Ron Sutton Offset 3-Link install

[Ron in SoCal]

The goal of this thread is to document Ron Sutton's 3 link design.

I'm just getting started, but basically it's this -

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8086_zps315c8f45.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8086_zps315c8f45.jpg.html)

plus this -

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8151_zpscab3164f.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8151_zpscab3164f.jpg.html)

In an effort to create this -

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/Track-StarOffset3-Link-Camaro_zps341c116c.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/Track-StarOffset3-Link-Camaro_zps341c116c.jpg.html)

[Ron in SoCal]

I chose Ron's offset design because it's the best trade off (for me) of performance, serviceability, and ability to doghouse the third / center link. Ron uses hardcore race stuff and incorporates his own ideas - like a trunk mounted roll center adjustment - to make it unique in our segment. Plus, the man can design and identify areas of concern in 10 minutes using just a tape measure. I'm like, "Cool! Slow down!" :lol: Seriously, the value equation is off the charts.

The car is at Tolle Fab in Sacto and so far it's a pleasure dealing with Mike Tolle in between his World Challenge, ALMS and Indy car projects :D

Still collecting parts and I'll try to get plenty of pics along the way.

:cheers:

[Vince@Meanstreets]

looks good ron!! your gonna love that set up.

[Vegas69]

Why not, your other Camaro is nearly wore out. :tv_happy:

Merry Christmas....

[David Pozzi]

Looks great! Thanks for posting this.

[Ron in SoCal]

looks good ron!! your gonna love that set up.

Thanks Vin. I'm digging it already!

Why not, your other Camaro is nearly wore out. :tv_happy:

Merry Christmas....

:lol: Merry Xmas Bro :cheers:

[Vince@Meanstreets]

Still collecting parts and I'll try to get plenty of pics along the way.

:cheers:

Collecting parts?? Im told your spare parts room looks like Amelda Marcos's shoe closet.

[Ron in SoCal]

Looks great! Thanks for posting this.

Welcome David! I'm sure Ron will jump in soon and bring the tech.

Collecting parts?? Im told your spare parts room looks like Amelda Marcos's shoe closet.

It's scary Vince.

[Track Junky]

You lucky dog!! Thanks for posting this Ron. :thumbsup:

[Rick D]

Wow!! That looks like a very nice setup, question is this a street car or more of a race car? Will this rear setup work on the street?? Can't wait to see and here more!

[WSSix]

Very cool, Ron. Will Deadpool be the street/show car while this one is the track car? Good luck!

[Ron in SoCal]

You lucky dog!! Thanks for posting this Ron. :thumbsup:

Hey G! :thumbsup:

Wow!! That looks like a very nice setup, question is this a street car or more of a race car? Will this rear setup work on the street?? Can't wait to see and here more!

This is intended to be a track car Rick. It's possible it'll have license plates though :D

The set-up would work well on either street or track. The shock and spring package as well as ride height would be the only limiting factors for the street. The benefit of this design is great articulation that puts the power down under acceleration and good contact patch when braking. It's also fully adjustable for roll center and set up tuning.

Merry Xmas Bro :cheers:

Very cool, Ron. Will Deadpool be the street/show car while this one is the track car? Good luck!

Hey Trey! This is a slowburn project and I'll continue sorting / tuning DP for track duty when I can. :military:

[Rod P]

:confused59:

[carbuff]

I can't wait to watch this, as I'm interested in Ron's setup as well. I have a question about the housing below, specifically the brakes. That looks a lot like the setup Speedtech (I think it was them) was putting together a couple of years ago which used the C6 bearing as an alternative to a full-floating brake setup. Can you give any more specifics?

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8086_zps315c8f45.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8086_zps315c8f45.jpg.html)

[Ron in SoCal]

Brakes? :lol:

It's a one off, frankenstein sorta deal Bryan. No more complete kit parts available for this I'm told. Best bet would be to contact Blake.

[Vince@Meanstreets]

Brakes? :lol:

It's a one off, frankenstein sorta deal Bryan. No more complete kit parts available for this I'm told. Best bet would be to contact Blake.

Doesn't DSE sell a version too? I remember Tommy had a version right before Steilow released his version. Interesting kit if you want a floater.

[Jr]

Subscribed!

I look forward to Ron detailed post.

[Ron in SoCal]

Doesn't DSE sell a version too? I remember Tommy had a version right before Steilow released his version. Interesting kit if you want a floater.

I know DSE had one in development. Not sure if they worked with Mark on that but wouldn't be surprised. Looking at Mark's, I really like the improvements he made in the axle end placement.

The one above is derived from Tom's original design, I think. I had heard a couple of different versions of that story. He did not manufacture the housing ends as far as I know.

[Flash68]

This is a slowburn project and I'll continue sorting / tuning DP for track duty when I can. :military:

So that means DP was a fast-burn project then? :peepwall:

:headspin:

[Ron in SoCal]

So that means DP was a fast-burn project then? :peepwall:

:headspin:

That timescale would put the completion date somewhere around the end of 2022.

:underchair:

[Musclerodz]

Doesn't DSE sell a version too? I remember Tommy had a version right before Steilow released his version. Interesting kit if you want a floater.
DSE is in development of one, but they are currently only selling the Baer floater as far as I have been told.

[WSSix]

fast burn, slow burn, or whatever burn, it's bada$$.

[Flash68]

That timescale would put the completion date somewhere around the end of 2022.

:underchair:

You know I'm a fellow slow burn member. :D

:cheers:

[Jr]

What is the front suspension going to consist of?

[GregWeld]

Am I watching "As the world turns"? Or is it a re-run of The Twilight Zone.... Either way If Ron Sutton is involved it will turn out kool... IF (BIG IF) Ron-Somewhere-in-the-world-or-maybe-so-cal... doesn't get involved and derail it.

[Rick D]

Am I watching "As the world turns"? Or is it a re-run of The Twilight Zone.... Either way If Ron Sutton is involved it will turn out kool... IF (BIG IF) Ron-Somewhere-in-the-world-or-maybe-so-cal... doesn't get involved and derail it.

:confused59: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Now that's some funny sh!t right there!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[fleetus macmullitz]

DP treated Ron like Ari treated...


jkJRLGgyTV8


...and Ron,

It's good to see you are under the care now of an accredited physician, who's not at all shady.

:tiptoe:

[Ron in SoCal]

What is the front suspension going to consist of?

It's got a JRS designed C6 suspension with fabricated frame rails. Came out pretty good.

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/IMG_0717_zps306a8f1c.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/IMG_0717_zps306a8f1c.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/IMG_0725_zps76c46467.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/IMG_0725_zps76c46467.jpg.html)

Am I watching "As the world turns"? Or is it a re-run of The Twilight Zone.... Either way If Ron Sutton is involved it will turn out kool... IF (BIG IF) Ron-Somewhere-in-the-world-or-maybe-so-cal... doesn't get involved and derail it.

:confused59: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Now that's some funny sh!t right there!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

My money is on a rerun. :lol:

Happy Holidays fellas :cheers:

[Ron in SoCal]

DP treated Ron like Ari treated...


...and Ron,

It's good to see you are under the care now of an accredited physician, who's not at all shady.

:tiptoe:

Welcome home Skip! :lol: :grouphug:

[Jr]

It's got a JRS designed C6 suspension with fabricated frame rails. Came out pretty good.

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/IMG_0725_zps76c46467.jpg[/URL]





My money is on a rerun. :lol:

Happy Holidays fellas :cheers:

Looks good.

[Vince@Meanstreets]

DP treated Ron like Ari treated...





...and Ron,

It's good to see you are under the care now of an accredited physician, who's not at all shady.

:tiptoe:

mans so cool the shade follows him..

[Ron Sutton]

Hi Rick,

Wow!! That looks like a very nice setup, question is this a street car or more of a race car? Will this rear setup work on the street?? Can't wait to see and here more!

That's a great question. I'll provide the pros & cons ... then I think the question has to answered by each individual based on their criteria. A LOT of racing stuff is finding its way onto ProTouring & G-Machine cars driven on the street. This is no different, as I have a few other clients already running this set-up in their street/autocross cars.

1. Can it be driven on the street? Sure. You won't notice how it drives any different ... except when you roll on the throttle hard. It has instant grip & far more grip through out acceleration. I'll explain why later.

2. It won't affect ride quality at all.

3. But you can't run a back seat. The top link would be where the rear passenger sits on the right side of the car. So you need a raised floor or bulkhead fabricated from sheet metal & covered (or not).

4. Is it a race car piece? Yes. It is designed to provide optimum grip when the car has more power than the tires are designed for. The top link is a torque absorber. It cushions the shock to the rear tires at initial throttle application.

5. I tailor the spring rate & number of poly bushings to each application. Ron Myer's car will have slicks, so I spec'd it with fewer poly bushings & of a harder rate. For clients that run TW200 street tires ... we utilize more bushings & of softer spring rate. I have a client with a twin turbo LS that can be full throttle by corner exit on TW200 tires. Later ... if Ron Myer takes this car off the track & makes it a street car ... we'll change the poly bushings for the tires he chooses.


:cheers:

[Ron Sutton]

Hi Bryan,

I can't wait to watch this, as I'm interested in Ron's setup as well. I have a question about the housing below, specifically the brakes. That looks a lot like the setup Speedtech (I think it was them) was putting together a couple of years ago which used the C6 bearing as an alternative to a full-floating brake setup. Can you give any more specifics?

Ron Myer already had the housing. I do not think they are available anymore. When I provide housings, we use Speedway Engineering Floaters.

[fleetus macmullitz]

Ron,

Very cool build obviously, but I woulda went with a Lotus.


:popcorn2:



lol

[LM7_67]

That's an awesome suspension!

[Ron in SoCal]

Ron,

Very cool build obviously, but I woulda went with a Lotus.


:popcorn2:



lol

That's for guys like :weld:

Glad to see you're back in your old form. Only took two whole days :lol:

That's an awesome suspension!

Thanks Tom! :cheers:

[James OLC]

The goal of this thread is to document Ron Sutton's 3 link design.

I'm just getting started, but basically it's this -

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8086_zps315c8f45.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8086_zps315c8f45.jpg.html)


Looks like a variation of a Coleman dual action / pro link or allstar three link - very cool. I've been looking at the possibility of utilizing shock bushings with the LD 3-link but the reality is it would take some alone time with the OLC so it will have to wait a while.

Can't go wrong with support from Ron - I have to get in touch with him in the new year and see if we can't put something together with my car for the short term...

Great to see progress being made!

[Blake Foster]

Hi Bryan,



Ron Myer already had the housing. I do not think they are available anymore. When I provide housings, we use Speedway Engineering Floaters.




Yes if there is interest in the housing they can be produced still. They are complicated to get all the parts together but we can still do it. if your interested call Speedtech Performance.

