect.

[rwhite692]

....It is in everyone's best interest to stop second-guessing. Pull the trigger by spending that hard earned money; getting your car done; AND DRIVING IT. I promise you that bench racing minutia will melt away with each passing mile. Every once in a while, someone asks me how much bumpsteer my car has and I must go look it up. I keep forgetting and I don't care. I'm standing here on the other side and there ain't a spreadsheet or bumpsteer graph in sight. Over here on the "done" side, it looks like this:
http://www.xvmotorsports.com/media/POC1007-10.jpg


TESTIFY, BROTHER, TESTIFY!

Can I get an AMEN?

[awr68]

Steve, in this case the grass IS greener on the other side...and I can't wait to join you!!!!!

Ty, just remember that what is 'the best' today will be old news soon enough! In this hobby it takes deep pockets and a short build time to have a top car with all the right parts...and that doesn't even last for long. Put together the best car you can and go enjoy it. I do appreciate all your research though!

My car is going to be great, but many of my parts have been bought over time and aren't necessarly the 'hot ticket' anymore, but they will work. I don't really mind since I was going for a timeless/clean look anyways, and not full of the 'have to have' parts the year the car was finished....for instance I don't have billet hood hindges...do I like them and are they cool? Yes, but at this time I need to get the car on the road and stop trying to keep up with everyone!! Building is fun but driving is where it's at!!

Enough about me! Narrow down your wants, needs and prefered style of components used and go from there...I thought Steve's point of packaging of headers was a valid concern! Even shipping and optional finishes and SFC's are concerns as well....just food for thought. :)

[Bowtieracing]

We are spoiled by the availability of some truly amazing products. Damn junkies that we are, we keep looking for ultimaterer parts. And ultimaterer is not a word. No it ain't.

It is in everyone's best interest to stop second-guessing. Pull the trigger by spending that hard earned money; getting your car done; AND DRIVING IT. I promise you that bench racing minutia will melt away with each passing mile. Every once in a while, someone asks me how much bumpsteer my car has and I must go look it up. I keep forgetting and I don't care. I'm standing here on the other side and there ain't a spreadsheet or bumpsteer graph in sight. Over here on the "done" side, it looks like this:
http://www.xvmotorsports.com/media/POC1007-10.jpg

Steve thanks again for your real life aspect on this.Your opinion is highly appreciated:cheers:

[Blake Foster]

Is this a good time to weigh in????
Unfortunatly it is very hard to fing the time to read this entire thread with out being interupted.
I am going out on a limb here as i don't see any other manufacturers chiming in.
I want to first let all who care know what OUR design ideas were when we purchased Speed tech in June 07 (not even 6 months ago).
lets build a first gen sub frame that addresses the following
1) what about the guy who is on a budget, has already purchased his wheels, brakes, control arms?????
2) what about the guy who wants to build his car in stages????
3) what about the guy who wants to run big front tires????
4) Air Bags???
5) coil overs???
I am sure there were many other considerations as well.
So we as a company after looking at the market and competition and we decided to build a sub frame that used Camaro Components.
We never tried to reinvent the wheel. and part of this really stemmed from a day at the vintage races, watching 789 camaros FLYING arround the track.i went to the pits to look at the cars and guess what........ STOCK sub frames,Stock control arms!!!! 140MPH!!! 15" wheels......
So we came up with our idea of a BETTER than ORIGINAL sub frame.
it looks good, its built strong, it fits camaro components, its reasonably priced,
it doesn't use HOT ROD style suspension components (Mustang II)
So as far as the numbers go ............. what do you think they will be?
close to stock camaro.
So these are the numbers that we have from the Performance trends suspension analizer v2.0
all the following #'s are based on 1" of dive
toe gain -.02"
camber gain -.32
caster gain .98
roll center height (not in the gulstrand position)-2.69

bump from 0" ride height (this also depends on the ride height you choose)
-1 = -.02"
-1.5 = -.03"
+1 = .00
+1.5 = .01

Our new High clearance control arms (that come with the sub frame)
will fit a 18 x 10 with 6.25 back space and will not hit the control arms, it will steer almost to the rack stops but the tire starts to contact the sub frame.

We have tried to incorporate as many options as possible with out sacrificing any of the major components.

I figure there will be a bunch of questions and probably some negativity but ......... this is the way it is. we knew we wouldn't be able to make everyone happy. if you want the ultimate handling sub frame i would gladly give you Kyles or Arts phone numbers. if you want some thing that you can bolt in, have options and use camaro components, is strong, looks good,then that is what we build.

like i said this subframe fills a void it's may not be the BEST as far as numbers go......... it Certainly won't be the worst.

i hope you like it, we have worked our asses off to build something that works.

let the chips fall where they may.

[bucks69]

That sir is what you call "throwin it down for ya" ....
Thanks Blake. Now if you just made a complete one peice frame... LOL

[Blake Foster]

WEll now that would depend on interest.................. wouldn't it

i personally feel that if a guy wanted to go to that extent then you would just call ART Morrison,

[awr68]

Blake thanks for jumping in here! I saw the frame at SEMA and you have a nice product! Love the new control arms as well!! :cheers:

[tyoneal]

first off, wow can you type, wish i could type that fast, second some of your replies are hard to follow.
the 69 orange car, that c.a.r built is really now where on the web and it was built at car with there front and rear susp, and ohlin coilovers however other then the few page article in phr awhile back thats all thats been scene or heard of it, it needed tuning as it did poorly in the phr testing, would like to see it tested again.
ask c.a.r. maybe they have more pics.
i understand what your looking for, however i am glad you stated ultimate for your car, as like you said no one can tell which sub is ultimate because not everyone has posted numbers, track times etc, you'll find a chassis you'll like i am sure and you moe then likely will not drive it to its limits
jake

Jake:

Thanks for the message.

