tci new 67-69 subframe setup
 

clip
 

looks like its all show no go, mustang II arms, chrome etc, and it seems its from a streetrodder shop, which generally street rodders are show and no go

I just noticed it today in the nov super chevy add. I personally think it looks like junk compared to the 21 century and DSE subs. It looks like the a arms are mustang 2. Also looks like a manual rack. I wonder if you can get a power rack for it. The tubing looks kind of cool, but it dosent look as rigid as the DSE.

I sold one of these IFS units to a customer who is installing on a 69 Camaro. This is a dynamite piece. It is super ridgid with beautiful welding. He is installing a new 572 BB in it so it is going to test this suspension to the max. It uses NO Mustang II parts. The spindles are a heavy duty version of the spindles they have used on their coilover frontends for years. They use their own billet coilover shocks with adjustable dampening, progressive wound springs for good ride and adjustable ride height. The a-arms are specially made just for this IFS unit. They use shims between the upper a-arm shafts a :thumbsup: nd the crossmember to adjust the alignment so there is no chance of it slipping like the Mustang II design does if you don't tighten them good enough. It uses a manual rack and pinion as standard. A power rack with a quick 2.5 turn ratio is available also. It comes standard with a front sway bar. The standard brakes use GM metric calipers or you can upgrade to 12 or 13" Wilwood rotors and calipers. Combined with their new rear 4-link and subframe connectors and a good set of sticky tires this setup will make .9G's with ease.
Tim

What do you base this off of? Does it look rigid to you, or have you actually tested this in a real world situation?





How about using Mustang II Geometry? Most people that use MII geometry don't actually use any real Mustang II parts either- They use chrome plated fabricated street rod replacements. Just like this frame appears to use.


Do you possibly know what the bumpsteer number are? How about camber gain, or initial caster settings? IF this company's front and rear are able to pull a .9 lateral g on a skid pad, I'd give all the credit to the tires.

This is a hot rod front frame, looks dictated form on this item. If you are serious about open tracking the vehicle, this isn't your frame.

Tyler

I can tell that you are a certified engineer in suspension systems. I will instruct my customer to remove this POS from his car and reinstall the stock suspension.

good idea :thumbsup:

That's pretty funny-I'm not an engineer, but I do employ one of the most talented mechanical engineers in this industry. Your advice above is actually much more sound than you think(but I know you were being sarcastic.)
With a stock subframe I can bolt on a spindle that has geometry figures that match a very high dollar aftermarket piece in most areas, and surpass it in others. If you think adding a big block between the tubular frame rails of an aftermarket front clip is "going to test this suspension to the max" then you have some reading and searching to do. Engine choice is not what makes a handling car.

Tyler

I thought Dennis68 quit cars????? :D

Let's not play the "Who's suspension is better" game, that's not the question that was asked. None of us here can comment on the subframe's statistical figures (rigidity, camber gain, etc) without seeing some real data.