![]() |
GM A-Body IRS
Since I have been working and reworking my '72 442 convertible for something like the last 15 years, I thought I might "upgrade" to IRS. Why not, right? I figure I will sell my Currie 9" to fund this little project.
So I figure I have six basic options. 1) C-3 Covette pro: Uses the half-shaft as the upper control arm. This makes narrowing difficult, but it also alleviates the problem of upper control arm/frame interference. con: The unit is difficult to adapt given the transverse spring, and trailing arms. 2) '69-'87 Jaguar pro: Uses the half-shaft as the upper control arm. This makes narrowing difficult, but it also alleviates the problem of upper control arm/frame interference. Comes in an easily adaptable "cage." Center section is essentially a Dana 44. Readily available for little money. con: Unknown axle strength. No trailing arm. 3) MN12 Thunderbird/Mark VIII pro: Strong. Comes on a readily adaptable carrier. con: It's 2" too wide. Not easily narrowable (cast lower control arms). 4) Mustang Cobra pro: It's an inch or so narrower than the A-body rear. Comes on an easily adaptable carrier. Strong. con: Known handling issues. Not cheap. 5) 200X GTO pro: Easily adaptable. Inexpensive. con: Strength (both the differential and the suspension components)? 6) Pontiac G-8 pro: Comes on an easily adaptable carrier. con: Strength (both the differential and the suspension components)? Remember, this is a bit of a Pro-Grand-Touring car; a backroad burner, long distance tourer, and not an autocross machine. I was leaning toward the MN12, but after reading about the Jaguar unit, I think it might be a good choice. It even has the right wheel bolt pattern. I think the adaption of a trailing arm to the factory A-body might help with wheel hop? Anyway, looking for thoughts and arguments regarding any of these. Shiny Side Up! Bill |
Check out these links, a bit of info, not real in depth, but a good starting point for research.
http://www.rodandcustommagazine.com/...n/viewall.html http://www.hotrod.com/howto/hrdp_071...s/viewall.html Did you consider a C4 Vette Rear end type of set up? The gear case / center section is braced with a torque arm (like a 3-link) and the wheels are set up like a 4-link. Yeah a real oversimplification, but I've heard that most mods that narrow the set up still retain good geometry with a hub to hub measurement as narrow as 58 inches . These guys do a C4 Vette suspension on 50's trucks and tri-fives www.hotrodjim.com/trifive_c4_grand_coil.php And there are a few other shops that do custom C4 Vette set ups. They mostly cater to Corvettes only but some have done other projects. http://uscorvetteconversions.com/ http://www.progressiveautomotive.com/ And one of the guys in our club has a 69 Camaro with a BMW 7 series IRS. He liked it because it had the huge brakes, and the right hub to hub for his project. He went with cantilever shocks in the trunk. Quite a project but it looks sick, and it handles great. http://pacificfab.net/barry-camaro.htm |
The C-4 looks nice, but very pricey.
The more I read though, the more the GTO rear looks like a good choice. Though he's never posted anymore on it, DDT RCKT put one in a a '70-'72 LeMans (shares a frame with my 442). Here is the thread on it. Hmmm..... Shiny Side Up! Bill |
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:52 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Lateral-g.net