I saw that car in PHR, it looked like a very well engineered piece, but as you said, The performance one would expect was far from impressive.(Given a price of $300k total) The cost is an impressive number in size, but it doesn't do anything to validate one way or another the, "Real Value", of it. I think they did themselves a big disservice, and to the readers impression of their technology.

I to wish that it would be totally retested so some fair numbers can be seen. Maybe I should write Frank and mention this thread. In many cases I don't mind saving extra money if I know I am buying a superior piece of equipment.

It would truly speak volumes if 69 Camaro Performance information by the different companies was available for comparison. Especially since there are a million of them around that have had the suspension modified.

We would still have to take into consideration that the times and speeds that were listed would have some variance in it. (Temp., Altitude, tire differences, driver differences, surface differences, etc., etc., etc.) However, since we know that these things can and do factor in to the performance, we could at least see the information, run a statistical model, and kick out some relative data about each of the different subframes, and how they relate to each other on the different performance test.

THAT to me would probably yield the information we all seek. Then the industry could price themselves accordingly. (I know, a Pipe Dream)

Thanks again,

Ty

[tyoneal]

Your brain cells would be better spent asking which clip offers better header clearance or which clip is wrapped and packaged nicely for shipping purposes. As far as I can tell, the only thing these clips lack is a suitable jacking point just behind the core support.

We are spoiled by the availability of some truly amazing products. Damn junkies that we are, we keep looking for ultimaterer parts. And ultimaterer is not a word. No it ain't.

It is in everyone's best interest to stop second-guessing. Pull the trigger by spending that hard earned money; getting your car done; AND DRIVING IT.
================================

Steve:

Well said, I for one really want to build this car once. If something else shows up superior to it then it will be in my next project.

When you mention, "which clip offers better header clearance or which clip is wrapped and packaged nicely for shipping purposes. As far as I can tell, the only thing these clips lack is a suitable jacking point just behind the core support."

Those to are really important issues, however to me, secondary after performance has been understood and decided on.

I rarely pull the trigger, on anything over about $2000 without doing my research and understanding, what the heck I'm buying vs. what the heck I want to buy.

I guess I don't know if my car will be PT or not. I really want more of a streetable-race car, than a racing/streetcar, that is why the suspension is so important. I can always add the Foo Foo stuff like nice carpet, insulation, and third light, a remote trunk release and power windows, plus I will be building a well mannered streetable engine with, (Hopefully) 550-575 RWHP.

I like listening to the engine better than the radio most of the time, and I enjoy "Feeling", the different components working together. One of the goals in time is to understand by the feel through the steering wheel though the seat of my pants, what is out of adjustment, and what I need to do to change it.

Driving is a very enjoyable experience. One of my Two favorite things.

Thanks for the advice, Your insight is always appreciated.

BTW: Anything new on the front spoilers?

Thanks,

Ty

[tyoneal]

Hey Ty, you can see his car called "Orange Crush" in last months PHR. There is a 5 to 6 page spread on it. BTW he hates that name. :lol:


November 07?

I'm already getting 2008 issues?

Ty

[tyoneal]

Was this car in a recent article, or an older one? Is this car on a web site somewhere to take a look at it?
They have a special 3 link they built for his car as well. It's a killer 3 link. The shop is like a big candy store of cool cars that they work on. They told me the SQ FT but I don't remember, but it's not super huge, but it's pretty big. Kevin is an educater when it comes to cars and is very good when talking cars to the customer. He's able to explain to you what it is you need or understands what your vision is with your car. All the guys in the shop are great. I cannot tell you a time it takes to put their subframe in someone's car, because it can vary with whatelse is being done to the car. I have never really seen them install one, but they have cars there that have them in it. I think it takes a week to 2 weeks to build each subframe, but the frame is built to each car, so each subframe may be different then another one depending on needs.
Mazspeed:

It's cool they can build a specific subframe for each particular car. That's probably where a lot of the pricing is along with top notch prices.

Are there any links to businesses that you would recommend that specialize in Adjustable High Performance suspension parts? (UCA, LCA, Sway Bars etc.)?

Thanks for the additional information.

Ty

[Stuart Adams]

The first gen camaro sub frame market is captured by a couple companies and now they are moving into other makes and models. New stuff will come out but most likely for other niches that are not captured yet, IMO.

[Steve Chryssos]

Ty,
My intention for considering secondary parameters is to reinforce the fact that the primary consideration--performance--is already fulfilled by a variety of sources.

Imagine Art Morrison, Kyle Tucker or Ed Bednar reading your initial post and thinking "Geez! More ultimate? What more could these guys possibly want?" Research and understanding are warranted and necessary, but the process can sometimes lead to "Consumer Constipation". That's how it goes in the internet age. There are myriad choices and tons of information. It's like going to a restaurant where each and every menu item sounds appealing. Make a choice or you will deprive yourself.

Enthusiasts like Brian Schien, John Parsons, Randy Bell and Jake Parrott have made their own frames. Three out of the four names mentioned tapped Katz Tsubai to generate their suspension geometry. I suppose that any of these guys have the ultimate subframe since they control every aspect of the design. Each has taken on the task of building from scratch for their vehicles which requires extraordinary skill, dedication, and time. As an added benefit, they get to control secondary parameters such as engine setback, frame rail width, header design, etc. John Parsons employed a $2500 custom width Woodward rack. The rack width perfectly matches his LCA inner pivot points. Randy Bell tied his upper coilover mounts into his rollcage down bars. Jake Parrott made some sweet looking billet steering arms. Maybe their stuff is better or maybe they just insist on DIY.

