View Single Post
  #5  
Old 10-04-2006, 09:04 PM
Teetoe_Jones Teetoe_Jones is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: La La Land, CA
Posts: 856
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ibuildm
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.
What do you base this off of? Does it look rigid to you, or have you actually tested this in a real world situation?




Quote:
Originally Posted by ibuildm
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.

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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ibuildm
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

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
Reply With Quote