![]() |
Splined Sway Bar Info?
2 Attachment(s)
I'm currently wrapping up a coil-over conversion for my '64 Chevy truck that has an assorted group of aftermarket parts that don't want to play well w/a traditional sway bar set-up. The mods consist of an aftermarket front cross-member (Porterbuilt) & narrowed a-arms (also PB). I have mocked-up multiple C10 bars as well as an f-body 1Le 36mm bar but only one lines up anywhere near close to the lower a-arm link mounts. My set-up = approx. 39.25"-39.375" wide @ the center of the outer link mounts on the arms. Others I've measured:
Belltech C10 'Sport' bar @ 1.375"od = 40.5" Stock '00 S10 OE bar = ~41.5" 3rd GEN f-body 36mm bar = 43.75" G-body Malibu OE bar = ~43.5" Addco/Porterbuilt C10 bar = 44" Of these units I played with, the Belltech bar is closest but still too wide. I can possibly get creative enough to get it to work @ the a-arm mounts but once you put the frame-pivot bushing housing on the bar & mount it to the bottom of the frame rails, it's the lowest hanging item on the truck & it's @ a very vulnerable spot. I have reached out to Porterbuilt to see if they have a narrower sway-bar that fits my dimensions but w/the mounting position @ the lowest portion of the frame being a concern, I sat back & wondered about alternative mounting of the bar. Moving the mounting location farther back w/the Belltech bar did help w/the mounting height (the frame starts to curve/rise in the area) but created other packaging issues. The shape of the bar is not ideal as-is which limits clearance as well so that's also a possible packaging issue (it may/may-not interfere w/my current minimal width front wheel/tire combo). Ideally, I need to mount the bar within the frame rail vs. below it so I don't add a clearance concern to the bottom of the chassis which was purposely built to minimize clearance concerns. This has me researching a Splined Sway bar as a solution. I've been doing basic Google searches for a few days & did find some info but where one source provides spec data, another doesn't (making it hard to determine what to get). Most I've found are race-car/rear set-ups. Welder Series has a DIY kit but it's not really a splined assembly nor do I feel it's adequately sized. Speedway has basically what I need (it's a 64-72 A-body spec kit) but it's too wide & they don't list narrower options in a similar configuration. I attached images of the Speedway/A-body set-up. A kit like this w/options for the main bar width is what I feel might work. If you've been down this rabbit hole & know of a source/sources for splined sway (Torsion) bars, let me know. |
I'm surprised that Porterbuilt didn't offer a sway bar as an add-on sale when you bought their kit. Seems like they would have offered the info that a standard C10 sized sway bar does not work with the setup they sold you.
Check out Speedway Engineering, they have virtually endless combinations of setups as you can buy the individual components to suite your needs. I'm sure if you calculated all of your dimensions and give them a rough estimate on vehicle weight, motion ratio of your front suspension and current spring rate, they could match up a bar rate for your intended application. http://1speedway.com/index.php?route...tegory&path=76 |
Quote:
That being said, a fresh in-house bar built to length would solve my initial 'fit' concerns but still leaves the 'it's the lowest item on the chassis' concern. That's where a modular splined-bar would work better as I can position it on top/inside of the lower rail 'lip' raising it's centerline out of harms way. I just browsed Speedways site again during my lunch & took additional notes but they don't list enough info on individual items to determine if their 'G-Comp Standard length bar @34" width' will interchange w/the A-body kits bar. They also now list an F-body 'kit' but no pics & not even similar info like the A-body kit. I scratch my head & wonder how their web site content is modeled/approved. |
I know that my splined bar came from Speedway Engineering. It's housed in a tube mount that is welded to stands welded to the frame. The arms and links etc are all just pieced together as well, I think some came from Allstar.
The main thing I fought for space with was whether to go over the steering or under. Going under let me have a much shorter swing arm which increased my bar rate by a ton. The end links do hang down kind of low but they are right next to the inside of the tire and as of yet they haven't hit anything. Start looking for the pieces you need instead of trying to find a kit and I think you'll be able to piece something together pretty easily. |
Quote:
I am starting out w/750# 10" springs/5" stroke shocks on the Ridetech coil-overs (sbc/700r4 combo) but don't have true scaled weights as the truck is still in the build assembly process. |
I wouldn't worry too much about end link length. I used to run extremely long end links to keep my swing arms above the tie rods with no issues. In fact, longer links will give more fudge room for the rod ends to not bind. The little itty bitty short ones I run now had to be just right to not bind anywhere in travel.
Length of swing arm is a big one though and was my motivation to run mine under the steering. |
Quote:
Good info to know on the links length. I wasn't thinking about the longer links helping from an alignment perspective. |
Quote:
While I'm waiting, was there a specific reason for your bar being housed in a tube arrangement? My guess is that the tubular 'housing' adds additional rigidity up front & g-body rails make accessing hardware more difficult. My plan was the traditional mounting/pillow-block arrangement (with upgraded/billet mounting blocks) utilizing an existing x-members mounting points. This would allow using a standard 37.5"L bar & utilize 'straight' arms @ 8" length w/the links in a plumb position as well as 7" & 9" positions for tunability (this is what I currently have mocked-up). |
Because I decided to go under the tie rods with my swing arms, lowering the bar itself from the frame with the tube stands helped with the geometry of the end links. This along with the additional structural help is why we went this direction.
|
Stay away from aluminum arms. A circle track magazine tested them and they have too much flex.
|
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:26 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Lateral-g.net