I'm with you Stuart. I blew about $60 in junk food over the GG Columbus weekend.

If you are like myself and want a rack on your sub (because you just like racks), quoted by Murtah...




I like racks, big racks. :D

DSE has suspension geometry numbers on their website. I'm still curious on weight tho...

http://www.detroitspeed.com/Product%...s/subframe.htm

Anyone here know what they are looking at?

DSE SUBFRAME SPECIFICATIONS

NOMINAL CAMBER

- 0.5°


NOMINAL CASTER

+ 4.5° (ADJUSTABLE TO 5.5°)


TOTAL SUSPENSION TRAVEL

4.0"


TOTAL BUMPSTEER, 30" TOE-SPAN

0.070" OVER 4" OF TRAVEL


TURNING ANGLE ( 18"x10" OR 17"x9" WHEELS )

30.0°


ACKERMAN ANGLE ( 18"x10" OR 17"x9" WHEELS )

2.5°


TURNING ANGLE ( 18"x9" WHEELS )

33.8°


ACKERMAN ANGLE ( 18"x9" WHEELS )

3.5°


Ok, time for the experts to sort that out :)

Did anyone mention what trans x-member the sub is drilled for in the pictures? Sort of looks like ATS. Obviously they give you the option of using anything a stock frame could use, I was just wondering who they had in mind with those pre-drilled holes.

I wonder if a LSX motor with the a/c compressor in it's stock location would work? I never did like mounting it up high.

Well....I know that 18" x 10" means an 18" Diameter by 10" wide wheel :lol:

Lead.

I called and asked Stacy, she said they never tested for that and they could not give a definite answer. They tested an LSx with the Vintage Air bracket setup. I would be better for me if it fit in the stock location, I prefer to use stock brackets at their stock location.

It was designed after factory. So is our mounting brackets, which is why it looks similar. Our T56 crossmember will bolt right up to that frame.

Tyler

Tyler,
I was checking out your new site yesterday, A lot better than the old one. Will your NEW t-56 crossmember work on the DSE sub? it seems it has more clearance (that your older one) for exhaust and I like the adjustability. I couldn't tell because my piece o' sh*t government computer wouldn't let me open the pdf file.

Yes, it should bolt right up to the DSE frame. The adjustablility is designed for the different T56 variants, and engine combos. Load the .pdf when you get home to see it up close.

Tyler

OK The numbers are out and not a person can say anything? Come on loud mouths... :D

Give me a day or so. We have had our camber/caster/bumpsteer graphs in lockdown mode for some time, but after seeing DSE post up for all to see, I think we shall follow suit.

Bonus is that we started from a bunch of the same initial settings, so we can do a side by side comparison of the DSE frame to a AFX spindle.

You people are going to be shocked for sure.

Tyler

SHOCK AWAY TYLER!!!!!!!

I'm all for learning and understanding....Building these cars is nice, but so simple these days with the many bolt on and all work done for you.

I guess the less we can do is do these products justice and undestand their function and differences. (unless of course your full o cash and just don't care...Which is still ok... :lol: )

That way, we can make intelligent choices too, one not only founded on the "name brand" part.

Looking forward to seeing the comparo!

Lead.

Before I get lit on fire for my 'shocked' comment let me say this disclaimer-

This is NOT going to be a direct apples to apples comparison. It can never be that cut and dry, but I can give out the same geometry graphs and numbers with the same initial settings.

Tyler

I hear ya,

:fire: (Knew i had seen this somewhere... :D )

Lets just put a bit of light on that subject. (for everyone's benefit i guess since no one speaks up of the numbers...)


' Lead.

Tyler

Am I reading you correctly in that you can equal the same geometry numbers with the AFX spindle vs. the entire DSE sub frame set-up? Please continue, I am very interested and have my check book ready to purchase the next round of your spindle if this is so. I do not have the intimate knowledge you folks have but am willing to purchase your knowledge and brag about it like I know what the Hell I am talking about. I fear that most of the numbers and advantages that each product offers will never be realized in true form as most posers will never twist their PT ride to those extremes. I am planning to run mine like it was a rental car.

I did read your disclaimer from the following post but I still am interested in your numbers.

I would be very interested in the stress testing that was put into the AFX spindle also. GM puts alot of testing in their spindle and had problems with breakage in the past that caused projects to be shut down until fixed.

Someone will put these numbers into simple terms, right...

