Open a photobucket account, load the photos there then copy and paste the link here.
138 replies to this topic
#76
TerrA LX
-
- Members
-
- 14,241 posts
Fulcrum Fixture
- Location:Sid 'n' knee
- Joined: 31-May 06
Posted 19 November 2013 - 09:54 AM
#78
ls2lxhatch
-
- Members
-
- 5,332 posts
- Location:Perth
- Car:LX Hatch
- Joined: 29-May 06
Posted 20 November 2013 - 07:01 PM
You need to remove the word thumb from the image url or click on the thumbnail so you get a big picture and copy that link.
Edited by ls2lxhatch, 20 November 2013 - 07:02 PM.
#79
_NewsuxLX_
_NewsuxLX_
-
- Guests
Posted 20 November 2013 - 07:02 PM
I dont even no what that is let alone how to do it lol
#80
ls2lxhatch
-
- Members
-
- 5,332 posts
- Location:Perth
- Car:LX Hatch
- Joined: 29-May 06
#81
_LXSS350_
_LXSS350_
-
- Guests
Posted 21 November 2013 - 02:40 AM
So they finally finished it. Its been over two years since we first loaned them a spare K-frame, but realised a year in that straight line drag racing is their only forte and they simply don't understand fast cornering or inside outside weight transfer under cornering and braking loads, let alone roll centres, instant centres, having separate caster camber adjustment (no shims)
Be interested in reviewing the measurement specs to confirm my thoughts. But I will stand corrected as it sure doesn't look like it will offer much improvement for corner carving over the Massey Ferguson suitable standard torrie set-up.
Good for drag racing and make it easy to fit 90/10 coilover shocks. Still looks like it is a carbon copy of the fatally flawed 70's geometry errors.
I just don't see why anyone interested in corners would be interested in spending $4.5k just to gain a few slight subtle benefits. I think with the drag racing fraternity its all about bragging rights WOW look I have a custom built K-frame front end with coilovers..
Its quite ironic that forever the yanks had no idea about going fast around corners and awesome braking, yet now here they are today with the hottest market being Pro-Touring where they are putting real geometry into those old 50's,60's and 70's muscle cars that in the old days could only really go fast in a straight line.
#82
_NewsuxLX_
_NewsuxLX_
-
- Guests
Posted 21 November 2013 - 06:02 AM
Honestly they arnt built for targa racing. If you building a pourpose built race car your not guna go down to autobarn and by speco stuff are you. They are more for streeters who are lookin for coil overs or airbags, theres abit more adjustment in them and they look heaps better than the standard splatter and you can fit big brakes easier. Just my opinion. If i was going racing i wouldnt have brought one
#83
_LXSS350_
_LXSS350_
-
- Guests
Posted 21 November 2013 - 01:54 PM
We are in 2013 and suspension and geometry knowledge has made enormous inroads and rightfully it has crossed over into the hotrodding of 60/70's muscle cars. It actually has nothing to do with racing its all about angles although obviously using good 2013 geometry knowledge and the far better tyres (that we didn't have in the 70's) means we can not only can get around corners in a torrie far faster than Brock ever could, but we also don't have to worry about our kidneys being forced up into our throats when we hit a rough road. The whole idea is to keep your tyres in max contact and yet not ride like a billy cart in an attempt to get the very poorly designed std chassis to work
Now this is not to say that some people hotrodding a torrie don't want to keep all the 70's foibles.
You are correct all these replacement K-frames are built with one design goal in mind.and that is style over substance , but that's my whole point ..... is spending $4.5k worth that gain?
What also is troublesome as per CRS is what real R&D is going into these things because all the so called certified safe means zip if it doesn't fit even using a common engine? Certainly wouldn't give anyone peace of mind knowing that their safety has been designed by someone that can't even make it bolt up.
I just question what I am seeing being sold as hot-up bits as being poor / no real engineering, overpriced and zero back-up support responsibility by the seller. It would seem the vast majority of businesses are taking advantage of the interest in doing up old cars and dishing up rubbish that's only claim to fame is its expensive rubbish.
#84
_NewsuxLX_
_NewsuxLX_
-
- Guests
Posted 21 November 2013 - 03:15 PM
I see where you are coming from man. I cant speak for other brands or other people for that matter but this set up is perfect for my car and for what i intend to do with it. By the way do you have a race car or something? I couldnt seem to find any pictures or anything. Some of the pics youve put up seem very high tec, are they of your project or just internet pics? You seem very switched on with geometry. Cheers
#85
ls2lxhatch
-
- Members
-
- 5,332 posts
- Location:Perth
- Car:LX Hatch
- Joined: 29-May 06
Posted 21 November 2013 - 06:11 PM
You are correct all these replacement K-frames are built with one design goal in mind.and that is style over substance , but that's my whole point ..... is spending $4.5k worth that gain?
