Thanks for the insight Infernal V. All that is great feedback and things we can think about. We just recently launched a new frame connector/ lateral cross brace/ torque arm front mount for the 1st gen cars. Something like this will be on the list of can we implement it for the 3rd gens too. Currently we use a bolt in crossmember for our Torque arm front mounts. We also typically use an adjustable trans crossmember for different trans opttions. We're all about low stance and lots of ground clearance so we'll pay attention to your comments as we get into the design. Thanks again!

Given how these cars are currently valued, I'd do the same. They will pick up, but it's not quite their time to shine yet. The market for something that extensive probably hasnt truly materialized yet.

Yep. With this one we're pushing to get ahead of the game and perhaps be instrumental in that rise in popularity for these cars. Imagine being $10K + ahead of the game by buying a decent $1000-$1500 platform to start with rather than $10K for a beat builder. If performance handling in a decent looking car is more of the end goal than sporting a 69 Camaro, this should be a hot market.

2 big things many 3rd gen fbody owners would like:

a choice of spindles.

ability to add a power rack and pinion.

there are quite a few who want spindles and rack and pinion. :) there have been various companies that have cast new spindles and fabricated them and ultimately they all disappeared.

Are you referring to the Strut spindles?

yep.

Would very much like a 1.5-2" drop and modification to allow easier installation of a rack and pinion

I actually thought about seeing if there was a way to adapt the AFX spindle to the strut mount but do not think it is possible as the AFX spindle was not designed to carry the load on the top side ball joint, thinking most would want to move to a coil over set up. so that is a no go. even trying to figure an upper mount to the strut and require a coil spring in the LCA will nt really work as there is not enough material on the top side to machine mounting bolt holes into it.
so back to the drawing board.
beside the strut just limits the tire size too much.

It almost looks like they are similar-ish looking designs that could have tooling adapted to provide the correct mounting point for the strut (yea, I know, thats actually easier and cheaper said than done). I know you basically have things right there in front of you but:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8476/8...331ff2af_h.jpg
http://www.speedtechperformance.com/...es/prd_279.jpg


Problem with coil over setups is that the strut towers on thridgens are not meant to carry the load of springs. They require a bit of bracing and such so the metal doesnt tear. I'm sticking with stock style springs in either case, many do.

The steering arm would have to be a major design point. The stock one isnt in the best position.

Anyways, just my humble analysis :shrugs:

Thanks for the input. We're well under way with our 55-57 Chevy chassis system, next is early 64-67 Chevelle and then the 3rd gen. I'll keep everyone posted as we get closer.