Major props to DSE and ATS for going public with their numbers...
This act takes a major set of balls!! :thumbsup:

Maybe the DSE sibframe with Tyler's spindles is the magic combination. :unibrow: :D :unibrow: :D

I am impressed also to see DSE put down the hard data, they really hadn't done that in the past. Disclaimer: as if there aren't enough fish in the front suspension sea already, we at Lateral Dynamics are also developing front solutions, clearly ATS has a head start on us, and DSE's new release beats us out too. Anyway, for a small company like ours, it is really hard to compete against advertising dollars that the big incumbent companies have, so we for certain welcome this.

Keep in mind, the numbers posted are important, but in and of themselves, they don't tell the whole story. I wouldn't expect any company, ATS or DSE included, to give "all" of the data out, there still has to be some proprietary secrets, or design theft would follow (not like it hasn't for DSE and Global anyway).

For some of the info listed, here's what it means:

Bump steer: Most folks know this, but this is the toe tendancy of a suspension system through the suspension travel, i.e. when the suspension moves up and down, this is what the toe angle of the wheel is doing. Less is better.

Ackerman: There's a principle named after the dude, Ackerman, that deals with the angle of each of the front wheels through a turn. If you look at the car from above, for instance, in a tight turn, the inside wheel ideally (i.e. on paper) needs to turn in a tighter arc, because it has less distance to travel than the outside tire. "Pure" Ackerman bascially states that the inside tire follows the ideal line relative to the outside tire in a given turn, obviously depends upon track width, and wheelbase. In the real world, you will get as many opinions on this as you will on who makes the best pizza in Chicago, there is no "right" answer. Things that come into play include the behavior of the tires (i.e. slip angles, which with modern tires is far less than it had been in the past), weight transfer (in a turn, the inside tire carries very little loading, so one argument is that "ackerman doen't matter as much at speed), and other goodies such as alignment settings.

Caster change: If you look at the line intersecting the upper and lower ball joint, you'll see that on virtually every car today there is a tilt, the top is further back on the car than the bottom ball joint. This angle is called the caster angle, and has a profound effect on a lot of dynamic behaviors. There's a graph that shows the change as a function of suspension travel, this is because the upper arm on an SLA suspension system (Short-Long-Arm, i.e. double wishbone) is shorter than the lower, so when the supension moves, the caster angle must change. Lots of arguments on what's good here, because it is coupled to several other aspects of the overall suspension and steering system.

Camber Gain: Seemingly everyone's favorite buzzword on front suspension, in reality is but one of the many things that need to be managed simultaneously in an effective system, but the early F Body cars had such poor camber characteristics, that improving this aspect has a profound improvement on the handling of the car when used with today's far superior tires. This is another one where you will get a huge number of opinions, because it is not well understood by many people, and also that it too is not independent, it is directly coupled to many other aspects of the overall suspension system. Further, virtually ALL camber gain data is taken with the wheels pointed straight ahead, but the last time I looked, you really kind of need to know what's happening when you TURN the car, because that's where you need to benefit of this aspect. Still, this is one piece of data where you CAN compare system to system, provided the data was collected properly, which is straight forward.

Again, to stress that we are in this business too, my "opinion" is that there are other factors that are equally as important, more important in fact that go into a good system. Also, I am not suggesting for a second that I would expect/demand, that any of the suppliers out there publish this, it's not any more confidential than the stuff listed, but I want to make sure I don't piss anyone off by saying this. Folks can get so sensitive. Anyway, a few other parameters that are important/interesting to look at is the roll center height and behavior (i.e dynamically), the scrub radius, side scrubbing behavior, and some others.

Some folks love data, some hate it and just want to feel good about things. We tend towards the "love data" end of things, so it is really nice to see some hard numbers for once. Very welcome in my eyes.

Mark

That will not be a possibility due to the design of the Corvette upright on the DSE sub. Our spindle cannot bolt to the upper control arm with the current config that is on the frame due to the inverted upper ball joint. Maybe DSE will make a provision for our AFX spindle? Can't hurt to hope...

Stuart-

We did lots of engineering, FEA, and actual physical destructive testing on our spindles. I can say that without a doubt they are stronger than the C5/C6 spindle by quite a bit. The C6 spindle is a pressure casting from A356-T6 aluminum vs our forging in 6061-T6 aircraft grade aluminum. I'm going to save my typing fingers, and cut and paste a response toa Chevelles.com thread where people questioned our spindle:

Here is the link to the thread:
http://www.chevelles.com/forums/show...&highlight=ATs

Here is the response that Shane wrote:

Alright guys I'll try and layout our design process for these spindles based on your inquiries and concerns. First let me state that yes it is extremely expensive (especially for a two man team) to replicate all the tests that parts have to endure in the OE's, but we have tried to cover all the aspects of the test and design phases to our capabilities by contacting multiple engineers in GM, other suspension engineers, and different vendors involved in designing the C5 knuckle in order to achieve these goals.