[Ron Sutton]

Hi James,

Looks like a variation of a Coleman dual action / pro link or allstar three link - very cool.
The Coleman dual action 3rd link (Top link) is actually a decoupled 3-link, where one link is an accel link & the other is the decel link. I like Coleman & work with them often, but I'm not a fan of how they did their dual action decoupled 3-link. They designed it backwards & upside down from what I think of as a standard or optimum design decoupled 3-link.

They did so with good reasons ...
1. To be different in the marketplace
2. So it fit common oval track chassis mounts with no modifications.

Unfortunately I don't have good photos of my two models of decoupled 3-links. Payton King will be installing the decoupled 3-link he got from me here in the coming year & that will show the orientation of the accel & decel links.

I've been looking at the possibility of utilizing shock bushings with the LD 3-link but the reality is it would take some alone time with the OLC so it will have to wait a while.
I think you would like it. The bushings help high powered car's with TW200 tires for sure. The torque absorber I have on a different client's car uses TW200 tires, a twin turbo LS & the torque absorber I tailored for him has softer bushings & more of them. I have his engineered to compress all the bushings 1-1/8" under hard acceleration ... to really soften the shock & plant the rear tires. Now he is full throttle by corner exit. There is more to it than this ... specifically how long we make the the top link lever to define the "lift & load" percentage.

Can't go wrong with support from Ron - I have to get in touch with him in the new year and see if we can't put something together with my car for the short term...
I'd love to work with you on your hot rod. Contact me when you're ready.

Great to see progress being made!

We'll post up some progress pics next week.


:cheers:

[rustomatic]

That biscuit bar looks familiar, but much nicer than mine. I recently swapped my biscuit bar out for a straight shaft/tube, because one of the multitude of joints always seemed to work its way loose after a bit of street driving/track thrashing, creating a horrifically irritating screech/vibe. Granted, I'm no skilled builder, and my tubing sizes have probably just not been containing enough thread engagement or something.

I'd like to re-enlist the biscuit bar eventually, because it very clearly worked overtime at all kinds of frequencies of axle movement--is there a secret to keeping all the threaded joints happy (with or without Locktite)?

I can see Ron's setup working its way onto a lot of future hotrods, because it's basic, strong, and has clearly included "awesome sauce" in the recipe...

[Flash68]

I can see Ron's setup working its way onto a lot of future hotrods, because it's basic, strong, and has clearly included "awesome sauce" in the recipe...

And the Sutton secret awesome hot sauce sprinkled on cheese balls can make even Ron Myers (TBD) and Sieg (already determined) FAST... just ask Sieg. :rules:

http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff245/flash68/photo_zpsc249ce00.jpg (http://s236.photobucket.com/user/flash68/media/photo_zpsc249ce00.jpg.html)

[Ron in SoCal]

^ creative editing right there :secret: :D

:cheers: Davey

[MillerBuilt]

I can't wait to watch this, as I'm interested in Ron's setup as well. I have a question about the housing below, specifically the brakes. That looks a lot like the setup Speedtech (I think it was them) was putting together a couple of years ago which used the C6 bearing as an alternative to a full-floating brake setup. Can you give any more specifics?

Doesn't DSE sell a version too? I remember Tommy had a version right before Steilow released his version. Interesting kit if you want a floater.

I know DSE had one in development. Not sure if they worked with Mark on that but wouldn't be surprised. Looking at Mark's, I really like the improvements he made in the axle end placement.

The one above is derived from Tom's original design, I think. I had heard a couple of different versions of that story. He did not manufacture the housing ends as far as I know.

DSE is in development of one, but they are currently only selling the Baer floater as far as I have been told.


First off, nice stuff Ron!

Second off, sorry in advance for self promotion below but couldn't resist (would almost give you a set if you want to cut off those proprietary units you have now:slingshot:)

Thirdly, I think this car may actually need/justify a set of my fabricated steel C6 Uprights :popcorn2:


For what its worth in regards to above responses, I am machining a few sets next week of this type rear setup (C6 Flange end), and could easily machine a few more if anyone is interested....

Ok, back to Ron's build!

[Ron Sutton]

And the Sutton secret awesome hot sauce sprinkled on cheese balls can make even Ron Myers (TBD) and Sieg (already determined) FAST... just ask Sieg. :rules:

http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff245/flash68/photo_zpsc249ce00.jpg (http://s236.photobucket.com/user/flash68/media/photo_zpsc249ce00.jpg.html)

Aren't those YOUR cheeseballs ... Cheesball? :stirthepot:

[Ron Sutton]

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8086_zps315c8f45.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8086_zps315c8f45.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/Track-StarOffset3-Link-Camaro_zps341c116c.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/Track-StarOffset3-Link-Camaro_zps341c116c.jpg.html)

Quick tech updates on this 3-link ...

A. With all 4-link, centered 3-link, torque arm, leaf spring & truck arm rear suspensions ... we experience a degree of "torque steer" ... where the left rear tire receives more loading ... and more grip ... under corner acceleration. This makes cars tighter on the exit of LH corners & looser exit of RH corners.

B. In an offset 3-link, we offset the top link to the passenger side a specific amount to eliminate torque steer, so the tire loading & grip are equal on both LH & RH corner exits.

C. The amount to offset the top link is based on calculations I do involving the friction in the rear end assembly & track width.

D. I do a lot of 3-links for racers where the top link is a typical tube with no torque absorber. If you have plenty of tire for the power output, they work fine. The torque absorber top link ... does just what its name implies ... absorbs some of the initial torque when the driver cracks the throttle. This softens the "hit" or "shock" to the rear tires ... which is especially helpful to tires of low profile, stiff sidewall, radial, harder rubber (58+ duro) ... or some combination of these designs.

E. I work out the durometer/spring rate of poly bushings to use ... and the number of bushings ... based on the power, gearing, length of upper mount, angle of top link, car weight & tires used in each application. I have 32 different combinations. For Ron Myers' track car ... with slicks, we only use 2 accel bushings & 1 decel bushing. All 3 are 80 durometer. The 2 accel bushings will compress about .70" with 1050# of force.

F. The top link mount you see clamped to the round tube is a top link screw adjuster. In Ron's car, a small aluminum rod with an upside down aluminum cone will pass through a bushing in his sheetmetal structure above the 3-link & behind the roll cage main hoop. Ron will be able to fine tune the top link angle easily with a 1/2" ratchet dropped into that cone. It is fine tunable as 3 full turns is 1 degree of top link angle change.

G. On track or autocross days when the track surface is not very grippy (too cold, too hot, dusty, old asphalt, etc) Ron can adjust the top link down in the front (increasing the top link angle) to add more initial grip. If you go too far & it pushes on exit ... simply raise it back up some.
* On really grippy days, too much down angle will provide initial bite but get the back end loose near the end of the corner exit. In this case, the tuner adjusts the front of the top link up until the "late loose" condition goes away.

H. If a tuner gets too greedy going for initial grip ... by lowering the front of the top link too far ... the car will start to get free or loose on entry. With a quick-n-easy adjuster like this, Ron can tune for optimum balance without ever getting under the car.

I. One of THE most important design points on any link suspension is ... how long are the "levers" ... which is what the upper & lower housing brackets really are. The length of the upper & lower housing brackets determine how the rear end's rotational torque is distributed.

J. Just to help understand what we're dealing with ... a car with 550# of torque, a 2nd gear ratio of 1.76, rear gear ratio of 3.70 puts almost 3600# of torque attempting to rotate the housing (exiting a corner in 2nd gear).

K. With this Camaro, the lower link mounts 5.5" below the axle CL & the upper link mounts 5" above the axle CL. That ratio puts 52% of this 3600# torque through the lower links pushing the chassis forward ... puts 48% through the top link pulling up ... lifting the chassis & loading the rear tires. This ratio matters MORE than anti-squat, but is rarely understood.

L. Yes, a car can have too much or too little "lift & load" ratio. It all comes down to the power, gearing, car weight & tires. Every car has a different "optimum set-up."

M. I have had occasional guys tell me they tried torque absorbers & it didn't work for them. They didn't understand the "lift & load" ratio ... and didn't understand the torque absorber bushing package has to be matched well to the "lift & load ratio."


:cheers:

[carbuff]

As always, love the detailed explanation Ron! One simple question...

If the top link comes all the way up to the roll bar of the car, how will / do you isolate it from the outside of the car? It will pass through a firewall where the rear seat was, but given that you want internal access to adjust it, where would you seal off the rear firewall to isolate the interior of the car?

Probably a simple answer that I'm just not thinking of at the moment...

[Ron Sutton]

As always, love the detailed explanation Ron! One simple question...

If the top link comes all the way up to the roll bar of the car, how will / do you isolate it from the outside of the car? It will pass through a firewall where the rear seat was, but given that you want internal access to adjust it, where would you seal off the rear firewall to isolate the interior of the car?

Probably a simple answer that I'm just not thinking of at the moment...

Hi Bryan,
Great question. there are three different ways we have done what you're asking about. The original illustration I provided Ron Myers (that he posted) did not show how we do that. The illustration at the bottom shows the option Ron Myers choose.

In this case, Mike Tolle of Tolle Fab will build the upright tube that the top link adjuster clamps to (light blue bar in the illustration) ... with a bottom curve in it. This curved tube butts & welds to the back side of the 2"x3" crossmember. There is horizontal cross bar from one leg of the main hoop to the other. It is also curved to set it back. The upright tube attaches to this horizontal cross bar. You can see them both (light blue) in the illustration.

We do this to set the upright tube & the toplink adjuster back behind the main hoop. Then the green dotted line shows where the aluminum sheet metal work goes ... sealing the rear suspension off from the cockpit. The top link adjuster sticks through the sheet metal with a special bushing. It is just behind the passenger seat (remember ... the top link is offset) for easy access & tuning.

Make sense?



.

[Ron in SoCal]

Way to bring it Ron!

Happy New Year :cheers:

[Vegas69]

I'd like to see one modification to the design. A major adjustment available to the driver. He'll clearly be out of excuses when this one hits the road in his golden years. :lmao:

[Flash68]

Aren't those YOUR cheeseballs ... Cheesball? :stirthepot:




Nope. Weld brought em... and he went home with em. What happened in between is anyone's guess. :hitaxeonthehead:

[Ron Sutton]

Nope. Weld brought em... and he went home with em. What happened in between is anyone's guess. :hitaxeonthehead:

Suuure he did.

But HEY ... it's your story. You tell it however you want. :stirthepot:

[carbuff]

Make sense?


.

Got it... Makes perfect sense.

One other question while I'm here... From a top-view, are the 2 lower arms parallel to each other, or do you angle them inward towards the front of the car? You have likely touched on this in a post somewhere. I'm not sure if anyone else makes them this way, but the Lateral Dynamics 3-link that a few cars here ran angled the LCA's inward as they went forward. I'm not sure if I've ever known what the reason for that was...

