AMS, DSE, or RS 69 Camaro Sub-Frame

[windycitychev]

Well, I am about to start on my 69 Camaro RS in about a month or so. I know this has been asked over and over but have not seen any new threads most are about 2 yrs old and I am sure some things have change. The question again who has the best quality sub-frame and rear end set up on both end and who has the easiest application. I know many have said there is preference which is in part very true and also many have told me DSE is the easy way to go. I know all three are direct bolt on when it comes down to the sub-frame. But with the rear end DSE has the quadra link which you have to cut into the floor and AMS has the rear TRI 4 Bar set up which would require removing the current rails. So I woud really like your guys opinion which would be helpful and hope to get some who have personally used all 3 not just based on what other have said. I am by no means trying to be a smarty pants but just trying to get the opinion based on experience not what others have said or the trend that everyone is following. Thanks in advance

[Vega$69]

#1

How do you intend to use the car?

[3_z28camaro]

I have AME front and rear suspension on my 1969 Camaro. The thing I like most about them is the front uses C6 control arms so it can be easily replaced if ever needed.

As for the rear removing those stamped excuses for frame rails in the rear is only a good thing. In my case one was cracked and during removal I found that some of the original spot welds never penetrated all the way through to the body.

Having a real rear frame to attach to the front with connectors essentially creates a nice full frame. I have the triangulated 4-link but the three link and IRS are available as well.

Unfortunately the car is still on jack stands but AME has done well with their test car.

[windycitychev]

Originally Posted by 3_z28camaro

I have AME front and rear suspension on my 1969 Camaro. The thing I like most about them is the front uses C6 control arms so it can be easily replaced if ever needed.

As for the rear removing those stamped excuses for frame rails in the rear is only a good thing. In my case one was cracked and during removal I found that some of the original spot welds never penetrated all the way through to the body.

Having a real rear frame to attach to the front with connectors essentially creates a nice full frame. I have the triangulated 4-link but the three link and IRS are available as well.

Unfortunately the car is still on jack stands but AME has done well with their test car.

Hey

So far you dont regret getting AMS set up and whats the big difference between the 3 link and IRS. I am leaning towards their stuff because they actually buy most or part of it which works out good if your doing a long term project.

[windycitychev]

Originally Posted by Vega$69

#1

How do you intend to use the car?

I will be doing some track time not much though if any but want the best handling possible and with me being in Chicago horrible traffic and damn speed bumps and pot holes thats my road course lol. I have a 68 Chevelle SS stock frame but have UMI all around and love the handling and stuff but I could imagine if I had a full frame and stuff. I have a 67 Fastback stock and I dont think I need to say how the handling feels.

[214Chevy]

IMO, all 3 are quality pieces by reputable builders. Since this is a thread and you asked a question, I'll answer from my personal opinion. My order would be RS, DSE then AME.

[dhutton]

Originally Posted by windycitychev

I will be doing some track time not much though if any but want the best handling possible and with me being in Chicago horrible traffic and damn speed bumps and pot holes thats my road course lol. I have a 68 Chevelle SS stock frame but have UMI all around and love the handling and stuff but I could imagine if I had a full frame and stuff. I have a 67 Fastback stock and I dont think I need to say how the handling feels.

Speed bumps and potholes means IRS for me.

Don

[windycitychev]

Originally Posted by 214Chevelle

IMO, all 3 are quality pieces by reputable builders. Since this is a thread and you asked a question, I'll answer from my personal opinion. My order would be RS, DSE then AME.

I actually went down to the RS to check out their sub but didnt have none on display and they showed me around and i fell in love lol. They were actually saying how at the end getting a sub vs a frame, a frame makes more sense economically. But its much easier to get $7K than $15-20K and I am only 45 min away, so I would be saving a few hundres on shipping. I honeslty have never seen an RS sub on a Camaro usually just full frames. So personally you would go with their sub

[3_z28camaro]

Originally Posted by windycitychev

Hey

So far you dont regret getting AMS set up and whats the big difference between the 3 link and IRS. I am leaning towards their stuff because they actually buy most or part of it which works out good if your doing a long term project.

No regrets except that I am not done with the car but that is another story. AME does a nice comparison of the three and four link. I think the video is at the bottom of the page. http://www.artmorrison.com/camaro.php

As the IRS it is the most expensive option but it seems to be a great choice if one had the money for it. Mary and David Pozzi are using the AME IRS in their cars. http://www.pro-touring.com/threads/1...tall-67-Camaro

Between AME, RS and DSE you cannot really choose a bad option. I like AME rear over the quadralink because you replace those rear rails which were in bad shape in my case. With the AME components you can sort of build a full frame as the budget allows.

[Schwartz Perf]

While we do not offer a sub frame, keep us open as an option on the full-frame end. Ours is less labor intensive than any on the market, and has a lot of great benefits as well.. such as longer shock travel for great ride quality, and more 'standard' features than others which offers better bang for your buck.

Let me know if you have any specific questions!

www.GMachineChassis.com

-Dale

(815)206-2230