In the initial stages we fabricated a test spindle much like the Stielow spindle but utilizing a C5 bearing cartridge and an adjustable steer arm. We acquired control arms from Global West, DSE, and Speetech and did camber curves, caster curves, plotted pivot points, in both the stock location and gulstrand location for both the AFX spindle and stock spindle. This was done to know our baselines and to be able to tell the customer how our spindle will work with any combination and how it will affect their application. We are currently in the process of working with SC&C to do the same for the A-body platform so we can accomodate those that have already done the B-Body spindle conversions and have the shorter UCAs and also to design an UCA that is specific and optimized for the AFX spindle.

All the components for the orginal fabricated spindle and current forged spindle were modeled in Solidworks and had simple wheel load FEA done on them by both myself and the forging company since we already knew the fabricated spindle has taken a ton of abuse on the Thrasher Camaro. I have taken specialty classes in both finite analysis using ANSYS and strain gauge testing. Next we got in contact with one of the original reps that worked for the manufacturing company that did the C5 pressure cast aluminum spindle. He was able to tell us the constaints and requirements that GM demanded for their design. The C5 spindle is actually a pressure cast A356-T6 alloy while ours is a must stronger forged 6061-T6. For those that want numbers The UTS is 228 MPa vs. 310 MPa, Tensile YS is 152 MPa vs. 276 MPa, and Elongation at break is 3% vs. 12% for the C5 vs. the AFX materials. Our selection of material was discussed in long detail and initial FEA was done based on our current model by both myself and the forging company taking in to account a safety factor of 5. Not only is our spindle more ductile but it is also a lot stronger and those that know how forging works know how the grain structure is worked so that it flows in the direction of the part for optimal strength. The AFX is also almost 1.5x thicker everywhere than a C5 spindle. Now let me say that the FEA was used just as a tool for the design process not as a corner stone. I will get into the true destructive testing later.

Other aspects that we looked into and talked with GM engineers on was one thing that was stated above about the new Z06 twisting the brake bracket which I can concur was true. They had to redesign the spindle to be beefier for the 6-piston calipers. We took this knowledge and also incorporated about a 50% thicker caliper bracket which is also reinforced into the lower ball joint with stratigically placed variable fillets. Another issue plaguing the C5 knuckle was the lower ball joint taper fatiquing after each torque cycle of the ball joint. We took care of this issue by introducing harder 7075-T6 inserts that are frozen in liquid nitrogen and placed into the extremely precision machined holes of the spindle, which upon reaching room temperature maintain an adequete interference fit. On top of the interferance fit we use heavy duty spiral locks with an additional tensile strength of 211,000 psi to prevent any initial backing out on top of the interferance fit and mostly to reduce the risk of tampering.

Now onto the manufacturing. Number one is quality control and precision. The forging company we chose is in the USA and has been in business for over 40 years doing stuff for both military and the OEs. Each and every raw forging is inspected and 1 out of 10 has a tensile sample ran with it to check the material properties and their consitancy. Also we recieve a certification sheet showing the critical dimensions for each part and their tolerances. The machine process involves a 7-axis CNC with an integrated CMM probe to maintain all the stringent tolerances that are called out. I personally have 2 years of experience working with quality control and operating a CMM so I have a really good grasp on what I am looking for and what is required. Some may argue that some of this is over kill, but all our products must be top notch regardless if this is just the aftermarket.

Now on to the testing. We are in the process of contructing a pretty elaborate test station that will simulate wheel loads on the spindle and record the loads and deflection in the spindle. We plan on taking it to the point of failure multiple times. We are also putting a few sets on some Camaros right now that will be running on some road racing events later this month and running very wide tires. They will be putting some serious loads on these spindles. The road testing will be an on going operation that we will be tracking even after we start selling the AFX spindles. We are also working with another GM engineer to meet any other validating tests that he thinks are necessary. With all this said you can see we are going all out to make sure that these are safe, sound, and proven. As an engineer myself I can understand some worries with such a critical part of your vehicle and thats why we are being so aggressive with them and I am personally going to run them on my 87 Grand National. We have worked with the experts on these and I can guarentee we have a product that is of high caliber. Please let me know if you have any other concerns or questions.

