Superstock front suspension question

scott gray · 09-29-2010, 09:07 PM

Can someone maybe Travis clarify this. I noticed in comp plus the SS Chevy 2 wagon theyre building appears to have front coil overs on it . I was told by D1 tech this is a no no. The rule book also states front suspension must be as produced, is this another thing that will be jammed down our throats because someone did it and now it will be legal like most the other enhancements SS has got in the last few years? Thanks Scott Gray SS1079

Ed Carpenter · 09-29-2010, 09:17 PM

Scott my understanding is that we are stuck with the old shock tower setup we have. You can't run anything else.

PS Did you buy your titanium valves yet? LOL

scott gray · 09-29-2010, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deuces wild

Scott my understanding is that we are stuck with the old shock tower setup we have. You can't run anything else.

PS Did you buy your titanium valves yet? LOL

That was my understanding till i saw the pictures of the set -up on comp plus and the hullabaloo on all their engineering skills. I thought everyone already had titanium valves , just wating for them to be legal LOL

Jeff Lee · 09-29-2010, 10:19 PM

My understanding on how some are getting away with this is the factory had a coil spring and inside of that coil spring was a shock. The argument goes that the outside diameter of the coil spring is not defined so in essence, a smaller diameter coil spring while still having a shock through the middle of it is legal. Same principle as OEM but vastly different in appearance.
Of course you can shed a lot of weight (example: an AMC 1970 and newer has a very large outside diameter spring), it makes it easier and probably cheaper to find the proper spring rate for a drag car and of course the ride height is considerably easier to adjust.
I believe this trend started with the 4th generation GM F-bodies. The same ones that got rack & pinion steering...

Tom Meyer · 09-30-2010, 08:56 AM

QA1 makes a kit for the front of early chevy IIs & mustangs and even amcs that use all stock mounting points, the lower spring perch is replaced with part made by MPR. I have heard many 3 gen camaros are running the spring over strut on the front that did not come that way.

Mike Gray · 09-30-2010, 01:48 PM

Then would this be acceptable on my mustang?

Tom Meyer · 09-30-2010, 02:01 PM

No it does not use the stock spindle or mounting point, but maybe the west coast rule book said its ok. Tom

Jim Caughlin · 09-30-2010, 02:57 PM

Something similar to this was proposed for early Mustang and Comet chassis's a couple of years ago and was rejected. Seems like a double standard if this is legal now.

09-29-2010, 09:07 PM	#1
scott gray Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 20 Likes: 0 Liked 30 Times in 4 Posts	Superstock front suspension question Can someone maybe Travis clarify this. I noticed in comp plus the SS Chevy 2 wagon theyre building appears to have front coil overs on it . I was told by D1 tech this is a no no. The rule book also states front suspension must be as produced, is this another thing that will be jammed down our throats because someone did it and now it will be legal like most the other enhancements SS has got in the last few years? Thanks Scott Gray SS1079

09-29-2010, 09:17 PM	#2
Ed Carpenter Live Reporter Join Date: May 2006 Location: Dripping Springs, Tx Posts: 2,700 Likes: 185 Liked 509 Times in 128 Posts	Re: Superstock front suspension question Scott my understanding is that we are stuck with the old shock tower setup we have. You can't run anything else. PS Did you buy your titanium valves yet? LOL __________________ Ed Carpenter 2005 Chevy Cobalt A/SM Race Engine Development

09-29-2010, 10:19 PM	#4
Jeff Lee VIP Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Anthem, Arizona Posts: 2,766 Likes: 0 Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts	Re: Superstock front suspension question My understanding on how some are getting away with this is the factory had a coil spring and inside of that coil spring was a shock. The argument goes that the outside diameter of the coil spring is not defined so in essence, a smaller diameter coil spring while still having a shock through the middle of it is legal. Same principle as OEM but vastly different in appearance. Of course you can shed a lot of weight (example: an AMC 1970 and newer has a very large outside diameter spring), it makes it easier and probably cheaper to find the proper spring rate for a drag car and of course the ride height is considerably easier to adjust. I believe this trend started with the 4th generation GM F-bodies. The same ones that got rack & pinion steering... __________________ Jeff Lee 7494 D/S '70 AMX

09-30-2010, 08:56 AM	#5
Tom Meyer Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Pierce NE Posts: 902 Likes: 53 Liked 303 Times in 106 Posts	Re: Superstock front suspension question QA1 makes a kit for the front of early chevy IIs & mustangs and even amcs that use all stock mounting points, the lower spring perch is replaced with part made by MPR. I have heard many 3 gen camaros are running the spring over strut on the front that did not come that way. __________________ Tom Meyer 5240 SS Stock ???

09-30-2010, 01:48 PM	#6
Mike Gray Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 527 Likes: 233 Liked 525 Times in 138 Posts	Re: Superstock front suspension question Then would this be acceptable on my mustang? Attached Thumbnails

09-30-2010, 02:01 PM	#7
Tom Meyer Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Pierce NE Posts: 902 Likes: 53 Liked 303 Times in 106 Posts	Re: Superstock front suspension question No it does not use the stock spindle or mounting point, but maybe the west coast rule book said its ok. Tom __________________ Tom Meyer 5240 SS Stock ???

09-30-2010, 02:57 PM	#8
Jim Caughlin Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Woodburn, Or Posts: 637 Likes: 70 Liked 696 Times in 209 Posts	Re: Superstock front suspension question Something similar to this was proposed for early Mustang and Comet chassis's a couple of years ago and was rejected. Seems like a double standard if this is legal now.