Reasonable chassis / suspension options for my 54 Olds project

[gearheads78]

I am starting to do some research on what to do for chassis / suspension for my upcoming Olds project. Unless someone has a better idea it looks like I will be ending up with a builders series chassis from either Chassis Works or Morrison. My goals are great ride and handling with an occational GG autocross but will not be a track car. It looks like both companies make products that will fit my needs and with a similar price structure. I am trying to get away from the Mustang II designs but avoid waiting two years to buy a RS chassis so these look like realistic options to me. Anyone have any experience they would like to share or opinions about either?

[Silver69Camaro]

Hi there. I can't really steer you in any direction because I'm a bit biased, but the advice I would give you would be to call each manufacturer and talk to them in length on what you are looking for. Have an idea of wheels and tire sizes, but be open minded to making some adjustments. Also, be honest with yourself on what you really want to do with the car. Have fun!

[bret]

I've got a fair amount of experience with this style of build in our street rod market. The full chassis route is certainly a viable option for a high end build, especially if the existing frame or floorpan is already shot. Roadster shop, Ironworks, and several others can accommodate nicely.
If it is reasonable shape then the stock frame can be worked with in an effecient manner.
For the frontend, few have more hands on experience with "unusual" cars [especially the 50's cars] than Fatmans. Not only do they do a specific front clip for this car, they can answer a multitude of your other questions about the build because they been under those cars personally all their lives.
On the rearend, a triangulated 4 link works well. While there is no "model specific" application, the components are highly adaptable and the installation is straightforward.
With this approach you still have the choice of air cor coilover. I personally like air for these cars because there is no compromise in performance AND they look bitchin on the ground!

Sounds like a cool project...good luck!

[gearheads78]

Originally Posted by bret

I've got a fair amount of experience with this style of build in our street rod market. The full chassis route is certainly a viable option for a high end build, especially if the existing frame or floorpan is already shot. Roadster shop, Ironworks, and several others can accommodate nicely.
If it is reasonable shape then the stock frame can be worked with in an effecient manner.
For the frontend, few have more hands on experience with "unusual" cars [especially the 50's cars] than Fatmans. Not only do they do a specific front clip for this car, they can answer a multitude of your other questions about the build because they been under those cars personally all their lives.
On the rearend, a triangulated 4 link works well. While there is no "model specific" application, the components are highly adaptable and the installation is straightforward.
With this approach you still have the choice of air cor coilover. I personally like air for these cars because there is no compromise in performance AND they look bitchin on the ground!

Sounds like a cool project...good luck!

I know they have been around for a long time but all I have ever seen from them (and still see on the current web site is MII stuff) I am not opposed to keeping and modifiing my frame just want to see options out there. I talked to one of the guys at GG Dallas about a frame and 17K would get me a work of art but would take a long time saving to get the money.

[takid455]

Building a '56 olds myself, I am in the same boat. The full frame route is the most advanced. Fatman stuff seems heavily based on MII design which I dont want. At 20k, an RS chassis is hard to swallow, but saves lots of time and is up to date with more or less with technology. I am sure other companies are the same. Art's setup was a little less $ but not a whole lot. Also want to avoid clipping the chassis. 2nd gen F body does work though. I have seem in rough form / early build, a 94-96 caprice/ Impala frame fitted to a ' 56 olds body. Its not bolt on, but not too far off. I am playing with that option on the drawing board currently. While my OE drums are being cut, it will be a little before I get to the underpinnings of my car and plan to drive it as is HAMB friendly for the time being.

[bret]

Don't let the MII design dissuade you just because it is not popular
on this site. I have raced with, driven, and been outrun by several MII equipped cars.
Lots of merit to a full chassis, if you have the resources. Lots of merit to building just as capable of car on a smaller budget as well.
Glad to see the research and discussion!

[gearheads78]

Originally Posted by bret

Don't let the MII design dissuade you just because it is not popular
on this site. I have raced with, driven, and been outrun by several MII equipped cars.
Lots of merit to a full chassis, if you have the resources. Lots of merit to building just as capable of car on a smaller budget as well.
Glad to see the research and discussion!

What about for the rear? 4 bar or triangulated 4bar? I not sure if I am going to do air ride or not but should the suspension design make a difference in what direction I go? When I built my 66 Cutlass I used the whole SC&C stageII+ front with Currietrac rear suspension with Bilstein shocks. I was very pleased with how it handled. If this car will handle similar I will be happy.

[dontlifttoshift]

Sorry for the not so great pics. This was a 56 Buick, not the same but similar. We used a Heidts Pro-g clip on this one along with a TCI torque arme in the rear. The x frame accepts the torque arm quite well and the front end went in just like any other "subframe" swap. It's a bunch of work but it allows your to put ride height exactly where you want it. You will spend 8 to 12k in parts going this way, maybe more, so that new chassis isn't terribly expensive when you factor in your time.

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[takid455]

DO like that torque arm setup w/ bags.

Clipping is a lot of effort and can go bad if not done properly. Not that I dont have the ability to do such, but like you mentioned, the full frame becomes no too far off.

I intend to use bags / air ride system being I am going for the grand tourer style build. These are classy cars and should handle and look as such. Had the '56 out today after the brake job and I came back w/ a big smile. While its no BMW in the twisties, it did fairly well considering 57 year old technology and 87 turn lock to lock steering. Actually much older technology. I think '58 was the first year for ball joints.

Anyhow, your suspension design will be greatly impacted on the overall type of focus you want to build your car. Personally, I prefer a three link, but the ease and egress of a 4tri-4 link may be the answer. After more R&D, I will have the answer for my build. Hopefully you will will as well. I do know that the kink pins will not be in the future.

[takid455]

Not to hijack, but since we are on the 54-56 bodies, here's a few shots of the '56.

Shindig garage where found


Arriving at the shop. Note '56 F250 Shop trunk on background


Ghetto paint job infusing '57 buick side trim


Origin of idea





Back to topic now.