I also wanted to add that our pricing currently is $625 a pair with brand new C5 hubs and all the hardware. BTW dennis thanks for the nice comments and as for the spindle height the tall version is 8.5" tall and with 1" taller upper and lower ball joints that would get you your 10" tall spindle along with a 1 7/8" drop. Like I said we are working with the A/G body guru Marcus at SC&C since he has a test frame to optimize this for that platform.

EDIT- Upon further reading of this post, there is 1 item that is incorrect- We do not use a 7075 T6 lower ball joint insert, and it is not pressed in place. We use 4130 steel lower inserts that screw into the spindle to help distribute the load into the spindle. It is now even stronger than it was when we first designed it. Our spindle failed after it saw 12x's the load it was designed for. We cycle loaded the spindle to 10 tons, and took it back down to zero, and multiple dial indicators showed ZERO deformation upon release of the load. We took it back up to find the breaking point, and it was just over 24,000 lbs.

I still need to take out some classified info from our excel spreadsheet, and then make it a .jpg for you guys to view. I'll be working on that later tonight, as I'm tied up de-bugging our new shopping cart.

Tyler

Here's our hard numbers with use of all stock components and just our spindle and also with a Global West upper for which we are dealers for. Also included a bumpsteer chart. All this data is actual test data not from a suspension program. This is for a First Generation Camaro. We will be putting all this on our new website along with the other applications such as Chevelles and G-Bodies.

I agree with Mark on his points with suspension. Don't get to involved with comparing just hard numbers since there are a lot of other factors involved such as spring rates, ride heights, purpose of the car, etc.

http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/904...urve1ra.th.jpghttp://img487.imageshack.us/img487/4...ster9gj.th.jpg
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/8...mber8dk.th.jpghttp://img153.imageshack.us/img153/5...ster4ej.th.jpg
http://img487.imageshack.us/img487/8...teer8uj.th.jpg

Shane

I really like the "Turn" this discussion has taken from what sounded like the beginning of war at some point, this is getting seriously interesting...

:thumbsup:

Lead.

Should of work harder on getting the price right! your units will be outsold 10 fold, praise for a great product! now make one people will afford

This has been one of the best threads I have read in a while. Thanks Tyler and others for all the great information. Laying it out there info wise is cool.

I am glad this did not turn into a pissing match.

Thanks

performance
 

good stuff guys. The frame looks interesting and can't wait to use one.

Gbody, If you sit and think about it, $67 isn't a whole lot of money considering your average hobbyist will spend that to band aid a frame and/or suspension to perform maybe half as good as we anticipate the DSE unit to do.
Now having used several Alston frames in the past I can tell you that the amount of money spent there is just for stronger welds, prettier frame than stock and no other performance gains. Maybe a 5 in cool factor but that drops to 2 when you get passed by a stock equipt frame with a g mod.
Im sure most of us can afford it if we cut fundage on other portions of our builds. ie: cheaper headers, carb, ignition system, 9k paint to 5k paint, and loose the 2k in stereo equipment.

Steve you are so right about it!! Yes we all are eager to jugde the looks and price of different products but have no clue what these numbers and terms really means!! I highly appreciate the the Marks@lateral dynamics and Tylers input of clarify all details to us. Plese keep talking and opening all details for us :thumbsup: Would be a big help before spending big money.

Could someone point out the major benefits betveen stock subframe modified with all DSE coil over kit and R&P vs. New DSE subframe ? Is the difference possible to "feel" on the road or track ?

The DSE pieces are excellent, However, Stielow is still using a modified factory frame on his latest build if I am not mistaken. Am I right or wrong here?

yes you are right......although the sub was not out when he was building it....Who nows maybe he will put one under it......

The two biggest advantages over a stock sub I see right off the bat are:

1. The DSE sub is designed to accomodate a rack/pinion, so it's easier to get the geometry right.

2. Less labor then welding up the stock sub. Modifying for coil overs and reworking it for a rack.

It also looks like they really reworked the geometry, but I am not expert enough to give an opinion on it. The nice part about DSE is that you know the quality is top notch.

A car with good geometry is just nicer to drive on the road. Too much scrub radius or bump steer just makes it a PITA to drive. So yes, you would feel the difference in a good frame over a bad one.