[Ron in SoCal]

^ Bryan great question and one of the reasons I picked Ron's 3 link design as his are parallel. Early on I sent Ron web pics of the LD design. Ron pointed out that the angle of the LCAs would induce rear roll steer: good for rotating the rear on an autoX, not so good for high speed corners. Further, the higher speed the more roll steer induced. Now, I'm no expert but I'm thinking ideally that's not what I'd want. Better IMO to put in a rear suspension that keeps the rear planted as best as possible, tune the front for turn in and mid corner balance and let the rear compliment it. Obviously everything else plays into it (shocks, sways, balance and tuning), but that's what made sense to me.

I really like the LD fit and finish, but also think Ron's design is an improvement.

[Ron in SoCal]

First off, nice stuff Ron!

Second off, sorry in advance for self promotion below but couldn't resist (would almost give you a set if you want to cut off those proprietary units you have now:slingshot:)

Thirdly, I think this car may actually need/justify a set of my fabricated steel C6 Uprights :popcorn2:


For what its worth in regards to above responses, I am machining a few sets next week of this type rear setup (C6 Flange end), and could easily machine a few more if anyone is interested....

Ok, back to Ron's build!

Good stuff Jay!

I'd like to see one modification to the design. A major adjustment available to the driver. He'll clearly be out of excuses when this one hits the road in his golden years. :lmao:

Dude, the longer the build the more time to reload on excuses. Just ask Weld. :D

:cheers:

[GregWeld]

^ Bryan great question and one of the reasons I picked Ron's 3 link design as his are parallel. Early on I sent Ron web pics of the LD design. Ron pointed out that the angle of the LCAs would induce rear roll steer: good for rotating the rear on an autoX, not so good for high speed corners. Further, the higher speed the more roll steer induced. Now, I'm no expert but I'm thinking ideally that's not what I'd want. Better IMO to put in a rear suspension that keeps the rear planted as best as possible, tune the front for turn in and mid corner balance and let the rear compliment it. Obviously everything else plays into it (shocks, sways, balance and tuning), but that's what made sense to me.

I really like the LD fit and finish, but also think Ron's design is an improvement.




You and Gaetano need to get together and coordinate your excuses why I passed you both on leaf springs and skinny tires. LOL

[Ron in SoCal]

^ right on queue :lol:

[Track Junky]

You and Gaetano need to get together and coordinate your excuses why I passed you both on leaf springs and skinny tires. LOL

Your not the only car still on leaf springs Mario.

You shouldn't have any problem passing Ron. Just be sure to have the back bumper back on your car when I'm pushing you passed him. :lol:

[Ron in SoCal]

Your not the only car still on leaf springs Mario.

You shouldn't have any problem passing Ron. Just be sure to have the back bumper back on your car when I'm pushing you passed him. :lol:

Nutttin' wrong with bump drafting but be careful what you wish for.

:welcome3:

[Track Junky]

Nutttin' wrong with bump drafting but be careful what you wish for.

:welcome3:

:BlahBlah:

[Vegas69]

In all seriousness, the front of these old cars is usually the major weakness, not the back. I think this is great to maximize your rear dynamics but you better make the carpet match the drapes.

[FETorino]

It's got a JRS designed C6 suspension with fabricated frame rails. Came out pretty good.

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/IMG_0717_zps306a8f1c.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/IMG_0717_zps306a8f1c.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/IMG_0725_zps76c46467.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/IMG_0725_zps76c46467.jpg.html)


In all seriousness, the front of these old cars is usually the major weakness, not the back. I think this is great to maximize your rear dynamics but you better make the carpet match the drapes.

I hear you Todd. :knokwood:

Ron always preaches that we are always chasing front end grip and often looking to reduce rear grip to match. Up front is a JRS front end. C6 spindles and coilovers like almost every other aftermarket subframe but is a conventional low travel high roll deal.

Are the Ron's making any changes to that or leaving it as it was when Dave and I picked it up in Maine and delivered it to Ron and Brian in OC.:popcorn2:

[GregWeld]

I see he's running the same rear tires I run all around mine....

[Vince@Meanstreets]

^ Bryan great question and one of the reasons I picked Ron's 3 link design as his are parallel. Early on I sent Ron web pics of the LD design. Ron pointed out that the angle of the LCAs would induce rear roll steer: good for rotating the rear on an autoX, not so good for high speed corners. Further, the higher speed the more roll steer induced. Now, I'm no expert but I'm thinking ideally that's not what I'd want. Better IMO to put in a rear suspension that keeps the rear planted as best as possible, tune the front for turn in and mid corner balance and let the rear compliment it. Obviously everything else plays into it (shocks, sways, balance and tuning), but that's what made sense to me.

I really like the LD fit and finish, but also think Ron's design is an improvement.

There was a huge thread (2002) on CC when Mark was doing his design and they acutally angled the lower links uphill to counter act the roll steer. There was a bunch of adjustiblity with the set up.

I believe it was discussed that it was optimum to run the link parallel to keep the car going straight.

[Ron in SoCal]

In all seriousness, the front of these old cars is usually the major weakness, not the back. I think this is great to maximize your rear dynamics but you better make the carpet match the drapes.

I hear you Todd. :knokwood:

Ron always preaches that we are always chasing front end grip and often looking to reduce rear grip to match. Up front is a JRS front end. C6 spindles and coilovers like almost every other aftermarket subframe but is a conventional low travel high roll deal.

Are the Ron's making any changes to that or leaving it as it was when Dave and I picked it up in Maine and delivered it to Ron and Brian in OC.:popcorn2:


First of all I hate that f'n pic.

Turn in is good on my 69 but it needs work. Rear roll center is too high, front to rear TRS is off. I think David Pozzi's recipe falls right in line with what Ron S looks for, more caster than KPI.

I had Jake build in 10* of caster (to be verified) on this sub. Will any first gen Camaro out perform a modern c6? Nope. Weight, weight distribution, aero, million$ in GM engineering. Can it get better than I've seen so far on my 69? Ron has measured it out and thinks so. 500 lbs lighter, so that's the plan.

[Vince@Meanstreets]

First of all I hate that f'n pic.

Turn in is good on my 69 but it needs work. Rear roll center is too high, front to rear TRS is off. I think David Pozzi's recipe falls right in line with what Ron S looks for, more caster than KPI.

I had Jake build in 10* of caster (to be verified) on this sub. Will any first gen Camaro out perform a modern c6? Nope. Weight, weight distribution, aero, million$ in GM engineering. Can it get better than I've seen so far on my 69? Ron has measured it out and thinks so. 500 lbs lighter, so that's the plan.

Is he having you changing the UCA mount position on that sub? :poke:

[FETorino]

First of all I hate that f'n pic.

Turn in is good on my 69 but it needs work. Rear roll center is too high, front to rear TRS is off. I think David Pozzi's recipe falls right in line with what Ron S looks for, more caster than KPI.

I had Jake build in 10* of caster (to be verified) on this sub. Will any first gen Camaro out perform a modern c6? Nope. Weight, weight distribution, aero, million$ in GM engineering. Can it get better than I've seen so far on my 69? Ron has measured it out and thinks so. 500 lbs lighter, so that's the plan.

:rolleyes:

Even with more caster the front still has minimal travel and a steep camber gain to go with the low travel. Plus the front end lacks any of the real adjustability for tuning such as Ron is building into the rear.

Are you planning on having Ron rework the front clip to make it as tunable as the rear or to allow for a true long travel low roll set up?

500lbs lighter than the 69:headscratch: How much does DP weigh? Did you ever scale her?

:cheers:

[fleetus macmullitz]

First of all I hate that f'n pic.


Photoshop is your friend, my friend.

:D



Enjoying the tech in this thread. :thumbsup:

[Vince@Meanstreets]

Not sure what you have against Dead pool that you hate that pic.:rolleyes:

Even with more caster the front still has minimal travel and a steep camber gain to go with the low travel. Plus the front end lacks any of the real adjustability for tuning such as Ron is building into the rear.

Are you planning on having Ron rework the front clip to make it as tunable as the rear or to allow for a true long travel low roll set up?

500lbs lighter than the 69:headscratch: How much does DP weigh? Did you ever scale her?

:cheers:

Would not be too hard, just time = expensive.

Ron knows where the rear roll will be and its range, so matching the front would not be too bad. Set the front to an optimum RC height while controlling IC's IIRC the change will be in the upper control arm length and mounting position. The LCA and spindle are set.

[Ron Sutton]

Got it... Makes perfect sense.

One other question while I'm here... From a top-view, are the 2 lower arms parallel to each other, or do you angle them inward towards the front of the car? You have likely touched on this in a post somewhere. I'm not sure if anyone else makes them this way, but the Lateral Dynamics 3-link that a few cars here ran angled the LCA's inward as they went forward. I'm not sure if I've ever known what the reason for that was...

Technically they are considered parallel lower links, but they are a smidge (1/8" each side) narrower in the front. This is to insure the outside lower link is never pushing the rear end towards the outside of the corner, under acceleration.

[Ron Sutton]

You and Gaetano need to get together and coordinate your excuses why I passed you both on leaf springs and skinny tires. LOL

^ right on queue :lol:

Your not the only car still on leaf springs Mario.

You shouldn't have any problem passing Ron. Just be sure to have the back bumper back on your car when I'm pushing you passed him. :lol:

Nutttin' wrong with bump drafting but be careful what you wish for.

:welcome3:



^^ This is hilarious. You guys need your own TV show. :popcorn2:

[CraigS]

As the top link changes length that will change pinion angle. There is so much discussion about getting that angle correct, I wonder what the effect is of it changing every time the gas pedal moves. Educate me please.

[Ron Sutton]

In all seriousness, the front of these old cars is usually the major weakness, not the back. I think this is great to maximize your rear dynamics but you better make the carpet match the drapes.

Yup!

[gerno]

What's the plan to laterally locate the axle. I assume a Watts. Do you have any pics of this piece and how it sits within the total rear package?

[Flash68]

You sure about that? Payton thought the same thing.... :peepwall:

It's got a JRS designed C6 suspension with fabricated frame rails. Came out pretty good.

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/IMG_0717_zps306a8f1c.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/IMG_0717_zps306a8f1c.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/IMG_0725_zps76c46467.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/IMG_0725_zps76c46467.jpg.html)

[Ron Sutton]

Hi Craig !

As the top link changes length that will change pinion angle. There is so much discussion about getting that angle correct, I wonder what the effect is of it changing every time the gas pedal moves. Educate me please.


First, just a reminder that this is a track car, not a cruiser.

We run just enough static negative pinion angle that the driveline & pinion yoke are in line under hard acceleration ... which is always the goal with performance & race cars. The amount of static negative pinion angle required varies with each torque absorber application, but they are all in the 3°-5° range.

:trophy-1302:

[Ron Sutton]

Hi Steve!

What's the plan to laterally locate the axle. I assume a Watts. Do you have any pics of this piece and how it sits within the total rear package?

It will be a very trick watts link set-up with 6" of roll center adjustment. Photos will come when Mike Tolle is installing it.