For the rest of us, the ultimate subframe(s) are here and readily available. Maybe you need to talk to these guys about what makes their frames different than available bolt on systems.

[James OLC]

An additional consideration, IMHO, for a truly 'ultimate' front sub would be optimum engine placement which would, in all reality, severly limit the market for such a piece. All of the current vendors are offering "bolt in" solutions that don't require significant alterations to the base car. As Blake stated, considerations have to be made for people who already have significant investments in components and that has to include the base car as well.

In an ideal world, the ultimate track/street subframe would have enough engine setback to require signficant reworking of the firewall, pedals, floor, and possibly dash. Not practical for many enthusiasts and certainly not something that would be embraced by most manufacturers (as a marketable product).

All of the subframe solutions that are available now - from new replacements to modified factory options - will begin to show their potential over the next year as more and more builders complete their projects. There is an unfortunate reality in this hobby and that is that these projects take time to build. Many of us bought 'new' offerings over the last year and it takes some time to get from that stage in the project through completion and into the real world. I agree with what many here have stated, in all reality the greatest limitiation of the suspension will be our own ability to use it properly.

That said, numbers will start to come out in the future and with them some very interesting (I think) conclusions.

Just my two bits

[tyoneal]

Ok, you already have a great 3 link in the rear, but also what kind of tires will you be running? 335 what? Are you going to run a race spec "R" compound on the road, or a goodyear f1 street tire, or what? This will also be a big factor in what you have. The LS motor is a great start because it's light weight. The DSE or ART frame will be great for this as well. The CAR frame will just give you a ton more adjustability for track and street use, but it's all how much you want to spend. I think with this kind of combo, you will get the numbers you may want. I think places that make subframes cannot give you a number, because of the differences in these cars. A new vette will have a baseline with all the others, and they will all handle the same, you put a few mods on it to handle better, and that's it. These cars are really torn apart and rebuilt, so the baseline is hard to get by putting in a new subframe and hitting the track. What motor tires, suspension ect.

Mazspeed:

Initially, I plan to run a good high performance Street tire to start. (335/30/18's, Rear)(315/30/18's front) I already have the wilwood 6 piston 14 inch two piece rotors fron, and the Wilwood 4 Piston, 13 inch. two piece rotors rear. all are Powder Coated Red.

My goal would be to have two sets of wheels and tires, depending on what the driving requires.

I have a buddy at NTB that sets the alinement to any specs I want. (I also have a four wheel drive truck I need this done to on a regular basis if I'm goi to spent time out in the country/mud.) It would be very easy for me to have the race, "specific's" tuned into the car prior to taking it to the track, then when finishes, change things back.

First I think it would be better to learn the high performance street driving, since it will be a lot easier to practice. I hope during this experience to eventually learn to be competent on a race course, enough so that I have qualified to run safe without a "Co-Pilot", and run making laps with other cars. Mary Pozzi's video would a good description of my first goal.

I am in no hurry and I have the time to spend doing it right. I'm in it or the shear enjoyment of driving, and enjoying the nice equipment that has been put together.

I hope this answers your questions.

TY

[Mean 69]

Ty, glad (hoping) you love the car and especially the rear setup. While not perfect, it's damn good and your questions are noble and just regarding the front. For those that don't have the sincere pleasure of knowing Ty, I can assure you that he's not trying to be a pain with this question, he's one of the very most intelligent people I have ever met, and really wants "the" answer, rather than trying to be a post-whore.

I'd have to agree with REBOOT, or rather, I TOTALLY agree with him regarding a few very important, and very specific questions to any front setup. With anything, one needs to realize that any setup is a question of compromises, hopefully informed ones, and you need basically to pick your battles. The two biggest ones for a high effort first gen, and this applies to most muscle cars, comes in two critically important flavors: Are you willing to set the engine back a minimum of 6" from normal position, possibly more. Two, what type of tires, not only in terms of section width, are you planning on running?

My philosphy on this stems from the outside-in. In other words, start with the tires. My ego says maximum traction, maximum corninering forces, from a front engine muscle car. That stated, it's not a far stretch that suggests as wide a front tire as possible, clearly we all know that muscle cars are generally front tire limited in terms of grip, unless the rear suspension is SO bad that the car reverts to oversteer despite common tuning practice (which is a mere phone call away from a number of "bolt-on" rear suspension suppliers, that's another story entirely). So, wide front tires, as sticky as possible, please, sir.

Next, where's the engine go? As Jim (Reboot) suggested, this is a biggie. Why? Fundamentally, the front tires need to do something that the rear tires (generally) don't need to do: steer. Yeah? So what? Lots, that's what. Specifically, as it pertains to a replacement subframe for an American muscle car, the darned engine is in the way of where the rack and pinion needs to be. Gulp, what?!? Yep, it's true, don't kill the messenger. What gives?

Rack units prefer, greatly, GREATLY to have their loads placed on axis. This means the steering forces, as constructed from the tie rods (which are forced from wheel forces axially), really like to go right down the actual rack unit itself. Torques, on a rack unit are not a terribly welcome thing. They need to be dealt with, even in factory applications, etc, but things are different in our applications. Why? Because the engine is usually in the way. Err, always in the way, at least in the stock engine location. Darned harmonic balancer or oil pan are the biggest culprits. Well, let's just drop the rack unit!!!! Yep, that's it, problem solved. Except there's this horrible by-product called bump steer. But!!!! We can solve bump steer by changing the location of the steering arm, on the wheel side, just drop the outer tie rod location!!!!! Awesome!

