Ty, you cannot run a 315 with stock dse or other tube arms, no matter if the frame will allow it, the rims will hit the arms very quickly not allowing any turning radius, among other things, so now you buy that aftermarket frame, you need different arms already, so to base a frame off stock style arms is not the best idea. there are better options out there, and to have really good adjustability you do not need sc/c arms or howe arms etc, its how the susp geometry was set up, its very easy to set a susp up with 1.0 to 1.5 camber for street then have it go to 2.0-2.5 for track duty, caster is typically fine non adjustable just as long as there enough of it, i like 5-7 degrees, other then that as long as the susp has been computer designed, and the rack width, height been designed, along with proper height steering arms, you will end with a very nice chassis.
TY:
Whether the stock DSE control arms would work with a 315 tire, I do not know, however I do know a 315 tire can be run under a stock '69 body, as CAR has already done it. What arms they use I do not know. I'm not so much trying to mix and match everyones parts, as I am trying to say that there seems to be several types/brands of parts on the market that can accomplish a specific task on a suspension. Some use one method, others use another. Some are fixed, others are adjustable. As I have been reading, many of the adjustable "Racing", parts offer a pretty impressive range of flexibility, So much so, that I think they would cover what needs we have and then some..
Further reading on this subject has opened up a New World of possibilities. The racing technology that is available is impressive and in some cases just flat out unbelievable. The needed settings that you mentioned above are well within the range of many of the adjustable parts that are offered. For better or worse the adjustability settings can get, "Out of Control", as far as different combinations if you were not careful. (There are definitely some Anal Retentive Engineers out there)
JAKE:
Also before calling a chassis the ultimate, do you know anything other then parts about it? ie, camber gain, initial camber adjust ability,caster, caster adjust ability, bump steer? these things should be known in a properly designed chassis.
goodluck
jake
TY:
Jake, you are right saying something is the, "ultimate", was a poor use of the word. I guess what I was trying to say is, the subframe that I would really like to have on my car, so "ultimate to me", would be a better way of expressing myself.
As far as my knowledge regarding the settings you mentioned above. Yes, I have read about all of them and I think I have a reasonable understanding of them (Hopefully better as time goes on). What settings are preferred, depends on the intended use and the specifications of a specific vehicle. "Bump Steer", issues seem to have been understood and corrected by the designers of most of the parts that would influence this issue.
I know I am not mentioning any specific parts in my response. I am just trying to clear up some of the Broader questions you have mentioned. This thread was/is intended to address the original question from a wider perspective rather than a specific one. Further, I have no intension in designing my own front suspension, rather see if I can extract additional items from the Racing side, that would be fun to have on our cars.
As you know, the world of Racing is technically complex, however there are many facets of Racing that can be brought over from the pure Racing side to the Street Side, where most of our vehicles reside. As I mentioned earlier, some of them are already here.
I know this was long winded and probably redundant in some places. I just hope it clarifies further my questions.
I hope this was helpful in answering/addressing some of your questions.
Thanks,
Ty O'Neal
|