:cheers:

[carbuff]

I thought I read this here in this thread, but I can't locate it at the moment... You (Ron) mentioned doing a rear axle with a 13" high upper link from the axle centerline. Looking at the side view of the axle being built here, based on these angles, that would go right through the crossmember for the rear coilovers. How do you deal with that?

Related question... If you draw a straight line between the upper and lower link mount points, it doesn't pass through the centerline of the rear axle. Why is this? Is there a specific reason that the 2 are located that way (behind the axle centerline)?

So many questions, I know... I am loving learning about these details, so thanx as always for sharing so generously!

[carbuff]

Technically they are considered parallel lower links, but they are a smidge (1/8" each side) narrower in the front. This is to insure the outside lower link is never pushing the rear end towards the outside of the corner, under acceleration.



Got it... Thanx!

[carbuff]

It's got a JRS designed C6 suspension with fabricated frame rails. Came out pretty good.
http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/IMG_0725_zps76c46467.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/IMG_0725_zps76c46467.jpg.html)


Did I read that you are looking at relocating the UCA mount points? Given how Jake builds these mounts, there is a bit of room to move the mount if you fill in the existing holes.

Also, adjusting caster and camber was relatively easy with this setup. Jake set mine up and machined spacers from 1" stock for the initial alignment. Eric and I used shims to adjust the alignment until we got to the point we wanted (based on Ron's specs), then Eric just machined a new set of spacers to those thicknesses. Worked out pretty well.

While I hate reading the story of Payton's project with Jake, I will say that the measurements on my subframe from Jake were pretty spot on when I recorded them for Ron. At least as accurate as I could measure them. Ron and I never discussed moving the UCA mounts, although I didn't present that as an option (and wouldn't really want to at this stage unless it would make a dramatic difference). Ron has all of my numbers along with one other JRS subframe I think, so I'm sure he will suggest the best changes as appropriate.

[FETorino]

You sure about that? Payton thought the same thing.... :peepwall:

It's got a JRS designed C6 suspension with fabricated frame rails. Came out pretty good.

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/IMG_0717_zps306a8f1c.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/IMG_0717_zps306a8f1c.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/IMG_0725_zps76c46467.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/IMG_0725_zps76c46467.jpg.html)




I guess it's a good thing we got it out of Jakes before he got in deeper. :knokwood:

It still seems with the Sutton designed offset three link with adjustable on the fly instant center and roll center out back and Jakes stuff up front the carpet won't match the drapes.

:cheers:

[Vince@Meanstreets]

I thought I read this here in this thread, but I can't locate it at the moment... You (Ron) mentioned doing a rear axle with a 13" high upper link from the axle centerline. Looking at the side view of the axle being built here, based on these angles, that would go right through the crossmember for the rear coilovers. How do you deal with that?

Related question... If you draw a straight line between the upper and lower link mount points, it doesn't pass through the centerline of the rear axle. Why is this? Is there a specific reason that the 2 are located that way (behind the axle centerline)?

So many questions, I know... I am loving learning about these details, so thanx as always for sharing so generously!

I think that maybe 13" from ground....or at least what im looking at in the picture Bryan.

The rearward offset mounting is used so you can get away with a longer links and to counter act leveraging. The longer the arms the better.

[carbuff]

I think that maybe 13" from ground....or at least what im looking at in the picture Bryan.

The rearward offset mounting is used so you can get away with a longer links and to counter act leveraging. The longer the arms the better.

Thanx Vince...

The comment I'm thinking of implied it was 13" above the axle centerline, and that the trunk was definitely sacrificed in that application. But since I can't find it at the moment, I could be completely wrong... :EmoteClueless:

[Ron in SoCal]

Fab progress. Mike Tolle has got the cross member located in the correct spot, from which everything else will be measured and installed.

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/EarlyFab1_zps5e1e671e.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/EarlyFab1_zps5e1e671e.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/EarlyFab7_zps0615fc14.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/EarlyFab7_zps0615fc14.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/EarlyFab15_zps5ba29afe.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/EarlyFab15_zps5ba29afe.jpg.html)

Next up is the frame rails:

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/Build%20Thread/EarlyFab4_zpsc4e09341.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/Build%20Thread/EarlyFab4_zpsc4e09341.jpg.html)

:superhack:

[Ron Sutton]

Hi Bryan !

I thought I read this here in this thread, but I can't locate it at the moment... You (Ron) mentioned doing a rear axle with a 13" high upper link from the axle centerline. Looking at the side view of the axle being built here, based on these angles, that would go right through the crossmember for the rear coilovers. How do you deal with that?

Related question... If you draw a straight line between the upper and lower link mount points, it doesn't pass through the centerline of the rear axle. Why is this? Is there a specific reason that the 2 are located that way (behind the axle centerline)?

So many questions, I know... I am loving learning about these details, so thanx as always for sharing so generously!

You probably read that 13" number in a different thread. Yes, for an autocross client with a twin turbo LS on 200TW tires ... we placed the top link mount 13" above the rear axle CL. It has amazing grip.

One of THE most important design points on any link suspension is ... how long are the "levers" ... which is what the upper & lower housing brackets really are. The length of the upper & lower housing brackets determine how the rear end's rotational torque is distributed. Just to help understand what we're dealing with ... a car with 550# of torque, a 2nd gear ratio of 1.76 & rear gear ratio of 3.70 puts almost 3600# of torque attempting to rotate the housing (exiting a corner in 2nd gear).

How that torque is distributed through the upper & lower link housing brackets is called torque distribution. The upper link lifts the chassis & loads the tires ... while the lower links simply push the chassis forward. This ratio matters MORE than anti-squat, but is rarely understood.

With Ron Myer's Camaro, the lower link mounts 5.5" below the axle CL & the upper link mounts 5" above the axle CL. That ratio puts 52% of this 3600# torque through the lower links pushing the chassis forward ... puts 48% through the top link pulling up ... lifting the chassis & loading the rear tires. This will be excellent with the slicks he plans to run.

With my client's car that has the upper link 13" above axle CL ... he wanted killer, mean grip ... on 200TW tires ... for running Goodguys & USCA/Optima. So his top link is 13" above the rear axle CL. Yes ... well up into the trunk area. Ron has different tires (slicks) & different priorities. Ron wanted the most grip possible while keeping the factory trunk floor intact. My other client wanted the ultimate grip possible with 200TW tires. I help my clients achieve their individual goals by tailoring the "lift & load" ratio.

To answer your other question, the centerline of mounting points do not to run through the axle centerline. The farther back we make the top mount, the more leverage we are giving the top link to "lift & load".

:trophy-1302:

[Ron Sutton]

It still seems with the Sutton designed offset three link with adjustable on the fly instant center and roll center out back and Jakes stuff up front the carpet won't match the drapes.

:cheers:

Hey Rob! Great to hear from you. I hope your time frees up in the near future.

As you may have heard me say a bajillion times, we can not go faster through the corner that the front end has grip. That is typically our limiting factor. I say "typically" because it is not very difficult to get the rear tire grip to match the front ... in most cars ... to achieve neutral, balanced handling. We simply need to tune the rear grip up or down to match the front grip ... for this neutral handling. If we don't, then we have a loose or pushy car.

Do I feel this will be the fastest front suspension design? No. But it's pretty good. I advised Ron against replacing it ... more as an exercise in cost vs gain. I can't speak for Ron Myers ... but I understand his goal to have a fast, fun track car without breaking the bank. It would cost $12k (parts & labor) to cut off & replace the JRS clip with my latest long arm/zero scrub design. The lap times would be measurably better ... but is spending $12k after already having this built worth that gain? I think each person has to make that decision, but I suggested he finish the car with the current front suspension and go have fun with it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On a different note ... and just for educational sake ...
With a few minor exceptions, the rear suspension design has no impact on mid-corner "roll through zone" grip or corner speed capability.

I just heard a lot people say, "What?" :confused18:

The factors that DO play a roll on mid-corner "roll through zone" grip & corner speed capability are:

CG, Roll Center & Track Width
Mechanical Roll Resistance: Spring & Sway Bar Rates
Shock Valving


Whether you have a 3-link, 4-link, 196-link, IRS, torque arm, truck arm, etc ... is irrelevant to mid-corner "roll through zone" grip & corner speed capability … because there is no torque (engine or braking) being put through the rear suspension during the mid-corner "roll through zone." The few minor exceptions to this, are if the rear tires have camber, toe or rear steer from the rear suspension design. Those items can affect mid-corner "roll through zone" grip & corner speed capability. Another exception is rear suspension bind … which can have an obvious, negative effect on handling. But frankly, all of these … camber, toe or rear steer … and even suspension bind … are possible with most suspension designs.

So why do we care what rear suspension design we run?
Corner entry & corner exit.

The choice of rear suspension design … and the key details in the rear suspension design … all play a role in how much rear grip the car has on corner entry (turn-in & braking) and corner exit (steering unwind & throttle roll on).

While there are a lot of details (18 to be exact) in optimizing a solid axle link suspension, the biggies during design, or purchase selection, are:
1. Articulation
2. Torque Distribution
3. Instant Center
4. Packaging
5. Pinion Angle Change
6. Rear Roll Center
7. Adjustability

Articulation is the amount of angle differential the housing can achieve from the chassis. Maybe not so obvious ... but we need the rear housing to articulate at least as far as the chassis needs to roll. This matters more if you're running a conventional suspension strategy that rolls 3° or more. This is less of an issue if you're running a modern low roll suspension strategy that rolls around 1°.

Torque Distribution is not understood by most. We've been trained (wrongly) to just look at anti-squat for our rear tire loading geometry. But when you attach suspension link brackets to a live axle with torque coming through it ... the link brackets become levers ... and the location completely affects how much of the torque is pushing the lower links & car forward ... and how much of the torque is lifting the chassis & loading the rear tires for grip. This is CRITICAL for optimum forward bite on corner exit ... especially with harder TW200 tires. 3-links & 4-links ... if room above the housing allows the brackets to be tall ... allow optimum torque distribution for grip. Offset 3-links allow optimum torque distribution side-to-side ... for zero torque steer ... allowing equal handling on LH & RH corners. The Offset, Decoupled 3-link offers separate & optimum tuning for corner entry & corner exit grip.

The Instant Center is your rear suspension pivot point as well as the point it picks up on the chassis to load the tires. Where it is in relation to the CG is very important. Too short & it will lose traction late on corner exit. Too long and it will spin the tires upon initial throttle roll on. This needs to be tunable & optimized to your car. I typically start with it under the CG & fine tune for track conditions.

Packaging in the PT world is probably at the top of the list. When someone is asking for my recommendation for their car ... the first I ask is, "Are you keeping the rear seat?" If the answer is yes, we should eliminate all three versions of the 3-link ... because where they really need to mount conflicts with the rear seat. Frankly so do parallel 4-links, unless the top links are ridiculously low & short. If the back seat stays ... the triangulated 4-link & Torque Arm suspensions are the best of what will fit & allow a back seat. If the back seat goes & we can remodel the sheet metal in the rear floor & trunk area... it's wide open. 3-links & 4-links allow optimum torque distribution for grip. 3-Links offer the most articulation. Offset 3-links allow optimum torque distribution for zero torque steer ... allowing equal handling on LH & RH corners. The Offset, Decoupled 3-link offers separate & optimum tuning ... for the ultimate grip on corner entry & corner exit.