Darned, that's not free either. Now we need to accomodate by using a lower than intended steering arm. This is most notable by all of the folks using a C5/C6 spindle on a muscle car, they either use a different steering arm, or add significant shims to lower the outer tie rod location in order to deal with bump steer. Hooray!!!! Nope, now, because the outer tie rod is lower, and therefore the tie rod too, interference with the rim in tighter turning situations. Wait, I've got it!!!! Shorten the steering arm!!!! Solves everything!!! Err, except that now there's far less mechanical advantage to the steering system from a leverage standpoint, so you need to turn the steering wheel harder. Heck, no sweat, just boost the pump pressure to increase the assist, no problem! Err, except, that nothings free, and ultimately, the steering gear, namely the rack and pinion will need to shoulder the additional forces, regardless of what of what is felt by the steering wheel/driver. And really, the rack and pinion unit that is used by virtually all of the aftermarket folks (with the exception of the uber-CARS unit) is a good ole Mustang rack, and it's proven in this exact setup, right? Sort of. Or rather, with skinny-ish street tires, and a modest front end weight.

What happens when you put a set of 275+ wide R-Compound tires on the deal and drive it like you stole it? Well, it depends. What's your scrub radius (less is better for impact to the steering unit, but far harder to achieve, and generally lessens turning radius, again, pick your battle). What about Ackerman? This is a bigger deal than most folks think, my personal research shows that ideal Ackerman is very beneficial, which for the aftermarket frames means moving the rack rearward, which means hitting the oil pan for stock engine locations. What happens when you put a set of 315's on? All gets worse. Slicks, during normal street driving where static friction is a really big deal? Gulp.

Well, this all sucks. So how do DSE, 21st, AME all solve the issue? Defying engineering physics? Nope. They all found a nice sweet spot in terms of overall compromise, and the very specific difference is in the choice of steering appartus: rack, versus steering box.

So why the hell did I suggest engine setback as a primary consideration? Simple. Mechanical advantge, and load reaction: locating the rack upward makes all issues easier. Look at a new Corvette, specifically where the engine is, and then look at the rack and pinion unit. Little different than on the aftermarket units, eh? You TOO!!! can have this arrangement, just move the engine back, like John Parsons did, and it all gets a lot nicer. 'cept that packaging deal with the pedals, etc....

Ultimate subframe? Honestly? First gen, with stock motor placement? My bet, today, is on a front steer, recirc-ball steering unit with a purpose built drag link/tie rod system, allowing stock motor position, and significantly fewer overall compromises. Suspension geometry is the easiest part in this application, especially without predefined constraints on the steering gear.

Sorry if this didn't make sense, my life has gotten intersting of late and I am basically writing this half asleep. Aside from the information gathering aspect of the internet, the byproduct is to foster alternative views, I'm guessing that this will do the latter. Looking forward to the responses, for now, it's bedtime.

Mark

[Payton King]

and just got to this thread.

First, Steve is still an island of reason and common sense.

Coming from a person that recently finished a project with a 21st Century sub frame, using this one, DSE or Morrisions' you will not be able to find a place on the street to even approach the limits of the above frames. Double any speed limit coming into a corner and they are not even working hard...on top of that how fast do you really want to run on a back road? Maybe because I am in my 40's now, but running 90 mph down a back road looking for cops and deer or dogs to jump in front of me is not as much fun as it use to be. So that leaves the track. How much time can I really spend there? And if I do, I know I will trash a set of tires, brake pads and possibly rotors. Do I really want to subject my high end car to the possibility of wadding it up in a wall pushing it 10/10th? For me my answer is no, I would rather have a nice pro-tour car that I drive on the street and every now and then take to the track (read track day or Run Through the Hills). Personally, If I want the ultimate...I will build a purpose built race car.

So getting completely off track, so to speak, in this thread. I will get back to your question which I think has been answered in a round about way. You need to spend some time on the track and develope a driving style, are you smooth and fluid or are you a thrasher? What do you like and dislike about your present set up...then either drive some other cars with the frames in question or have someone custom build a subframe...or full frame to your liking. That suits you and your style, read here what you feel confortable in driving as hard as you can. What one person likes and feels is the ultimate may be too "on edge" for you to drive fast. Being fast goes hand in hand with being confident.

Another part of the puzzle not touched on is heat in the tires. Will you be able to drive hard enough to get 315's and 335's up to temp for them to work at their optimum? Hard to tell without some track time and a pyrometer.

I know the 3 G Vette turned some pretty darn good numbers running a 265 front 295 rear and I don;t think the tires were up to temp on the runs.

Just random thoughts on the larger picture for the quest of the ultimate.

[Blake Foster]

i think Payton King and Mean69 just summed the WHOLE thing up, "it's about Compromise" and "How do you want to drive"

[Stuart Adams]

Also take into consideration in the case of a stock first gen. camaro, not the best starting point, and these subs are no comparison to stock. If it handles way better and you enjoy driving the car alot more, that is what is really important in my mind.

Too many variables to get caught up in all the numbers.

[68protouring454]

good points, but i can say i have driven 6-8 different 1st gens, if they were all mine, i would drive the ones with the after market front clip anyday before a modified stock clip, not that the geometry is better, they just have a late model feel to them, and are much more comfortable going fast.
jake

[tyoneal]

Ty,
My intention for considering secondary parameters is to reinforce the fact that the primary consideration--performance--is already fulfilled by a variety of sources.

Imagine Art Morrison, Kyle Tucker or Ed Bednar reading your initial post and thinking "Geez! More ultimate? What more could these guys possibly want?" Research and understanding are warranted and necessary, but the process can sometimes lead to "Consumer Constipation". That's how it goes in the internet age. There are myriad choices and tons of information. It's like going to a restaurant where each and every menu item sounds appealing. Make a choice or you will deprive yourself.