I agree. I think the aftermarket k-frames are primarily intended for street car owners that want either height adjustable shocks or air bags. If that is all you want then I think some of them will do the job. You may also get some small improvement in performance due to a wider choice of shocks and springs. Like everything whether or not it represents value for money is up the the individual.
If you were serious about improving the suspension then you would need to replace the front and rear suspension as a matched set. I suspect the market for that level of modification to a LH/LX Torana is too small to make it viable for a business to develop a significantly improved suspension package for the LH/LX/UC Torana.
The worldwide market for US muscle car parts is massive by comparison so its not surprising that you can buy an improved suspension package for a Mustang or Camaro.
Edited by ls2lxhatch, 21 November 2013 - 06:15 PM.
#86
Posted 21 November 2013 - 07:42 PM
No need to spend big money on R&D to reinvent the wheel, a subframe that accepts say C5 Corvette components using OEM geometry and offers adequate room for a suitable steering rack would be just fine
#87
_LXSS350_
_LXSS350_
-
- Guests
Posted 22 November 2013 - 04:26 PM
I see where you are coming from man. I cant speak for other brands or other people for that matter but this set up is perfect for my car and for what i intend to do with it. By the way do you have a race car or something? I couldnt seem to find any pictures or anything. Some of the pics youve put up seem very high tec, are they of your project or just internet pics? You seem very switched on with geometry. Cheers
For me if your spending $4.5k+ for a new front end set-up it would have to offer significant handling benefits.
No I build my own hatch's .... I have never had time to race. Plus at my age it would be very hurtful to be beaten and also make me feel guilty when I yell at Webber for making a driving mistake. 
But yes after a build to properly dial them in it is handy to use the track. At my age the road is not a racetrack, I have a major fear of flashing blue lights in my rear view mirror and the very unsatisfactory free accommodation they provide when they catch up with you. (to give you your room number - no doubt with some guy they call big bubba).
I don't know exactly which pictures you refer but I presume they are pro-touring internet photos. For me a great change has happened in the usa where they have finally taken steps away from pretty much straight line only performance. Sure they had some cars that could corner ok but compared to europe they had yet to learn that customers wanted handling and brakes to go with the powerful engines.
Where things are getting taken out of context here is all this talk of you only need better for CIRCUIT RACING and things like TARGA. This talk is total rubbish because good handling is not the exclusive domain of Racing. Street cars benefit greatly by having well designed suspension, geometry and tyres. What has happened with ALL of these coilover front end set-ups is they have just reverse engineered the standard torrie set-up and pretty much kept 90% of its issues.
Now that's fine if that's what you want and all you expect. But for me I want significant advantage if I am handing over my hard earned $4.5k. I mean ffs if your a manufacturer do your homework and fix the issues, don't reverse engineer a flawed set-up and then ask top dollar. Better to ask top dollar+ and offer significant improvement.
Look at the McDonald Brothers unit they spent over two years and who knows how much money yet why do and produce something for such little gain? Why would you not look at what the usa has learnt with its front and rear set-ups for old cars. It's all just mounting points, leverage, angles, travel, offset etc. To put it simply its MATH.
It doesn't cost much more (if anything) to move mounting points or add a few inches here or there or put a separate caster adjust on the top ball joint, make the front roll centre fully adjustable, design in more travel and more camber gain. Its all relatively simple math so sure if you failed math don't apply.
These manufacturers are building a product from scratch. They are not adapting to the old K-Frame and being restrained by its factory limitations. So you tell me .... why you think they have done what they have all done?
The truth is they simply don't understand geometry to enable the chassis to better get around corners. Looking at what is being produced they obviously only know the superficial limitations of the standard set-up not the true depth of the issues stopping significant improvements being made.
I agree. I think the aftermarket k-frames are primarily intended for street car owners that want either height adjustable shocks or air bags. If that is all you want then I think some of them will do the job. You may also get some small improvement in performance due to a wider choice of shocks and springs. Like everything whether or not it represents value for money is up the the individual.
