I followed Todd's setup on his car and had great confidence going into the purchase of my G-Bar (Original Version) since it was proven by him at the track and on the street (even though I knew I would need to modify the end links). Like many of you, the fact that there was only a small amount of fabrication required was also a draw.

At the time of this purchase, some others vendors had just come into the market with new designs, specifically Torque arms. When Todd ran into the framerail problem, I knew that at some point my car would also have 335's and track tires like Todds. Now, I know that the framerail issue can be resolved through additional efforts, however, after seeing Speedtech's Nova at RTTC run, and the simplicity of the setup, I will be putting one in my car. It removes the upper bar/framerail stress issue completely for me, allows for the ride height I like, there is very little fabrication, and it is proven on the track as well.

I'm not saying my car doesn't work, it does very well for what its got in it. But I am currently running 300 treadwear tires with 275/35 20's on the rear. It's not putting nearly the stress on the frame through the G-Bar that some 335's and 100 treadwear tires would, thus my frame rails have been ok thus far. I did modify my end links to heim's, but that's it.

At the end of the day, for me, it's what has been proven to work on the track. If it works there, then I have no worries about street miles. Todd's car is the testimony of the G-Bar--how it's worked, and the shortcomings.

The G-Link, after seeing Roger's car and being able to get in it and driving it a few laps through the Auto X, is impressive. However, the fact that both this car and Payback suffered respective framerail issues helped make my decision easier.

Doug

As some who have installed and run the Speedtech torque arm can confirm there is no floor modifications or cutting that need to be done, The upper shock X member is the only part that requares welding. (if you purchase the complete rear end) the ride height is as low as you can go and still drive the car if you want it that low. It has proven itself on the track and the street as well. and the cost is right in line at 1995.00 that includes the shocks/springs.

Now you said something!! I'll be calling the 1st of the year!!!:D :D :D

Doug, it's my opinion that any rear suspension design could compromise these paper thin frame rails. I push things until they break or prove themself. I'm not sold that a panhard bar is the answer.

Hi Blake, interested in your Torque Arm Suspension. Looking at the pictures wondering can you use frame connectors?

Sure can, I have them in my Nova

http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/...nnectors-1.jpg
you can see them welded into the floor. in this shot.

One of the reasons i like the quadralink so much. plus the panhard mount reinforces the frame rail as apart of the design.

cool but how does the connectors front Sub and front torque arm all meet up?

Here are some more detailed pictures

http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/...a/DSC09300.jpg

http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/...a/DSC09299.jpg

http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/...a/DSC09298.jpg

hope that shows what your wanting to see.

FYI - Over on PT, there is a thread about a broken DSE panhard bracket, and a report of another. Racing breaks stuff, always check your parts.

The panhard bracket was inproperly installed. It was not welded to the frame. That is not a DSE failure.

It was in one of the reports, but unknown in the other. So were the 4 link brackets referenced in this thread.

The point is that there isn't a lot to weld to in the rear of an f-body, which is a problem of any of the contemporary rear suspensions. It is essential to keep an eye on suspension links of ANY vehicle used in a racing application.

These cars were not structurally capable of harnessing 450hp and 8" wide tires in the trans-am series 40+ years ago. Tires 335 wide and 600-700hp can break lots of parts.

very true.