Pinion Angle Change happens greater when the top links & lower links are short or have a large difference in length. It also happens with weak/soft leaf springs & lots of power. It's not the end of the world. You just have to plan & deal with it.

Rear Roll Center adjustment ... to me, from my experience, for track tuning ... is one of the easiest, more predictable tuning devices you can ever have to help balance & neutralize the handling of the car. It's simple. Raise it to free the rear end up. Lower it for more rear grip. Don't go outside the sweet spots. Having a rear suspension with no adjustment for the rear roll center really ties your hands. It eliminates one of the best tuning devices out of your tool box. You can run a double adjustable panhard bar or adjustable Watts link with any suspension but IRS. Yes ... even leafs & triangulated 4-links.

Adjustability is KING for track cars. if you can adjust the instant center height & distance ... adjust lower links for rear steer ... adjust the rear roll center ... you have a rear suspension you can optimize for your car. Not adjustable? How do you optimize it?

Lastly, all rear suspension designs are a compromise for corner entry grip versus corner exit grip ... with the exception of a decoupled 3-Link. (See illustration below) With IRS & all link style suspensions the geometry needs are different for corner exit & entry. So your goal is to find the best, fastest "compromise" ... which is the best grip available on corner exit without making the car loose on corner entry.

The exception is the decoupled 3-link ... because we can set the accel link for optimum corner exit grip ... with no affects on corner entry. Conversely, we can set the decel link for optimum corner entry grip with no affects on corner exit. Because they decoupled from each other. But everything has it's cons. The decoupled 3-link takes up a lot of room behind the roll cage main hoop ... and rides rougher (like it has a stiffer spring rate).

Summary:
• The highest performance rear suspension for track purposes is the Offset, Decoupled 3-Link.
• Next would be the Offset 3-Link.
• Next would be a regular centered 3-Link or 4-link (as long as articulation is not an issue).
• None of these will fit well under a seat, unless the top links are super short (not recommended).
• The best that fit under the seat are triangulated 4-links & torque arms.
• Regardless of choice ... make them adjustable ... as well as the rear roll center.


:cheers:

[Ron Sutton]

I think that maybe 13" from ground....or at least what im looking at in the picture Bryan.

The rearward offset mounting is used so you can get away with a longer links and to counter act leveraging. The longer the arms the better.

Hey Vince. Bryan was referring to a different client of mine. Ron Myers' top link mount is 5" above axle CL ... so around 17.6" above ground.

But I've done one with the top link mount over 25" above ground. :gitrdun:

[Vince@Meanstreets]

Hey Vince. Bryan was referring to a different client of mine. Ron Myers' top link mount is 5" above axle CL ... so around 17.6" above ground.

But I've done one with the top link mount over 25" above ground. :gitrdun:




ok, thanks ron. teaches me to butt in. :knokwood:

[Ron Sutton]

ok, thanks ron. teaches me to butt in. :knokwood:

LOL. No worries. It is an extreme set-up.

Take care !

[glassman]

Fab progress. Mike Tolle has got the cross member located in the correct spot, from which everything else will be measured and installed.

Is he in Tracy, up here?

[Ron Sutton]

Hi Mike,


Is he in Tracy, up here?

Tolle Fab ... owner Mike Tolle ... is in Gold River, CA ... same as my shop ... which is a suburb of Sacramento. His shop is literally 2 blocks away from my shop. Since I don't wrench or fab on cars myself ... Tolle is one of four alliances I use here in California for my client's projects.

I use Tolle Fab for high quality fabrication work … like roll bars, cages, mounting seats, pedals, steering, fuel cells, etc. … installing my Track-Star Front Frame & Suspension … or Track-Star rear suspensions. Most racers know him by his last name "Tolle".

Tolle is a very talented race car fabricator. He's a veteran race car builder from the road racing & sports car world. He has … and still builds … high end road race cars for Tudor/IMSA, Pirelli World Challenge, Porsche Cup, Daytona Prototypes, etc.

:cheers:

[glassman]

Hey Ron, it was another guy with almost the same name, in Tracy, a friend of a few good friends. Also a wonder fabricator.

But where apprx is Gold River? 50 or 80? Never mind, just above Rancho Cordova.....50, nice area

[Flash68]

Is this done yet or what?

[GregWeld]

Is this done yet or what?

..... Not until there's enough spares to build half a dozen more cars....

[fleetus macmullitz]

Is this done yet or what?

..... Not until there's enough spares to build half a dozen more cars....

Ya'll jes gellazzz of Camaro Ron...

[Ron in SoCal]

You guys are killin' it!

Pics tomorrow :D

[DBasher]

You guys are killin' it!

Pics tomorrow :D

Is it tomorrow yet??

[jarhead]

This is going to be Killer Ron!:thumbsup:

The humor is an added bonus.

Joe

[Rick D]

You guys are killin' it!

Pics tomorrow :D

Ummm just sayin :poke: :thumbsup:

[fleetus macmullitz]

Our buddy, Camaro Ron, didn't want any focus drawn away from the GNRS by posting the massive update he has planned.

:popcorn2:

[Ron in SoCal]

Is it tomorrow yet??

This is going to be Killer Ron!:thumbsup:

The humor is an added bonus.

Joe

Ummm just sayin :poke: :thumbsup:

Our buddy, Camaro Ron, didn't want any focus drawn away from the GNRS by posting the massive update he has planned.

:popcorn2:

Just got back into town last night. Here it comes:

vavIO0F-vEY

[Ron in SoCal]

When we last left off, Mike Tolle had the install measured out and the cross member located in place. I had ordered the Autoweld frame rails and really they could not help tell me which ones I needed, only after a bit of discussion about intended use and the car already has DSE mini tubs and subfr connectors installed their parallel rails should work. This is what we ended up with:

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8200_zps0mrh0wk1.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8200_zps0mrh0wk1.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8202_zpsuaz82vdv.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8202_zpsuaz82vdv.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8203_zpsoyuu029g.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8203_zpsoyuu029g.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8200_zpsmpz9eycf.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8200_zpsmpz9eycf.jpg.html)

You can see the fit. I don't much care, this is not a 100 point restoration. What I will need to do is get a custom tank. I'll make that decision later, but a fuel cell is very much on the table. More industrial strength pics:

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8213_zps2bteiteu.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8213_zps2bteiteu.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8220_zpsedf3ohcf.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8220_zpsedf3ohcf.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8220_zpsddlslcka.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8220_zpsddlslcka.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8208_zpsc1ladmfp.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8208_zpsc1ladmfp.jpg.html)

[Ron in SoCal]

Here's a look inside the car where the main hoop is:

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8204_zps9okbblo3.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8204_zps9okbblo3.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8205_zpsaovnfopl.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8205_zpsaovnfopl.jpg.html)

And outside looking in:

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8212_zpsojxogfyb.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8212_zpsojxogfyb.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8207_zpsj6eykvzw.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8207_zpsj6eykvzw.jpg.html)

That's all for now. I'm pretty sure there's more progress, so I'll start bugging Hot Sauce to go get me some pics!

:cheers:

[fleetus macmullitz]

Looks stout Ron. :thumbsup:

[Track Junky]

I don't see a problem with the fitment. Needed to go with the taller frame rails for the lower ride height and this is a race car anyways. How many times did we go back and forth and you telling me you weren't going to swap out the oem frame rails. Guess that's another point for me. Ha Ha.

Glad to see you went the RIGHT direction and the progress. :thumbsup:

[Ron in SoCal]

Looks stout Ron. :thumbsup:

LOL Skippah!

I don't see a problem with the fitment. Needed to go with the taller frame rails for the lower ride height and this is a race car anyways. How many times did we go back and forth and you telling me you weren't going to swap out the oem frame rails. Guess that's another point for me. Ha Ha.

Glad to see you went the RIGHT direction and the progress. :thumbsup:

Yep neither do I. Public website, so I thought I'd get ahead of that. For the record, I also said I wasn't gonna F with the pretty turnk sheet metal. Two points for you, Gae.

#becauseracecar :D :cheers:

[intocarss]

You can see the fit. I don't much care, this is not a 100 point restoration. What I will need to do is get a custom tank. I'll make that decision later, but a fuel cell is very much on the table. More industrial strength pics:

It should be the ONLY thing on the table :newbie:

[Track Junky]

It should be the ONLY thing on the table :newbie:

Ya Think!! :twak:

[intocarss]

Ya Think!! :twak: FACT!!

[jarhead]

Saaweeet!

[Flash68]

a fuel cell is very much on the table.

hmmmm... oh ya don't say. :bitchslap:


As opposed to a Kramerica Industries oil tanker bladder perhaps? :sieg:

http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff245/flash68/20130108-091656_zps6goudlwe.jpg (http://s236.photobucket.com/user/flash68/media/20130108-091656_zps6goudlwe.jpg.html)

[Vince@Meanstreets]

sweet ron, now tell them to add another 3" to that tub.

[Ron in SoCal]

It should be the ONLY thing on the table :newbie:

Ya Think!! :twak:

FACT!!


hmmmm... oh ya don't say. :bitchslap:


As opposed to a Kramerica Industries oil tanker bladder perhaps? :sieg:


ok Ok OK! :military:

I've been talking to Carl C about a sweet Vaporworks set up in a custom sized fuel cell. It's :G-Dub: though...

Saaweeet!

Thank you Sir!

[Ron in SoCal]

sweet ron, now tell them to add another 3" to that tub.

I knew you'd catch that Vin. Yep now there's room, but I've got about 14" already. Our buddy Gae says whose-yer-daddy 315s are plenty :confused59:

[Vince@Meanstreets]

You can never have enough space. Plus that's 4 extra lbs of sheet metal sitting idle.

What's a couple more hours and a coupe strips of 18gauge. LOL

:D

[Sieg]

Nice progress! :thumbsup:


Have you started accepting resumes from potential drivers yet?

[Ron in SoCal]

Not yet, but for sure I'm crossing Lotus drivers off the list :D

[Track Junky]

315's with slicks are definitely plenty. Think about how much more weight I have then you back there with the leaf springs, Fays 2 watts (35 lbs) and I cant get the rear to slide (with the Sutton secret sauce shocks).
295's up front if you can manage would be great also but Dave Brown and Karl Chicca have been doing pretty darn well with 275's and I imagine they're shock set up contributes to that.
335 in the rear with 200 tread wear tires I completely understand due to the amount of power these Optima Challenge cars lay down but I'm under the impression that this will be your track car and not auto x.
And again, why spend money on a custom tank when you can pic up a fuel cell. Aluminum fuel cell would be my preference as my 8 gallon steel is 26 lbs and I'm pretty sure you will go bigger.