Enthusiasts like Brian Schien, John Parsons, Randy Bell and Jake Parrott have made their own frames. Three out of the four names mentioned tapped Katz Tsubai to generate their suspension geometry. I suppose that any of these guys have the ultimate subframe since they control every aspect of the design. Each has taken on the task of building from scratch for their vehicles which requires extraordinary skill, dedication, and time. As an added benefit, they get to control secondary parameters such as engine setback, frame rail width, header design, etc. John Parsons employed a $2500 custom width Woodward rack. The rack width perfectly matches his LCA inner pivot points. Randy Bell tied his upper coilover mounts into his rollcage down bars. Jake Parrott made some sweet looking billet steering arms. Maybe their stuff is better or maybe they just insist on DIY.

For the rest of us, the ultimate subframe(s) are here and readily available. Maybe you need to talk to these guys about what makes their frames different than available bolt on systems.
==============================================
Steve:

I understand what you are saying. First thing they would probably do is Crap that someone would be so picky/uninformed/ungratefull to all their hard work producing a quality product, and that's just for starters. (I'm not sure I would want to hear the next part. My ears would probably spontaneously combust with good reason.

I wish I had an ounce of the knowledge and expertise all those people have, your point is very well taken.

I think before I do, "Pull the Trigger", I will give these folks a call.

I always appreciate you taking the time to chime in.

Thanks,

Ty

[tyoneal]

An additional consideration, IMHO, for a truly 'ultimate' front sub would be optimum engine placement which would, in all reality, severly limit the market for such a piece. All of the current vendors are offering "bolt in" solutions that don't require significant alterations to the base car. As Blake stated, considerations have to be made for people who already have significant investments in components and that has to include the base car as well.

In an ideal world, the ultimate track/street subframe would have enough engine setback to require signficant reworking of the firewall, pedals, floor, and possibly dash. Not practical for many enthusiasts and certainly not something that would be embraced by most manufacturers (as a marketable product).

All of the subframe solutions that are available now - from new replacements to modified factory options - will begin to show their potential over the next year as more and more builders complete their projects. There is an unfortunate reality in this hobby and that is that these projects take time to build. Many of us bought 'new' offerings over the last year and it takes some time to get from that stage in the project through completion and into the real world. I agree with what many here have stated, in all reality the greatest limitiation of the suspension will be our own ability to use it properly.

That said, numbers will start to come out in the future and with them some very interesting (I think) conclusions.

Just my two bits
==============================================
James do you have any idea how far the engine can be set back before the troubles become ridiculous?

If not, anyone else?

Thanks for your patience,

Sincerely,

Ty O'Neal

[Steve Chryssos]

Engine setback is indeed the ultimate approach. It does come with one caveat, though:

You've taken your car apart and made a relatively small hole in the firewall for the purpose of moving the engine rearwards. But with the car apart and cutting equipment at hand, something strange happens. You start licking your lips and flaring your eyes wildly.....You rub your hands together as an evil grin spreads across your face from ear to ear. Before you know it, the entire floor has been cut from the car. When you snap out of your sweaty hot rod junkie trance, you find Craig Morrison standing there wearing a kinky devil costume and holding your wallet. :yes: Nirvana: You have achieved the ultimate: A full frame with a channeled body.

The ultimate subframe is, in fact, not a subframe at all. The single biggest problem with a subframe is the "sub" part. The frame hangs well below the floorboard thereby preventing you from getting the car, and the center of gravity, as low as possible.

Remember the movie "Altered States"? William Hurt's character endured tremendous physical, emotional, and psychological strain in search of the ultimate answer: The beginning of Creation. When he finally reaches the end of his quest, he finds that the answer is Nothing. Before there was Something, there was Nothing. File that one under D for Duh. This is like that, only different.
http://www.obscurehorror.com/altered_states.jpg
http://images.popularhotrodding.com/features/0406sc_01z+1969_chevrolet_camaro+left_front_view.j pg

[tyoneal]

Mark:

Thanks for writing, I know you are up to you eyeballs with stuff to do. To answer your question, "A BIG YES", it is a fine piece of engineering and even without the front sub, the rear set up and the few things you did to the front make it handle SO MUCH BETTER than stock it is ridiculous.

You are very kind in your description of me, I hope I can live up to it. At this point I've probably got people things I'm borderline nuts based on all the post I've made.

I mentioned in an earlier reply, "How much distance can the engine be moved back in a first gen. without hitting the massive amount of headaches you mentioned?

Your statement, "That stated, it's not a far stretch that suggests as wide a front tire as possible, clearly we all know that muscle cars are generally front tire limited in terms of grip, unless the rear suspension is SO bad that the car reverts to over-steer despite common tuning practice (which is a mere phone call away from a number of "bolt-on" rear suspension suppliers, that's another story entirely). So, wide front tires, as sticky as possible, please, sir."

Sums up my thoughts exactly about the desire for the larger front tires. When driving Lateral-1, the front grip seems to be the weak link in it's cornering ability as it is currently set up. I have altered my approach, how the throttle is applied, the brakes going in and the brake work through the turn so the weight stays planted with sufficient force as to minimize under-steer.

