62 Chevrolet, STILL No Traction

[Mike Pearson]

Rally Bob,

If I set up my car that way it would spin the tires uncontrollably. I have run my car with a stick shift and an automatic. Both responded to the same setup. I tried moving the front mounting point up in the car several times with the same result, tire spin. I have worked very hard on my chassis setup over the years and found as much as 3 tenths of a second just in chassis tuning. There may be other ways to set up the rear suspension but this the only configuration that has worked in the cars that I have setup. My car is a 68 camaro SS/HA 350 cu in, 3200 lbs 9.92 1.28 60 ft.

Mike

[Aubrey N Bruneau]

Originally Posted by Mike Pearson

There may be other ways to set up the rear suspension but this the only configuration that has worked in the cars that I have setup. My car is a 68 camaro SS/HA 350 cu in, 3200 lbs 9.92 1.28 60 ft.
Mike

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Stick shift experience... 1.28 ????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!

uuuuuuh..... uuuuuuuuuuh....
......I'll do what Mike says...

holy $%&#!!!!!!!!!!

[rallye bob]

Aubrey;
You can check this post (from speedtalk.com) out and try to follow along.LOL
I know you don't run a "torque arm" setup but the theory(s) are related........
http://www.speedtalk.com/forum/viewt...=6691&start=30
PS: I am a big fan of the GM '60's "bubble tops"

[Dave Goob Cook]

Plotting the I/C location length and height is all well and good, but with the limitations of Stock racing, with the driveline (including crankshaft C/L) being inherently high in the car, you can't treat it as you would a full tube chassis car in regards to the I/C length and height.

I've found that the I/C needs to be long and high to help use the sprung weight to help transfer (or roll) toward the rear, while simultaneously applying some "plant" to the rear axle housing.

The greatest percentage of the Stock type vehicle weight is located above the spindle/axle centerlines, and your suspension geometry must take full advantage of a bad situation.

I appreciate what is being said about the Camaro, but all we know about leaf spring cars does not apply to these factory trailing arm/coil sprung cars.

I never did sort out clearly as to whether your car has any or all solid bushings in the rear bars?
As mentioned, the more compliant bushings will have/use more pinion rotation under load, resulting in the need for more static pinion angle.

[Aubrey N Bruneau]

That was GREAT, RallyeBob... learned all kinds of 8 cylinder words and everything !
HEEE HEEEE !!!

Dave, Mikes car is a Super Stock... I think he has an aftermarket 4 link

BTW, I got the ride height down, and did some measurements. It's better, but no where NEAR ideal.

[gymracer01]

I been thinking a lot about your 62 since I sent you a PM yesterday. I know guys that ran well in the day of these cars that did very little to the rear suspensions. Now I realize we have much better tires and a better clutch setup. These cars didn't seem to be so bad with a good set of tires and some shocks and maybe an airbag. It was soon realized that hard bushings and raising the mounting point of the top bar at the rear was the hot setup. Are you sure the front is working correctly. In the day everyone loosened up all the front end and the things nearly drug the rear bumper, but got weight transfer. Just some thoughts, I think you are getting there.
Jim N.

[Aubrey N Bruneau]

First, I'd like to thank everybody who advised me here...
I listened to all, and am applying what I am aloud to !

I must admit, I was just about ready to give up. Car has been jinxed !
EVERYTHING going wrong lately !
Have an engine miss that seems to be getting progressively worse. Concerned that it could be electrical system being over-taxed by the new "big" fuel pump, electric water pump and electric fan... with my stupid alternator not working.
Seems to still be really lean too. Don't get THAT ? Same carbs I ran before.

AS for traction, it appears that I may be getting there !
Raised the front about 3/4", and lowered rear a bit ( not enough yet ).
On cold slicks, for the first time, I felt that "jump" effect of a drag car !
FINALLY got a hint of atmosphere under the front tires.

I'm going to bring the rear down another inch. Car will still sit with some forward rake.

thanks again, people

Aubrey

[Woodro Josey]

There is a guy in Atlanta that has been racing 60's Chevrolet's with 409 Plus Cubic Inch engines since day one. His Name is Lamar Walden, he is still Nostalgie racing those cars. I might can get his number if you'd like to call him!

[Bub Whitaker]

Woodro...Could you elaborate on the approx date of Day one ???

[Aubrey N Bruneau]

Woodro, I've spoken to Lamar a couple times.
You should have heard him laugh 4 years ago, when I told him I was building a car for actual modern Stock Eliminator ! ! !
His response... you can't get under the Index ( this was the general consensus for most anyone who was experienced with 409's in the later years of Stock ).
He did wish me good luck though !
My one Stock event that I managed to attend a couple years ago... qualified second to last in a 38 car field... but I WAS .18 under the Index ! ( 1.75 60ft... spinning through first gear ).

Anyhow, Lamar's experience, is mostly with SEVERELY modified cars and engines ( angle milled block, ect ).

"Day one" ?
Somewhere in spring of 1961 !
I was 1 year old