[Sieg]

Not yet, but for sure I'm crossing Lotus drivers off the list :DThat's really going to hurt GW's feelings. :shakehead:

[Flash68]

Have you started accepting resumes from potential drivers yet?

Good idea, but why so soon? Those who are available now will be long retired by the time this thing hits a track... :tv_happy:

[Ron in SoCal]

315's with slicks are definitely plenty. Think about how much more weight I have then you back there with the leaf springs, Fays 2 watts (35 lbs) and I cant get the rear to slide (with the Sutton secret sauce shocks).
295's up front if you can manage would be great also but Dave Brown and Karl Chicca have been doing pretty darn well with 275's and I imagine they're shock set up contributes to that.
335 in the rear with 200 tread wear tires I completely understand due to the amount of power these Optima Challenge cars lay down but I'm under the impression that this will be your track car and not auto x.
And again, why spend money on a custom tank when you can pic up a fuel cell. Aluminum fuel cell would be my preference as my 8 gallon steel is 26 lbs and I'm pretty sure you will go bigger.

Thx G, good stuff! :cheers:

That's really going to hurt GW's feelings. :shakehead:

No it won't. He has a first Gen track car :lol:

Good idea, but why so soon? Those who are available now will be long retired by the time this thing hits a track... :tv_happy:

Voice of experience right there :D

[Vince@Meanstreets]

You don't have to add more tire just getting rid of unecassary fluff and making room for the unknowns. Exhaust, fuel system and I know it's always nice to have the just in case space.

Just saying it's easy to do now and why not push that tub out to the new frame rail.


Don't worry, these guys know what they are doing and should have it buttoned up sooner than you think.

[Sieg]

Don't worry, these guys know what they are doing and should have it buttoned up sooner than you think.
You know he's not happy unless his hair is on fire.

[SteveN69]

Looks good. Was there a reason you didn't fully remove the old "frame rails", and push the new ones out the the edge of the wheel tubs? It looks like the rail bends would have fit nicely with the floor if they were a few inches out. For Ron S., what sort of effect would having the top bar offset on the rearend, but angled toward the center of the car have on handling? Weird roll steer? I'm trying to think of packaging in a 2nd gen Camaro, with a rear seat, maybe split bottoms like a 4th gen Camaro uses.

[Blake Foster]

IMO that 2x4 cross member under the drive shaft is going to hit the ground it will also limit your droop on the rear end. it is so far ahead of the wheel and 4" below the rocker. just saying

[Ron Sutton]

Looks good. Was there a reason you didn't fully remove the old "frame rails", and push the new ones out the the edge of the wheel tubs? It looks like the rail bends would have fit nicely with the floor if they were a few inches out. For Ron S., what sort of effect would having the top bar offset on the rearend, but angled toward the center of the car have on handling? Weird roll steer? I'm trying to think of packaging in a 2nd gen Camaro, with a rear seat, maybe split bottoms like a 4th gen Camaro uses.

Hi Steve, I'll answer both of these ...

We made the frame rail placement decisions based on performance, not looks. In the end, when Mike Tolle does the sheet metal work, it will look sweet. But the frame rail location is optimum for the 3-link & shock mounts.

I'd better clarify three things ...
1. The shocks are more responsive (more grip) the farther out we place them. The ultimate location for the lower rear shock mounts is inside the rear wheel. I've done that many times, but you have to run a separate shock mount from the trailing arm mount.

2. The lighter the rear end assembly ... specifically out at the ends near the wheels ... the more responsive (more grip) the rear suspension is. For optimum grip, we want to pay attention to weight out at the wheel, including of course, the tire & wheel, brake system & any extra mounts.

3. When we mount the shock on the back of the trailing arm mounts ... and place the shock, trailing arm mounts & trailing arms ... outside the frame rails & next to the tire ... we can get dang close to ideal shock placement ... without having to weld a separate shock mount on the rear end. I have found this to be the optimum set-up.

Some simple math for sake of conversation ... if we put ...
A. 1" of clearance from tire to frame
B. 2" frame rail
C. 1" of clearance from frame to trailing arm
D. 3/4" to the center of the lower shock mount
... we have the lower shock mounted 4.75" away from the tire.

For Ron Myer's Camaro that would have put the:
* Frame width at 38"
* Shock Mounting width at 30.5"

On the other hand ... if we put ...
A. 1" of clearance from tire to trailing arm
B. 1/2" to the center of the lower shock mount
C. 1.75" of center of the shock mount/TA to frame
D. 2" frame rail
... we have the lower shock mounted 1.5" away from the tire.

For Ron Myer's Camaro that puts the:
* Frame width at 33.5"
* Shock Mounting width at 37"

Summary:
Whether the frame rails are 33.5" or 38" wide ... will have basically no effect on the handling of the car. But the lower shock mounts being 37" wide or 30.5" is a very big deal with a significant handling & grip gain to the wider option. So in other words, shock mounting width trumps frame width for performance.

-----------------------------

Your question: What sort of effect would having the top bar offset on the rearend, but angled toward the center of the car have on handling? Weird roll steer?

Not roll steer, but definitely torque steer. Which way you offset the top link ... with it angled back to the chassis centerline ... would determine which rear tire is loaded more, causing the car to drive harder off of one tire. Not suggested.


:cheers:

[Ron Sutton]

IMO that 2x4 cross member under the drive shaft is going to hit the ground it will also limit your droop on the rear end. it is so far ahead of the wheel and 4" below the rocker. just saying

Good eye Blake. With the car at ride height the crossmember "as it sits" would only have 2" of ground clearance. But Mike Tolle already planned to "trim" it down & re-box it.

:cheers:

[Ron Sutton]

Looks good. Was there a reason you didn't fully remove the old "frame rails", and push the new ones out the the edge of the wheel tubs? It looks like the rail bends would have fit nicely with the floor if they were a few inches out. For Ron S., what sort of effect would having the top bar offset on the rearend, but angled toward the center of the car have on handling? Weird roll steer? I'm trying to think of packaging in a 2nd gen Camaro, with a rear seat, maybe split bottoms like a 4th gen Camaro uses.

P.S. The old frame rails are fully removed ... now ... just not in the earlier photos.

[SteveN69]

Ron S. , Thanks so much for the informative reply. I realize this car is being built for serious track oriented use, and now I'm aware of how important shock/spring placement on the rearend is.
I really enjoy reading your forum posts, they are incredibly detailed, yet easily understandable for us non engineer types ( sometimes I do read them over 2 or 3 times though) Thanks for taking the time and sharing your wealth of knowledge, it's really appreciated.
Looking forward to the rest of this build.

[Ron in SoCal]

IMO that 2x4 cross member under the drive shaft is going to hit the ground it will also limit your droop on the rear end. it is so far ahead of the wheel and 4" below the rocker. just saying


Good eye Blake. With the car at ride height the crossmember "as it sits" would only have 2" of ground clearance. But Mike Tolle already planned to "trim" it down & re-box it.

:cheers:


Agreed and thanks for chiming in Blake. I've not yet seen the crossmember mod; Ron is measuring and building ground clearance at each fab step. Latest pics and a good example of ground clearance, Ron and Mike set up the subfr to connect and align with the work going on in the rear.

Trimmed down. I think Dave and Payton have run into this as well:
http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8323_zpswko7ldlt.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8323_zpswko7ldlt.jpg.html)

Which also had to trim the core support bushing:
http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8321_zps8tnnhb7z.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8321_zps8tnnhb7z.jpg.html)

And then we connected the sub with bolts and crush sleeves:
http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8319_zps4i5zeb3l.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8319_zps4i5zeb3l.jpg.html)

There's more progress, but I'm on the road and will speak with Mike by Friday.

:cheers:

[Ron in SoCal]

Lots and lots of pics of the watts and three links installed:

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8363_zps2xzouuef.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8363_zps2xzouuef.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8359_zps2xpon7zb.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8359_zps2xpon7zb.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8364_zpsg94a2o1x.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8364_zpsg94a2o1x.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8362_zpstvirhbha.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8362_zpstvirhbha.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8357_zpsxhofyfah.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8357_zpsxhofyfah.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8350_zps6dfhiqfx.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8350_zps6dfhiqfx.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8348_zpsuirrbxml.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8348_zpsuirrbxml.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8343_zpsgzpckop4.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8343_zpsgzpckop4.jpg.html)

[Ron in SoCal]

Moar...

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8346_zpspm2mskw8.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8346_zpspm2mskw8.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8347_zpsma7qciwr.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8347_zpsma7qciwr.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8341_zps75vimuip.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8341_zps75vimuip.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8332_zps1swrq7kw.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8332_zps1swrq7kw.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8342_zps4etyavek.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8342_zps4etyavek.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8329_zpsqnihvvmu.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8329_zpsqnihvvmu.jpg.html)

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac52/flash911/100_8328_zpspehzldn6.jpg (http://s885.photobucket.com/user/flash911/media/100_8328_zpspehzldn6.jpg.html)

There's a few little design gizmos in there I'll let Ron explain. This is the stuff that sold me on his design.

'Hot Sauce' went a little camera happy, but the pics are so cool I thought I'd post 'em all up! :cheers:

[GregWeld]

Hot sauce awesomeness!!!!

[Ron in SoCal]

Hot sauce awesomeness!!!!

Thanks G-Dub. Aren't you supposed to be lounging somewhere right about now? :D

Gaetano, Jerr Dog... notice the open trunk floor??

[GregWeld]

Thanks G-Dub. Aren't you supposed to be lounging somewhere right about now? :D

Gaetano, Jerr Dog... notice the open trunk floor??

Just woke up from my nap!!


Aloha from the Four Seasons in Wailea.

[jarhead]

insane!

[Track Junky]

Loving it Ron!! Keep plugging buddy!! :thumbsup:

[Greg from Aus]

Yep that looks OK Ron's ( both good and bad Ron ) :D :D

[Build-It-Break-it]

This set up is looking killer. Who's floater rear end are you running?

[Flash68]

I think you missed a few camera angles.... can we get moar?

[fleetus macmullitz]

#RMwinning

[GregWeld]

I think you missed a few camera angles.... can we get moar?




I got the new MOAR F1-20 MOA reticle in my NightForce B.E.A.S.T. scope.


I may use it to inspect the tolerances of the various suspension pieces in this over the top garage queen.

[Ron Sutton]

Answers to FAQ

1. The square tubing struts are simply for mock up purposes to simulate where the shock goes & hold the rear end at height.

2. The sub frame rails Ron Myers found from a company that makes a lot of frames rails … didn’t fit perfectly. With the front of rails against the floor & the back of the rails against the floor … there was a ¾” gap between the frame rails & the floor in the middle. Of the various installation options, the lowest priority was the middle. So there is a gap there.

3. The Watt’s Link bellcrank & links are just mock up pieces. The final bellcrank will look similar but be longer & use ½” bolts on the outer two rod ends & will be either the shiny aluminum you see of anodized bright black … Ron Myer’s choice.