I do still have the 275's on the front so there is a fair amount of foot print to start with. I'm sure that some tweeking can help this, as well as good driving lessons, but even with focusing on smoothness, it always seems to come back to traction. Don't get me wrong, this is the 4th first gen I have owned and by far the nicest and best handling. I wouldn't trade it for anything. (We've spent some quality time bonding together me and her)

I'll admit I'm not slow poking it around these turns, I have focussed on turns that are on good smooth (Textured), freshly poured and cured concrete that is devoid of excess dirt and oils. They run in 90 degrees in both directions so I can work both sides. With proper air pressure the tires themselves are doing a decent job, but with the greater weight in front, well, I'm not shedding any new news about that. An interesting detail came in as just before the front tires were going to start going away (under-steering), I tried correcting the front skid by a throttle induced over-steer occurrence. it was interesting, and in the right gear if you can get the power out fast enough, it was quite interesting.

Anyway, this has been the main basis for my hardheadedness on the subject of wheel width. I know there will still be challenges to deal with as the design of the car itself even with a good suspension is a 40 year old technology that if changed would help the handling as well. But hey, without that we wouldn't be driving the cars we love so much right?

In your next point,

"Next, where's the engine go? As Jim (Reboot) suggested, this is a biggie. Why? Fundamentally, the front tires need to do something that the rear tires (generally) don't need to do: steer. Yeah? So what? Lots, that's what. Specifically, as it pertains to a replacement subframe for an American muscle car, the darned engine is in the way of where the rack and pinion needs to be. Gulp, what?!? Yep, it's true, don't kill the messenger. What gives?

Rack units prefer, greatly, GREATLY to have their loads placed on axis. This means the steering forces, as constructed from the tie rods (which are forced from wheel forces axially), really like to go right down the actual rack unit itself. Torques, on a rack unit are not a terribly welcome thing. They need to be dealt with, even in factory applications, etc, but things are different in our applications. Why? Because the engine is usually in the way. Err, always in the way, at least in the stock engine location. Darned harmonic balancer or oil pan are the biggest culprits. Well, let's just drop the rack unit!!!! Yep, that's it, problem solved. Except there's this horrible by-product called bump steer. But!!!! We can solve bump steer by changing the location of the steering arm, on the wheel side, just drop the outer tie rod location, .........Now we need to accomodate by using a lower than intended steering arm. This is most notable by all of the folks using a C5/C6 spindle on a muscle car, they either use a different steering arm, or add significant shims to lower the outer tie rod location in order to deal with bump steer. Hooray!!!! Nope, now, because the outer tie rod is lower, and therefore the tie rod too, interference with the rim in tighter turning situations. Wait, I've got it!!!! Shorten the steering arm!!!! Solves everything!!! Err, except that now there's far less mechanical advantage to the steering system from a leverage standpoint, so you need to turn the steering wheel harder. Heck, no sweat, just boost the pump pressure to increase the assist, no problem! Err, except, that nothings free, and ultimately, the steering gear, namely the rack and pinion will need to shoulder the additional forces, regardless of what of what is felt by the steering wheel/driver. And really, the rack and pinion unit that is used by virtually all of the aftermarket folks (with the exception of the uber-CARS unit) is a good ole Mustang rack, and it's proven in this exact setup, right? Sort of. Or rather, with skinny-ish street tires, and a modest front end weight.

What happens when you put a set of 275+ wide R-Compound tires on the deal and drive it like you stole it? Well, it depends. What's your scrub radius (less is better for impact to the steering unit, but far harder to achieve, and generally lessens turning radius, again, pick your battle). What about Ackerman? This is a bigger deal than most folks think, my personal research shows that ideal Ackerman is very beneficial, which for the aftermarket frames means moving the rack rearward, which means hitting the oil pan for stock engine locations. What happens when you put a set of 315's on? All gets worse. Slicks, during normal street driving where static friction is a really big deal?"

Anyway, if I'm reading this correctly, If there wasn't an engine in the way of everything, the front end geometry, the R&P steering etc., etc., etc. would create a much easier condition to design around.

That's when i thought, if I could get a couple of inches into the firewall as to not disrupt everything inside, and just add 3 inches to the sub-frame where it bolts to the body, then other than adding to the rear of the front fenders 3 inches, and adding 3 inches to the rear of the hood, (I know this is overly simplified) it might be a solution that would make the engineering more workable, and hopefully not wreck the lines of the Car. (Long Hood, Short Deck) Who knows it might even look good?

This solution might be what was needed to correct the problems that exist and minimize the headaches associated with them. Here are your words about this,

"So why the hell did I suggest engine setback as a primary consideration? Simple. Mechanical advantge, and load reaction: locating the rack upward makes all issues easier. Look at a new Corvette, specifically where the engine is, and then look at the rack and pinion unit. Little different than on the aftermarket units, eh? You TOO!!! can have this arrangement, just move the engine back, like John Parsons did, and it all gets a lot nicer. 'cept that packaging deal with the pedals, etc...."

Anyway, if people thought this solution was anything that might be possible, and this idea didn't get me laughed off the forum, I was going to have some initial renderings done, to get a real peek of the looks of it from the outside.

Yours and/or anyone's thoughts? (Please be nice)

It always seems We are always looking for ways to build a better mouse trap. Could this possibly be one?

Thanks for reading all of this, and Mark it's good to hear from you again, I hope everything is moving forward for you in a positive direction.

Best Regards,

Ty

[Steve Chryssos]

Ha! We must have been typing at the same time. For the record, I don't think you're nuts. I'm having fun with this. It's all very valid. I want to make sure that people who read this thread understand the big picture, before plunging into fabrication hell. I think a long wheelbase Camaro in the spirit of a Mercedes McLaren SLR is a killer idea.

[victionone]

There was a '70 Chevelle at SEMA with a LS7 set at least a foot back. It had a stock wheelbase so most of the engine sat inside the firewall. Very nice car and idea but spark plug changes must be a pain among other things.

