![]() |
I spent a lot of time researching parts when I built my 68 and ultimately decided on the DSE subframe. I have around 6000 street miles on it and I would buy the DSE again in a heartbeat. Like you one of my requirements was a front steer power rack. I also liked the hydro-formed frame rails.
http://hayes-ent.com/steve/images/Camaro/Camaro1.jpg http://hayes-ent.com/steve/images/Camaro/CAMARO3.jpg |
Awesome car dude. Performance, safety, structural inegrity and ride quality are where DSE shines.
|
After recent developments I can no longer recommend the Chassisworks product line.
|
Quote:
|
Chassisworks front clip
I've been wondering why chassisworks only has a single front cross-member when nearly all other designs have two (thought size varies). Dipped - has your experience been that you haven't noticed any lack of torsional rigidity with your setup. What engine are you running with it? Tire sizes?
Thanks Rod |
Total suspension
I would not just focus solely on the front subframe only. These suspensions perform better and are easier to tune if you have matching front and rear components. It is easier for the suspension manufactures to assist in precise tuning when you are not mixing and matching company A with company B. That being said I would also pay close attention to what subs have the hidden costs such a having to switch from a type 1 to a type 2 steering pump for the rack, transmission mounts, ect... Look at alignment specs, which allow more adjustability with front end geometry such as the static camber, caster, and everything else Ron Sutton discusses in detail in the above threads.
Evan |
Good Points
I have been looking at rear suspensions also, but decided to find out reactions to the front first. Yes, the matching of front and rear will make it easier for the source (DSE, AME, Chassisworks, etc) to help tune the whole vehicle based on feedback from the customer. I feel that looking at the suspension tuning in the way of the alignment specs is something I'm going to start on Monday making phone calls to all the ones that are on my short list. I'm fortunate that all the vendors that I've narrowed it down to have a rear suspension package that dumps leaf springs. Great in their day for cost savings, but modern times has shown us a better way.
Thanks for the advice of all of you, Rod |
Quote:
We only use one front crossmember because that's all it needs. Our frame is super strong. The crossmember is made from mandrel-bent .120 wall thickness 4x2 steel. Our motor mount standoffs are also different from what you typically see and the engine essentially forms a stressed member in this type of mounting. The only car that comes to my mind that had two crossmembers stock was the '67-'69 because GM couldn't figure out how to build it cheap enough AND strong enough to have just one. Apparently they figured it out when they built the '57 Chevy but forgot after designing the Chevelle. Oh, but remembered by the time the '70 came out. :lol: Most of the stress in the frame during a handling exercise is front to back under braking. Our rails are the strongest on the market partially due to their interlocking plate construction. Quote:
I hope that's helpful information. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Dude -- That's so F'n' easy to make that decision..... BOTH!! LOL |
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:50 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Lateral-g.net