4. The links will be powder coated black, but with one will have curves, not straight like the mock ups. The lower right link actually curves to form a slight S stepping forward … so there will be only a small ¼” spacer between the rod end & shock. Not the 3 big spacers shown in mock up.

5. The rod ends are heat treated chromoly wide body design. The ball rides on an injection molded nylafiber liner that is self lubricating & keeps the dust out. These are the best low maintenance rod ends & they do have about a pound of stiction. For pro race teams that clean & lube the rod ends after each event, we run a similar rod end without the nylafiber liner for zero stiction, but more maintenance.

6. I see a lot of Watt’s links where the bellcrank bolt attaches to a plate with holes. There are two major negatives to that strategy. One … if you have to jack the car up … unbolt the bellcrank … move it to a different hole … and rebolt it in … that takes time & work … and you are less likely to do that at the track as a common tuning tool. Second … by the nature of holes in a plate … the adjustments are somewhat coarse. Typically the holes are 3/4” to 1-1/2” apart. That is a big change. That would be ok if the car was out to lunch. But if the car is pretty good handling & we’re tuning for track changes … most times we need anywhere from a 1/8” change to 3/8”. Raising or lowering the roll center ½” is a bigger change than many guys might think.

7. Adjusting the rear roll center is … one of the best tools to balance the handling of a car for changing track conditions. It is … or at least should be … one the easiest tuning changes to make too. But only if the adjusters have been well thought out.

8. The adjuster for the bellcrank in my Track-Star Watt’s Links like Ron Myer’s here … provide a full 6” of quick & easy adjustment. The second photo from the top shows a bottom view shot … where you can see a hole in the billet steel framework & a threaded hole in the bellcrank center bolt. That allows us to utilize a non-loaded threaded rod in the assembly … with an aluminum cone on top or bottom for easy adjustment.

7. When we mount the adjuster cone on the bottom … the Tuner slides in under the car with a ½” ratchet (no socket) and adjusts the rear roll center in any amount desired just by turning the cone with the ratchet. The threaded rod is 14 threads per inch … so each full turn is a smidge over 1/8” of an inch. You can see it allows pretty fine adjustments if desired.

8. When we mount the adjuster cone on the top … an aluminum rod attaches to that cone … goes up thru the tube in the crossmember … and protrudes a few inches up into the trunk area in front of the fuel cell … with an adjuster cone on it. This way the Tuner simply opens the trunk … reaches in & turns the adjuster cone with a ½” ratchet … without crawling under the car.

9. I typically plan the rear roll center adjustment range from 6” above ground to 12” above ground. This way you can optimize the rear roll center for whatever suspension strategy you choose & any type of track.

10. Frame mounted bellcrank versus housing mounted bellcranks? Housing mounted bellcranks keep the roll center basically the same at all times because the center of the housing only lifts or squats a minimal amount as the tires compress or stretch. The lay person may think that’s desirable but it’s not. Frame mounted bellcranks move the roll center with the chassis. So if you have chassis lift in the rear on corner entry the roll center goes up with it … minimizing the roll angle. On corner exit, as the driver lays power on the car squats in the rear to some degree … the roll center lowers with the chassis, providing more rear grip & forward bite for optimum corner exit acceleration.

11. Weight is our enemy, so I design all of my stuff to be as light as it can be & still as strong as it needs to be. Plus I work to multi-purpose things as much as possible … to reduce duplication of items & unnecessary weight.

12. For example the upper Watt’s link crossmember serves as the shock crossmember also. Why run two crossmembers only a few inches apart? That is unnecessary weight. Of course it took me some work to make the packaging all fit well. But there are no wasted tubes, no duplication of mounts or crossmembers & no unnecessary weight.

13. Another example is the Watt’s link housing mounts. I see a lot of heavy, bulky mounts that clamp on. Just adding weight to the rear end. Most have to add two mounts to the housing. My design here dual purposes the right rear shock mount. This not only saves the weight of the bracket & bracing, but bolt hardware too. All of this weight is “unsprung weight”. The lighter we can make the rear end housing … especially out at the ends … the quicker the suspension can respond to irregularities on the track. Lighter unsprung weight in the suspension = more grip.

14. A common question is about the additional load that shock bolt sees with the lower right Watt’s link attached to it. Anyone that knows me very well, knows how safety conscious I am, so you know I did the math. I have a bolt load stress calculation spread sheet I use.

For those that care … calc’s ran as:
* 4000 # Car
* 50% rear weight (2000#)
* 1.5 G load
* 3000# force

No, Ron’s car won’t be that heavy … LOL. I like to do my calcs with more load on stuff than it will actually see. Like a safety factor inside the safety factor.

The bellcrank bolt sees half of the total force going through the Watt’s link.
* 1500# force on ¾” Grade 8 bellcrank bolt @ 1.156” = .0017” deflection (17/10,000)

The four bolts & rod ends each all split the other half of the load four ways, for 375# of force.
For weight savings, I utilize lightweight, tubular chromoly bolts on most mounts that are in double shear. For single shear suspension items, I use special 170,000 PSI 12-point bolts.

The combo shock & Watt’s link bolt sees loads from both the coil over shock & the Watt’s link.
* 1600# force on ½” 160k PSI link bolt @ 0.3125” = .0002” deflection (2/10,000)
* 375# force on ½” 160k PSI link bolt @ 1.1875” = .0022” deflection (22/10,000)
* The forces are from different vectors so the deflection doesn’t really total .0024” … but it doesn’t matter anyway, as anything this small is negligible.

P.S. Shear strength ratings of the hardware is:
* ¾” Grade 8 bellcrank bolt = 39,762#
* ½” 170,000 PSI 12-point bolts = 20,023#
* Chromoly Rod Ends 5/8” shank & ½” hole = 31,390#

15. One advantage a panhard bar has, is it allows us to get the fuel tank closer to the rear end. But I work to get all I can, so this Watt’s link design is pretty compact, allowing us to place the fuel cell only 9.5” from the rear axle CL.

16. As mentioned earlier … by placing the frame rails narrower … we’re able to get the 3-Link trailing arms out wider … get the shock mounts out wider … and get the Watt’s link mounts out wider. All of this reduces the angle changes & geometry changes during suspension movement.

17. Getting the shocks out wider is a bigger deal than most people know about. The motion ratio affects the springs … but it’s no big deal to run softer springs for wider placed shocks & stiffer springs for narrower placed shocks. But the shock is more responsive … and has better control … the wider we place them.

18. In other words, we can partially make up for lower motion ratios of narrow spring mounting by simply increasing the spring rate. There are side effects though. The side view motion ratio doesn’t change … so a stiffer spring is truly stiffer as far as the side view motion ratio is concerned … and this affects the basic up & down motion for bumps, as well as affecting grip under acceleration. So we always want the springs out as far as we can get them to help with grip.

19. All shocks have delay in them. Gas monotube shocks have less delay than twin tube shocks, but again … all shocks have delay in them. The closer you mount the rear shocks to the chassis centerline … away from the rear tires … the greater the delay. Meaning … the longer time it takes for the shock to respond … which equals less control. The farther out we place the shocks from the chassis centerline … closer to the rear tires … the smaller the delay. Meaning … the shorter time it takes for the shock to respond … which equals more control. Control is grip.

--------------------------------

20. In future photos you’ll see:
* Curved Watt’s Links
* Smaller Rod Ends & Bolts
* Watt’s Adjuster Rod & Cone in place
* Rear 3-piece Sway Bar installation


:cheers:

[pro68chevelle]

Oh that looks sweet!

[Payton King]

That sucking sound is money flying out of your bank account. You know I know that sound as well.

Looking good Ron squared...kind of like Duran Duran.

[efs69]

Ron M.. It's looking great!

Ron S..:confused59: I had to read that a couple times to follow what you are doing. Thanks for putting it out there for our benefit:thumbsup:

[intocarss]

Gaetano, Jerr Dog... notice the open trunk floor??:thumbsup:

[GregWeld]

If there isn't a progress report WEEKLY -- then you're either out of money and owe the shop --- or you're in the wrong shop....


So...... Where's the updates, because I know neither of the above fits your situation!

[Ron in SoCal]

Thanks Guys for all the comments!

If there isn't a progress report WEEKLY -- then you're either out of money and owe the shop --- or you're in the wrong shop....


So...... Where's the updates, because I know neither of the above fits your situation!

I should just let my PR rep (aka Skippah) reply, but...I travel almost as much as Rob. :D

Pics coming! :cheers:

[Ron Sutton]

We've already got cage pics ... but we're pacing ourselves. :hello:

[fleetus macmullitz]

Thanks Guys for all the comments!

I should just let my PR rep (aka Skippah) reply, but...I travel almost as much as Rob. :D

Pics coming! :cheers:

Ron,

I brought some help...what could go wrong?


lol

[XTRMEASURES]

Great thread and great looking 3-link design. I'm glad i stumbled on it, ive being trying to deside on a rear suspension for my truck for about a year and a half. And i think this would give me both street/autocross performance without cutting or welding on the truck. Very inspirational and thanks for posting.

Oh and PS Mr. Ron Sutton for President!!!!!

[XTRMEASURES]

Not sure if it's been mentioned but what size heim joints are used on the 3-link?

[Ron Sutton]

Not sure if it's been mentioned but what size heim joints are used on the 3-link?

The 3-link rod end sizes are 3/4" x 3/4" and 3/4" x 5/8". Mild steel economy 2-piece rod ends would probably be OK but I can't bring myself to use them. There are 3 versions of chromoly rod ends. I use them all for different applications:
#1. Black lower cost versions that are the same size & shape as economy mild steel rod ends. Great value & extra piece of mind for a small price. These run no liner & need to be cleaned & lubed often. Zero stiction.

#2. Wide body 3-piece precision rod ends are the most expensive. The 3rd piece is a precision race that is pressed into the body. These run no liner & need to be cleaned & lubed often. Zero stiction.

#3. Wide body 3-piece precision rod ends with a Nylafiber race liner. The Nylafiber race liner is injected into the body. These are self-lubricated & self wiping, so they keep a high degree of grit off the wear surface of the ball. They don't require cleaning & lubrication often. About 1 pound of stiction.

Here are the radial load ratings & costs for comparison:
3/4" x 3/4" Economy Mild Steel: 18,810# (Cost $12)
3/4" x 3/4" Economy Chromoly: 25,000# (Cost $17)
3/4" x 3/4" Wide Precision Chromoly: 28,081# (Cost $33)
3/4" x 3/4" Wide Nylafiber Liner Chromoly: 28,081# (Cost $26)

3/4" x 5/8" Economy Mild Steel: 19,350# (Cost $12)
3/4" x 5/8" Economy Chromoly: 27,000# (Cost $17)
3/4" x 5/8" Wide Precision Chromoly: 40,572# (Cost $33)
3/4" x 5/8" Wide Nylafiber Liner Chromoly: 40,572# (Cost $26)

For low budget applications, I use & recommend the black economy Chromoly rod ends. The price is so close to mild steel & the strength is a big increase.