Ty,
I would stick with a DSE or AME frame. It fits, works well, and can be done. Stretching the front end of the car will be fabrication hell like Steve said. An idea that is more doable would be to push the engine a bit into the firewall without having to push back the dash, driver and passenger seat and run a C6 rear transaxle. Now that is a car I want to see!

[Silver69Camaro]

i think Payton King and Mean69 just summed the WHOLE thing up, "it's about Compromise" and "How do you want to drive"

:yes: :yes: :yes:

[ProdigyCustoms]

The engine (depending on weather you have a big or small block), can move back a few inches if the transmission tunnel / firewall union is modified to allow the bell housing deeper penetration to the tunnel. We can get the number 1 cylinder about even with the front spindle on Camaros. On EmptyNest using a Pontaic motor and custom firewall tunnel, with only a distributor relief in the firewall, we were able to get the number 1 cylinder behind the front spindle.

A few years ago, We (4) corner scaled my street racer before and after we moved the engine back, and went from 1810F / 1570R to 1720F / 1660R weight bias all by moving the engine a few inches we moved almost 100 LBS front to rear and changed the weigh balance to almost 50 / 50 . It makes a huge difference.

I believe there are 2 things that can make the most improvement in handling without using "The ultimate Subframe" if using a technically good subframe like the ones mentioned here. I think energy spent giving attention to these couple things would be more of a benefit then a better subframe.

The first thing is get weight off the nose. Particularly really bad weight out in front of the front spindles. Things like bumpers, spoilers, headlights and housings, inner fenders, intercoolers (BAD), radiators, turbos/ All that stuff that hangs off the front is on a lever and is HORRIBLE weight. Just try holding a 5 LBS in your hand with your arm extended, it will feel like 5 LBS, then put that 5 LBS on a 2 foot long sick and hold the end of that stick with the ball hanging off the other end. It will feel like 20 LBS, and the car feels that weight the same way. This is why I like big cube aluminum NA motors so much. No blower / turbos / intercoolers screwing up the weight balance. I wish I had before and after weights on EmptyNest before we started. But with the aluminum motor saves 150LBS, set back a few inches has to move 200+ LBS to the rear weight. We made a fiberglass front bumper. It weighs 4 LBS instead of 15LBS, only 11 LBS savings, but with the long nose of the Firebird, and that bumper hanging out there, it will probably move 25LBS to the rear of the car. Same for the fiberglass close out instead of steel, 14 LBS savings, again hanging off that nose. Fiberglass inner fenders, 14 LBS for the pair instead of 32 LBS for the pair. It all adds up and moves weight around so much you cannot believe it.

Second, and only Steve (I think unless I missed it) alluded to this. Lower the Center of Gravity. I believe that if someone buys good components and finds way to lower the COG, It will give a tremendous improvement. But this lowering has to be done with channeling of the body, or installing the frame higher in the body by ditching the subframe bushings. If the COG can be lowered without compromising suspension travel, it can pay huge benefits.

So I would focus on moving weight back and lower COG, using any of the quality subframes mentioned.

JMO

Now back to the subframe discussion

[tyoneal]

To All:

I have been temporarily covered up with things that couldn't wait.

I will respond to everyone this evening if possible.

More Later,

Thanks,

Ty O'Neal

BTW: GREAT POST!! I Really appreciate the time you have taken to add to the conversation. Thanks.

[tyoneal]

Frank:

I always enjoy hearing from you, and appreciate your time and thoughts.

While I know my thoughts are occasionally , "Much A Do about Nothing", I like to do This Project the best I can then move on to another, so I can add another Car to the Garage. This one in particular is important to me as it is a fulfillment of a promise to myself.
==========================================
You said:

"The first thing is get weight off the nose. Particularly really bad weight out in front of the front spindles. Things like bumpers, spoilers, headlights and housings, inner fenders, inter-coolers (BAD), radiators, turbos/ All that stuff that hangs off the front is on a lever and is HORRIBLE weight. Just try holding a 5 LBS in your hand with your arm extended, it will feel like 5 LBS, then put that 5 LBS on a 2 foot long sick and hold the end of that stick with the ball hanging off the other end. It will feel like 20 LBS, and the car feels that weight the same way. This is why I like big cube aluminum NA motors so much. No blower / turbos / inter-coolers screwing up the weight balance. I wish I had before and after weights on Empty-Nest before we started. But with the aluminum motor saves 150LBS, set back a few inches has to move 200+ LBS to the rear weight. We made a fiberglass front bumper. It weighs 4 LBS instead of 15LBS, only 11 LBS savings, but with the long nose of the Firebird, and that bumper hanging out there, it will probably move 25LBS to the rear of the car. Same for the fiberglass close out instead of steel, 14 LBS savings, again hanging off that nose. Fiberglass inner fenders, 14 LBS for the pair instead of 32 LBS for the pair. It all adds up and moves weight around so much you cannot believe it."

"Second, and only Steve (I think unless I missed it) alluded to this. Lower the Center of Gravity. I believe that if someone buys good components and finds way to lower the COG, It will give a tremendous improvement. But this lowering has to be done with channeling of the body, or installing the frame higher in the body by ditching the subframe bushings. If the COG can be lowered without compromising suspension travel, it can pay huge benefits."
===========================================
These Ideas of course are very Logical.

I think this is an area that I will have to explore with another project I have simmering, I need to have a lot more planning before I get to this point in a build. If I have to go about reverse Engineering this Whole Car. What a headache this would be.

