69 camaro rear suspension travel help...
 

how much travel do you guys run on a pro touring 69 camaro for the rear suspension? I'm trying to set up my rear end right now

This is where I am at. I'm mocking up the rear end so I can start to build the triangulated 4 link. I just need to know a common measurement of the amount of travel a car would see on a the road.

http://i548.photobucket.com/albums/i...o/IMG_0552.jpg

http://i548.photobucket.com/albums/i...o/IMG_0554.jpg

http://i548.photobucket.com/albums/i...o/IMG_0555.jpg

http://i548.photobucket.com/albums/i...o/IMG_0573.jpg

http://i548.photobucket.com/albums/i...o/IMG_0580.jpg

Most are in the 5-5.5" range.

In a perfect world, 6". Then you have an inch you can raise or lower the rear for ride height setting & still get by, & would still have 2" of bump or rebound. If you have bumpstops on the shocks, it uses up some bump travel. I like to see 2.5" travel clearence to the bump stop. Many coil over shocks are 5.5" stroke.

Ok then I seem to be pretty close in range. At ride height, the top of my housing is 3 inches from the frame rails. In these pictures, how does it look?


This would be at ride height...

http://i548.photobucket.com/albums/i...o/IMG_0604.jpg

http://i548.photobucket.com/albums/i...o/IMG_0605.jpg

http://i548.photobucket.com/albums/i...o/IMG_0606.jpg

those frame rails seem to be your biggest issue, not sure who's they are. They look they remove a lot of your clearance by the way they are bent. I don't think 3" is anywhere near what is normal. David said 6" ideally and I believe that was at ride height.

I meant 6" total travel bump & rebound, so 3" of available bump travel with maybe .5" more lost to a coil over bump stop, leaving 2.5" bump travel before you hit the bump stop. With shocks behind the axle it translates into a little less travel at the axle centerline due to the motion ratios.

3" at the axle is pretty good. Be sure to check your pinion bumper & driveshaft to tunnel clearence. If your trans is angled down to the rear, it will require the pinion to be angled up the same amount to align it, this can cause the driveshaft to be higher than you might think.
Those frame rails do look like they droop to the rear.
David

thanks David. I've never had one that close at ride height, but the factory rails are bent completely differently than what he's using.

Bad penny is at the limit, or darn close to it.

Would there be any downsides to having around 1"-2" more travel in the rear than what you stated ?The roads around here are pretty rough in some areas and any extra traxel could be beneficial.I do realize that ride height would be affected ,but I will have a little over 2" of channeling of the body over the frame rails.Would that not help with the ride height issues that inevitably come along with the extra travel?

channeling...that would help.... David, I thought Steve had fabricated frame rails?

I only have 4" of total travel on my falcon. This is only due to packaging, too much stuff under the falcon with the 3-link and watts.

I have only driven my car on the street at this point and I have not seen any major issues with limited travel. My DD 95 mustang only has 1" until bump stops and only rides hard when I have someone in the back seat.

4" of travel minimum should be fine. Do you plan on off roading :cool: . Our cars are meant to drive on asphalt. Unless you have some real big buddies that you intend on throwing in the back seat and take every where you go, as Greg Weld would say,"Fuggettaboutit" :D

No plans on offroading ,but even David reccomended 6" of travel as ideal and if you use c/o bumpstops you should add at least 1/2".I don't see the problem with 7" stroke shocks in any position if you aren't using factory style mounting points.I'm not saying you don't have some solid points,it is just that I'm 6'3" and weight 270# and what passes for pavement in some parts of my state are like hitting the inside corner curbs on some of the worst tracks i've seen.I was just thinking it wouldn't hurt to have a little cushion to the specs Dave quoted.

Four inches isn't enough. I agree with Dave, 6 inches gives you plenty of room to roam in extension and compression in a custom mounting application.

Throwing a set of long shocks on components that are engineered for a shorter shock isn't a good idea. You must mock things up and modify to make it work.

Old hot rodders "C" notch the frame rails when the clearance is tight... but you young guys wouldn't know anything about that... :D :woot:

I'm in mock up stage (or starting as of last month) and the whole rear frame is being handbuilt by a friend of mine and myself,so we can tweak things here and there.I may be wrong (wouldn't be thefirst time),but aren't the rear shocks or c/o usually of a longer travel than the front?I would like to get the max out of both ends within reason.Don't want to open too many cans of worms at one time,but want to consider both ends and make the wisest decisions that I can make.I don't think 4" is enough personally at either end.I would prefer at least 5" in front if possible.I don't want to step on anyones toes,but with channeling the body and reworking some of the shock mounts for adjustabity I could have enough compliance to get through some of the parking lot ramps around town cuz i intend to drive the crap out of it when It is running.