Both wide body Chromoly rod ends have the same shape, dimensions, materials & load ratings as each other. The body is almost twice as wide as the economy rod ends. I use these in all my race cars, Track-Star & AutoX-Star suspension kits. If it is going to be for an all out professional race car team that has the manpower to fully clean & service the car after each event, I use the Wide Precision Chromoly rod ends with no liner for zero stiction. For regular racers ... and ProTouring cars ... I use the Wide Nylafiber Liner Chromoly rod ends. They self clean & lubricate, last the longest and only add about 1# of stiction.

Special Note:
The Watt's link Bellcrank & links in the previous photos were just for mock up. This Track-Star Watt's link uses the right rear lower shock mount for the lower right Watt's link mount to reduce weight out at the end of the housing (which affects grip). The lower right Watt's link will have a S-bend step in it. The Watt's link Bellcrank will be 7.5" instead of the 5" version in the mock up photos & use 1/2" rod ends, not 3/4". It will be black anodized, as will the sway bar arms.

The Watt's link rod ends used are:
1/2" x 1/2" Wide Nylafiber Liner Chromoly: 16,238# (Cost $16)

[carbuff]

Here are the radial load ratings & costs for comparison:
3/4" x 3/4" Economy Mild Steel: 18,810# (Cost $12)
3/4" x 3/4" Economy Chromoly: 25,000# (Cost $17)
3/4" x 3/4" Wide Precision Chromoly: 28,081# (Cost $33)
3/4" x 3/4" Wide Nylafiber Liner Chromoly: 28,081# (Cost $26)

3/4" x 5/8" Economy Mild Steel: 19,350# (Cost $12)
3/4" x 5/8" Economy Chromoly: 27,000# (Cost $17)
3/4" x 5/8" Wide Precision Chromoly: 40,572# (Cost $33)
3/4" x 5/8" Wide Nylafiber Liner Chromoly: 40,572# (Cost $26)


Ron,

Can you explain why the larger ends have a smaller load rating? And are the costs between the 2 sizes actually the same? Interesting...

I replaced all of the ones in the rear of my car last summer with a set of QA1 ends. I cannot remember the exact 'family' of parts I used at the moment, but I did get the ones with the liners. XM series perhaps?

[Ron Sutton]

Ron,

Can you explain why the larger ends have a smaller load rating? And are the costs between the 2 sizes actually the same? Interesting...

I replaced all of the ones in the rear of my car last summer with a set of QA1 ends. I cannot remember the exact 'family' of parts I used at the moment, but I did get the ones with the liners. XM series perhaps?

The 3/4" × 5/8" rod ends have the same shank & body size as the 3/4" × 3/4" rod ends. Just the bolt hole & ball are smaller. So the 3/4" × 5/8" body has more material ... making it stronger.

:thumbsup:

[Solid LT1]

Hello, I'm wondering are the bottom coil over shock mount also being used for Watts Linkage mount on passenger side? Is all this loading on the bolt being mounted in single shear?

[Ron Sutton]

Great thread and great looking 3-link design. I'm glad i stumbled on it, ive being trying to deside on a rear suspension for my truck for about a year and a half. And i think this would give me both street/autocross performance without cutting or welding on the truck. Very inspirational and thanks for posting.

Oh and PS Mr. Ron Sutton for President!!!!!

Just an FYI ...
My Track-Star line of suspensions are far from "bolt-in". They require professional level fabrication & welding. Just saying this so there is no confusion.

For my clients that want to bolt in a higher level of technology & performance, I typically go one of two routes:
1. We work out their existing geometry, then I work up a harmonious suspension package of individual components from companies I like their stuff like Ridetech, Speedtech, Maier, JRi, etc. Together, we improve their suspension & steering geometry ... and put a more modern suspension package under the car. Almost always I've mapped out the correct sway bar & spring rates for a neutral, balanced handling vehicle. Plus we make the car run flatter (less roll angle) & run some level of higher grip shock valving.

2. Now with the Speedtech line of chassis & front subframes coming out, with optimized geometry from me, I simply work up the correct sway bar & spring rates for a neutral, balanced handling vehicle, make the car run flatter (less roll angle) & run some level of higher grip shock valving.

Those two routes above are how I work with my clients doing bolt-in projects. But I have quite a few projects in the works (most without build threads) with DIY clients or shops installing my custom Track-Star front subframes with long-arm, zero-scrub, high travel suspensions ... and/or four different versions of my Track-Star offset 3-links ... like Ron Myer's in this thread.

[Ron Sutton]

Hello, I'm wondering are the bottom coil over shock mount also being used for Watts Linkage mount on passenger side? Is all this loading on the bolt being mounted in single shear?

I copied this from a previous post on this thread to answer your question.

11. Weight is our enemy, so I design all of my stuff to be as light as it can be & still as strong as it needs to be. Plus I work to multi-purpose things as much as possible … to reduce duplication of items & unnecessary weight.

12. For example the upper Watt’s link crossmember serves as the shock crossmember also. Why run two crossmembers only a few inches apart? That is unnecessary weight. Of course it took me some work to make the packaging all fit well. But there are no wasted tubes, no duplication of mounts or crossmembers & no unnecessary weight.

13. Another example is the Watt’s link housing mounts. I see a lot of heavy, bulky mounts that clamp on. Just adding weight to the rear end. Most have to add two mounts to the housing. My design here dual purposes the right rear shock mount. This not only saves the weight of the bracket & bracing, but bolt hardware too. All of this weight is “unsprung weight”. The lighter we can make the rear end housing … especially out at the ends … the quicker the suspension can respond to irregularities on the track. Lighter unsprung weight in the suspension = more grip.

14. A common question is about the additional load that shock bolt sees with the lower right Watt’s link attached to it. Anyone that knows me very well, knows how safety conscious I am, so you know I did the math. I have a bolt load stress calculation spread sheet I use.

For those that care … calc’s ran as:
* 4000 # Car
* 50% rear weight (2000#)
* 1.5 G load
* 3000# force

No, Ron’s car won’t be that heavy … LOL. I like to do my calcs with more load on stuff than it will actually see. Like a safety factor inside the safety factor.

The bellcrank bolt sees half of the total force going through the Watt’s link.
* 1500# force on ¾” Grade 8 bellcrank bolt @ 1.156” = .0017” deflection (17/10,000)

The four bolts & rod ends each all split the other half of the load four ways, for 375# of force.
For weight savings, I utilize lightweight, tubular chromoly bolts on most mounts that are in double shear. For single shear suspension items, I use special 170,000 PSI 12-point bolts.

The combo shock & Watt’s link bolt sees loads from both the coil over shock & the Watt’s link.
* 1600# force on ½” 160k PSI link bolt @ 0.3125” = .0002” deflection (2/10,000)
* 375# force on ½” 160k PSI link bolt @ 1.1875” = .0022” deflection (22/10,000)
* The forces are from different vectors so the deflection doesn’t really total .0024” … but it doesn’t matter anyway, as anything this small is negligible.

P.S. Shear strength ratings of the hardware is:
* ¾” Grade 8 bellcrank bolt = 39,762#
* ½” 170,000 PSI 12-point bolts = 20,023#
* Chromoly Rod Ends 5/8” shank & ½” hole = 31,390#

----------------------------------

Remember, the coil-over shock applies a max load of 1600# & the Watt's link applies a max load of 375#.


:trophy-1302:

[Track Junky]

:ttiwop:

[XTRMEASURES]

Yes more pics would be nice.... Thank you

[Ron Sutton]

Okie Dokie. Heard ya. Sure did. :)

I haven't been to Tolle's shop recently so these photos are old. Everything is welded up & just waiting on a few parts. Once we do final assembly, I'll shoot & post some more photos.

Here are some from last time:

[XTRMEASURES]

Thank you thank you Mr. Ron

[Blake Foster]

LOOK AT THAT AWESOME drive hub set up!!!

[Vince@Meanstreets]

LOOK AT THAT AWESOME drive hub set up!!!

LOL, look at proud poppa

[Track Junky]

Thanks for the pic's Ron. Looking forwrd to more up dates. :thumbsup:

[Blake Foster]

LOL, look at proud poppa

lol I had to!!
:stirthepot:

[Build-It-Break-it]

Any updates on this beauty?

[Ron Sutton]

Any updates on this beauty?


A little ...
* 3-Link & Watts Link completed
* New Black anodized Watt's bell crank & stepped tubes installed (no photos yet)
* New Rear 3-piece Sway Bar getting installed next
* Pedals & Steering column after that
* Our new trick fuel cell is on order (photo attached)
* Trunk floor sheet metal will finish it up

[Build-It-Break-it]

Hey Ron do you have any updates of the fuel cell installed yet? I emailed you about getting one but I'm curious of how you guys went about setting it up and caging it.

[LS7 Z/28]

Are you guys still working on this project?

[Ron in SoCal]

Hey Ron do you have any updates of the fuel cell installed yet? I emailed you about getting one but I'm curious of how you guys went about setting it up and caging it.

Are you guys still working on this project?

Hey Guys, project is in slow burn mode right now. Mostly a personal decision on my part. I should have some pics in a few weeks.

Cheers,

[65_LS1_T56]

Hey Guys, project is in slow burn mode right now. Mostly a personal decision on my part. I should have some pics in a few weeks.

Cheers,

Too busy, enjoying your BIRTHDAY!!!! Happy Birthday, again :)

[Ron in SoCal]

Too busy, enjoying your BIRTHDAY!!!! Happy Birthday, again :)

lol, Thanks Aaron!

Cheers Brother,

[dhondagod]

updates?


Chris

[Number1]

Any updates?

[GregWeld]

Any updates?



Yep -- He bought a little red C5orvette -- so all these other "builds" died.



Anyone want to watch a Corvette build?? Oh -- didn't think so..... LOL

[glassman]

:lmao: ^^^

[fleetus macmullitz]

'Sources'...recent Ron Myers sighting on this board.

Yet he remains...


https://s20.postimg.org/fyk5vskv1/IMG_2129.jpg


:P

[Ron in SoCal]

lol Skipper! :D

J2HBdRCroks

[Chad-1stGen]

Yep -- He bought a little red C5orvette -- so all these other "builds" died.



Anyone want to watch a Corvette build?? Oh -- didn't think so..... LOL

hahaha

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/946/735/a0a.jpg

[Ron in SoCal]

Good thing I didn't post one!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[fleetus macmullitz]

Yep -- He bought a little red C5orvette -- so all these other "builds" died.



Anyone want to watch a Corvette build?? Oh -- didn't think so..... LOL

Good thing I didn't post one!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Calling the Ronvette 'red' is being charitable.



:D

https://s20.postimg.org/kpw171an1/IMG_2737.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/aftm7skrd/)image upload no compression (https://postimage.io/)certificity.com (https://certificity.com)