Plus, I would like to not cut up Lateral-1, to much, just add to it's already, "Good Looks". (Yes, I know I biased, it's not like anyone else has a '69 Camaro. This car was important to Mark and I understand that. While mine, I think I can still find a happy medium for him to be happy he parted with it to me)
===========================================
So focus on moving weight back and lower COG, using any of the quality subframes mentioned prior, plus:

1) Move Battery to the Trunk

2) Eventually put in an aluminum LS-2/7,+Supercharger with air/water inter-cooler built in. Big Power, Light Weight, and all weight stays rearward in the Engine compartment as possible. Maybe pick up an extra inch or two if possible.

3) Lose Chrome Bumper, go with, "plastic", bumper offered that year.

4) Make use of CF parts now available (If economically smart)

5) Use After market Subframe, much lighter to start with (maybe I can get a bit of extra work done on it by the manufacturer that will satisfy some of my wants in some of the other areas I mentioned)

6) I still want to stiffen the car up a bit and go from a 4 to 8 pt cage. (Use Chrome Moly Tubing)
==============================================
Question:
With a Dry Sump System, can I move the engine and transmission lower, to make enough difference to justify the hassle, and Lower the COG?

Once done, go with shorter Body Bushings?

Is there a Kit for this?

Any recommendations you have in this respect? (For Everyone to Answer)
=========================================
Another Thought:(Thinking Out Loud)

I love the, "New", Chevy Small Block Technology, Duh?

Does GM make an Aluminum Six Cylinder Engine Based on this new LSx Technology?

Horse Power is so easy to make now, with a Target of 575-600 RWHP, a Stroked 6, and a Turbo, it should be very possible to meet my Target HP. (I think?)

Fewer Engine Parts=Cheaper Engine? (hp > per Dollar)

Plus, I now have Solved my Weight issue front to back, and dropped off some additional pounds, (25% Less Engine Mass) without any headaches.

I could even check out a STS for further weight transfer. (Moving Turbo to the Rear)

Add a six speed gear box, and run a deeper rear gear and still have good cruising with the 2nd overdrive.

If the Six Cylinder would spin high enough without coming unglued, a low rear gear ratio might be ok to run on the street and track and stay spooled.

MPG if I kept my foot light maybe surprisingly good.

Thoughts From anyone?

***VERY IMPORTANT, PLEASE BE BRUTALLY HONEST, IF THESE LAST IDEAS ARE RIDICULOUS, MAKE SURE AND SAY SO!

I don't want to waste my time and yours with a lot of ill thought out, "Half Baked", Drivel.

Thanks,

Ty

[tyoneal]

Ha! We must have been typing at the same time. For the record, I don't think you're nuts. I'm having fun with this. It's all very valid. I want to make sure that people who read this thread understand the big picture, before plunging into fabrication hell. I think a long wheelbase Camaro in the spirit of a Mercedes McLaren SLR is a killer idea.
==============================================

Steve:

Think what kind of modern silhouette might be had with a 40 year old car?

TY

[tyoneal]

Engine setback is indeed the ultimate approach. It does come with one caveat, though:

You've taken your car apart and made a relatively small hole in the firewall for the purpose of moving the engine rearwards. But with the car apart and cutting equipment at hand, something strange happens. You start licking your lips and flaring your eyes wildly.....You rub your hands together as an evil grin spreads across your face from ear to ear. Before you know it, the entire floor has been cut from the car. When you snap out of your sweaty hot rod junkie trance, you find Craig Morrison standing there wearing a kinky devil costume and holding your wallet. :yes: Nirvana: You have achieved the ultimate: A full frame with a channeled body.

The ultimate subframe is, in fact, not a subframe at all. The single biggest problem with a subframe is the "sub" part. The frame hangs well below the floorboard thereby preventing you from getting the car, and the center of gravity, as low as possible.

Remember the movie "Altered States"? William Hurt's character endured tremendous physical, emotional, and psychological strain in search of the ultimate answer: The beginning of Creation. When he finally reaches the end of his quest, he finds that the answer is Nothing. Before there was Something, there was Nothing. File that one under D for Duh. This is like that, only different.
http://www.obscurehorror.com/altered_states.jpg
http://images.popularhotrodding.com/features/0406sc_01z+1969_chevrolet_camaro+left_front_view.j pg
=============================================

That Camaro is Pure Testosterone.

Very Cool, but I think something a bit less subtle would be a better goal.

Thanks,

Ty

[tyoneal]

Steve:

http://images.popularhotrodding.com/features/0406sc_01z+1969_chevrolet_camaro+left_front_view.j pg[/QUOTE]
==============================================

BTW: What kind of wheels are on this car, and what kind of wheels do the NASCAR guys run?

Thanks,

Ty

[comp-spec]

[QUOTE=streetfytr68]Engine setback is indeed the ultimate approach. It does come with one caveat, though:

You've taken your car apart and made a relatively small hole in the firewall for the purpose of moving the engine rearwards. But with the car apart and cutting equipment at hand, something strange happens. You start licking your lips and flaring your eyes wildly.....You rub your hands together as an evil grin spreads across your face from ear to ear. Before you know it, the entire floor has been cut from the car. When you snap out of your sweaty hot rod junkie trance, you find Craig Morrison standing there wearing a kinky devil costume and holding your wallet. :yes: Nirvana: You have achieved the ultimate: A full frame with a channeled body.

The ultimate subframe is, in fact, not a subframe at all. The single biggest problem with a subframe is the "sub" part. The frame hangs well below the floorboard thereby preventing you from getting the car, and the center of gravity, as low as possible.







How true..... move the motor back and channel it on a full frame

[rwhite692]

BTW: What kind of wheels are on this car, and what kind of wheels do the NASCAR guys run?

Aero.

http://www.webkrafts.com/pms/aero.html