57 Chassis C4 Corvette Front and Rear, Stage 4 + SS Kit + 32 Gallon Fuel Tank by Hot

[rat_rod_russell]

One we built for Don in San Antonio, Hes close enough for me to go take photos for him and post up. He's got a 57 4 Door Sedan and a 2 Door Hardtop he can't decide which to put on the chassis just yet.

The highlights

Hot Rod Jim C4 Frame # 46
Stage 4 rolling chassis
92 Corvette suspension front and rear
Dana 44 Differential with 3.73 gear upgrade
SS kit

• QA1 dual adjustable coil over shocks
• Front and rear adjustable sway bars
• Adjustable rear 4 bar (this really helps dial in your launch with a C4 rear)

Hot Rod Jim Custom 32.5 Gallon fuel tank

• Aluminum Tig welded
• 255 LPH Fuel Pump (650 HP @ 60 PSI)
• 0-90 ohm sending unit
• all AN hardware
• easily removable flex lines from under the car
• quick drop cradle
• NOTE: You do have to take out the spare tire well to fit the tank

[rat_rod_russell]

I'm trying to trade him my basket case 2 Door hard top for his 4 Door Sedan so I can have a 57 again but this time I can really use it. I loved my 2 door but it was just hard to take people or stuff in a 2 door. If you don't remember I only had my Black Widow 57 Sedan with a very similar chassis for 7 months and I put almost 12k on the clock, since I live at the shop I have no commute, that was driving anywhere because the car would get 28 MPG if you drove like a civilized person and would run 13.2 on street tires with 58 PSI in them, all day long on pump gas. So I plan on making a new DD car and dumping the Subaru. We'll see, his hardtop's in rough shape and mines all there and I have new quarters for it. Should be fun, I'll keep you all posted.

Later
-Russell

[tones2SS]

Very nice Russel. That should be a great build.

[brakebuster]

j.w. but why is the rear swaybar attached to the lower link. ive never seen it done that way before

[rat_rod_russell]

Originally Posted by brakebuster

j.w. but why is the rear swaybar attached to the lower link. ive never seen it done that way before

Its because of the fuel tank location on the 55-57 Chevy's and the modification required to those cars to make the sway bar fit the body if it was still on top like in the C4 corvettes. This takes care of a lot of problems with the longer wheel base too and you have a bunch of other stuff that has been moved and you just don't see like it sits here. Migrated instant centers of the rear swing arm, extended anti squat instant center and so fourth. By giving the rear sway bare less mechanical advantage over the rear we get a softer sway bar without having to buy a new one and we can use the OE Corvette bar that comes with the suspension. (so its free )

Thanks
-Russell

[jy211]

2 door

[214Chevy]

Very nice!! I love the frame set up.

[ccracin]

Originally Posted by rat_rod_russell

Its because of the fuel tank location on the 55-57 Chevy's and the modification required to those cars to make the sway bar fit the body if it was still on top like in the C4 corvettes. This takes care of a lot of problems with the longer wheel base too and you have a bunch of other stuff that has been moved and you just don't see like it sits here. Migrated instant centers of the rear swing arm, extended anti squat instant center and so fourth. By giving the rear sway bare less mechanical advantage over the rear we get a softer sway bar without having to buy a new one and we can use the OE Corvette bar that comes with the suspension. (so its free )

Thanks
-Russell

Very nice work. The chassis looks good. I just have to comment on the rear sway bar location as well. You may want to have someone do an FEA analysis on that idea. Between the HAZ created by welding the bracket to the tube and the loading in compression as well as bending it worries me. Long slender tubes in compression have to resist buckling. Obviously these types of 4 bar set-ups are well proven, but when you apply a load like that between the fixing points of the bar you are increasing the probability of buckling under load. I can't say for sure this is going to be the case, but without some calculations and investigation, I personally would go with a different solution. I'm not throwing stones, just my personal opinion. I wouldn't want to see any accidents happen.

[brakebuster]

Originally Posted by rat_rod_russell

Its because of the fuel tank location on the 55-57 Chevy's and the modification required to those cars to make the sway bar fit the body if it was still on top like in the C4 corvettes. This takes care of a lot of problems with the longer wheel base too and you have a bunch of other stuff that has been moved and you just don't see like it sits here. Migrated instant centers of the rear swing arm, extended anti squat instant center and so fourth. By giving the rear sway bare less mechanical advantage over the rear we get a softer sway bar without having to buy a new one and we can use the OE Corvette bar that comes with the suspension. (so its free )

Thanks
-Russell

thank you for the explanation

[rat_rod_russell]

Originally Posted by brakebuster

thank you for the explanation

Originally Posted by 509Chevelle

Very nice!! I love the frame set up.

Thank you, thank you.

Originally Posted by jy211

2 door

I'll think about it. But the idea of a corvette suspension 4 door with 600 HP Twin turbos just sounds so wrong its funny. I can here it now "You got wiped, by a 4 door"

I'm thinking that everyone will be able to just climb in and take off or just open the back door and drop the parts on the floor, little stuff like that. IF this were my only hot rod I'd think about it but I'm planning a wicked 55 Sedan sometime in the future.

Originally Posted by ccracin

Very nice work. The chassis looks good. I just have to comment on the rear sway bar location as well. You may want to have someone do an FEA analysis on that idea. Between the HAZ created by welding the bracket to the tube and the loading in compression as well as bending it worries me. Long slender tubes in compression have to resist buckling. Obviously these types of 4 bar set-ups are well proven, but when you apply a load like that between the fixing points of the bar you are increasing the probability of buckling under load. I can't say for sure this is going to be the case, but without some calculations and investigation, I personally would go with a different solution. I'm not throwing stones, just my personal opinion. I wouldn't want to see any accidents happen.

Thanks I apprentice you taking time to voice a valid opinion. But let me know if this makes since. The lower link of the 4 bar when under acceleration is not pushed forward in a buckling load but rather pulled in stretching as the knuckle is twisted forward so the arm will not see both extreme loads at the same time. Also the lower arm is so short that there is not that much leverage on the arm. Tubes are .125" wall DOM 1020 (mild steel) and all tig welded. Finally for practical purpose we tested this mounting method on my black and white 57 Chevy that I road raced and auto crossed for 3k miles and streeted for another 9k and never had any issues with the rear sway bar either. (P.S. The black and white car has thinner wall, smaller diameter tubing too.)

Later
-Russell