Steve, does your post include the Unisteer Rack and Pinion? Maval gear makes that unit, and it is a bolt on.

Jeff

I seriously hope you are not taking a crack at Tyler now.

Forget the performance aspects of the new sub. The engineering alone impresses me. Anybody can weld a bunch of tubing together and make a subframe work given the required skills and knowledge which is exactly what I am doing with help from the proper people. DSE's sub an is taking an OE manufacturing appoach to the aftermarket world and that shows incredible commitent to their products. I also beleive ATS has done the same thing with their spindles.

Mike

Couldnt have said that better myself.

One has to know how to interpret, not only the raw data, but also interpret the effects which those variables place on the overall system. Little things like migration and scrub have a lot to do with the big picture in more ways than known to most.

Without data, all you have is a placebo.
:lateral:

well i dont know anything about the DSE subframe other than it looks good and it comes from DSE ..and even with specs and all that crap I still dont know wtf that means lol ..but just like everything else a name brand most of the times it speaks for it self ....just like sony or alpine or hre or anyother over priced brand lol the only decision left is either have a dse subframe and go to a car show or have a chris alston subframe and find a place to hide at the car show ...i think last time i checked their subframes are based on mustang II parts including their spindles

Shane,
The overlayed bumpsteer graph is telling. You gotta do a graph that overlays the camber curve using all stock parts against the camber curve for GW/ATS combo. Then people will really see the benefits of the swap.

In the end, there is room for everyone. A stock clip with upgraded parts improves handling but has some limitations as well.
UPGRADED STOCK CLIP:
-Excellent Handling
-More Affordable Alternative (about $3K if you go to town, but keep coil springs and separate shocks)
Stock Clip Limitations:
-40 year old stamp & weld, rear steer clip.
-No place to properly mount a rack so you're stuck with a pitman arm, idler arm, and center link, etc.
-More limited wheel & tire sizes
-Coil over conversion (unnecessary in my opinion) brings price much closer to DSE.

DSE CLIP
-Excellent Handling
-Brand new frame (Study the stamped crossmember and reinforced UCA mounts/spring buckets to fully appreciate the benefits of the bare frame.
-Properly Rack & Pinion steering
-Room for big tires without sacrificing steering angle.
-Matched shocks and springs
DSE Clip Limitations:
-Twice the price of an upgraded stock clip. More if you stick with stock A-arms (but stock sux).

So, Steevo, that's 2 positive, and 4 minuses for the stock clip. And it's 5 positive, and 1 minus for the DSE setup? In your professional, and influential "opinion?" :rolleyes:

???
M

Hi
 

Hi, I am just a lurker and am only going to post this, and go back to my cave.

What I see is a bunch of grown men arguing over nothing. I swear from reading these boards, and especially this one, is how everyone loves to go back and forth over parts, which one is better, which one costs more, which one looks better, what brand is the best, etc.....

Does anyone drive their car anymore these days????? If people spent more time putting miles on their car then arguing over what parts are the best, then arguments like these woudln't even come up. Its ALL just bragging rights anyways or your building your car for the wow appeal. I mean how many people here would actually even have the skills to pilot their car fast enough and smooth enough too really take advantage of the difference? Just go drive your car and let the guys with more money than brains buy what they want.

Everyone wants the best stuff on paper. Gotta have custom front sub, 3 link rear, twin turbo, baer brakes, 3 piece wheels, recaro seats, etc.... but 1 out of maybe 300 actually has the skills or time, or balls to take the car to its potential. All about bragging rights, what makes people sleep better at night, knowing just what great research and parts selection they made.

Everyone knows DSE makes quality stuff, and I doubt this subframe falls short. Is it overpriced? probably not for the effort/development they put into it, but bang for the buck??? I highly doubt it. Lets be honest, no one here really needs any of this stuff, but it is nice to have.

:clap: One post....... and I like this cat already. :clap:

Couldn't agree more, been saying this for ages, they're cars not objects of art & most of these expensive parts being bought is just for bragging rights. No-ones gonna take their cars to the limit to see if there's a difference. A good test would be to have a number of cars for comparison.One fitted with a stock uprated frame & then one from the manufacturers like Wayne Due, DSE, Alston etc etc, but don't tell the drivers which one is which. Run them on the road & see how they compare I bet they wouldn't tell the difference on the street/showground/trailer, which is after all where your cars are gonna live. :rofl: :rofl:

Mark,
Feel free to fill out the list as you see fit. :hail:
/S