If you were serious about improving the suspension then you would need to replace the front and rear suspension as a matched set. I suspect the market for that level of modification to a LH/LX Torana is too small to make it viable for a business to develop a significantly improved suspension package for the LH/LX/UC Torana.
The worldwide market for US muscle car parts is massive by comparison so its not surprising that you can buy an improved suspension package for a Mustang or Camaro.
Spot on. Its all about weight transfer and we all know the std rear roll centre is too high and yet its too low on the front. Then we get into front back transfer, squat, binding etc
I do disagree with the typical excuse Oh the USA is a bigger market. So what is being said by this typical poor comparison of an excuse is that in oz we have to except whatever is dished up. Rare Spares anyone?
Same story I will ask - how much more would it cost to build a front-end with the correct math vs what we have been dished up?
Its a mutton vs lamb thing. Lamb is more expensive but it doesn't leave a bad taste in your mouth after you swallow.
Lets not forget owners of a hatch are paying $1200 for a s/h busted a*s 36yr old hunk of plastic (centre console). What's an extra $500 or $1000 more for something that can change the whole way your torrie rides, turns and handles.
No need to spend big money on R&D to reinvent the wheel, a subframe that accepts say C5 Corvette components using OEM geometry and offers adequate room for a suitable steering rack would be just fine
Your right on the money. No need to re-invent anything just reverse engineer a know design and scale. Take a look at the 4wd skyline/Lx hatch for reverse engineering. It's not your grandads old torrie.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One last thing the fact remains the torrie is a 70's car and regardless of all the one eyed vocals they handle,stop and go like a 70's car. If that floats your boat then that's all that counts. (Your opinion).
Edited by LXSS350, 22 November 2013 - 04:33 PM.
#88
_NewsuxLX_
_NewsuxLX_
-
- Guests
Posted 22 November 2013 - 06:06 PM
Haha your very passionate about this arnt you lol if only everybody was this enthusiastic. Maybe you should pair up with a fabricator and see what yous can cum up with? It could be the next biggest thing and like you say it would actualy improve handling but also like you say it has to match the rear end. Good on ya mate. Cheers
#89
ls2lxhatch
-
- Members
-
- 5,332 posts
- Location:Perth
- Car:LX Hatch
- Joined: 29-May 06
Posted 22 November 2013 - 08:36 PM
I do disagree with the typical excuse Oh the USA is a bigger market. So what is being said by this typical poor comparison of an excuse is that in oz we have to except whatever is dished up.
I was thinking more along the lines that between 74-78 there were around 190,000 Toranas built. During the same period there were 1,107,718 Mustangs and 971,221 Camaros built. Plus of course the Mustang and Camaro were both in production both sides of 74-78. I know which market I would rather make parts for.
Edited by ls2lxhatch, 22 November 2013 - 08:37 PM.
#90
_LS1 Taxi_
_LS1 Taxi_
-
- Guests
Posted 22 November 2013 - 08:56 PM
Interestingly I reckon the $4500 front end would allow the ls1 castle pipes to fit....actually, scratch that, they'd still foul the steering 
#91
_LXSS350_
_LXSS350_
-
- Guests
Posted 23 November 2013 - 08:27 PM
I was thinking more along the lines that between 74-78 there were around 190,000 Toranas built. During the same period there were 1,107,718 Mustangs and 971,221 Camaros built. Plus of course the Mustang and Camaro were both in production both sides of 74-78. I know which market I would rather make parts for.
Of course we should pay relatively more because we are a smaller market size. But my "only point" is why pay any price if its just sh#t that either doesn't fit or has to be modified or doesn't do the job? The fact is you pay peanuts you get monkeys. Take a good look at what it takes $$ to restore/hotrod a torrie. For a quality build its nothing to spend $100k+ for a hatch. You really think someone is going to quivel about an extra $3k-4k on the build and have a car that not only rides better but can go significantly and very noticeably faster through the twisty bits.
The actual key ingredient in the usa is you have a ultra competitive market for the consumer - its not actually the size that's its biggest benefit (innovation). Because its extremely competitive people think "outside the box" in an attempt to gain market share and they drive to become a trendsetter. This is why some tiny companies just come out of nowhere (their garage at home) and capture billions.
The fact is we are the lucky country where you "bend over and get shafted" because we are a small market (so the story is told to us). That's rubbish because its laws and regulation done to kill competition designed to protect existing licence holders and the businesses in Australia know that watever they dish up is good enough for Australian consumers.
That's not to say the usa doesn't have the same crud but at least you get to have the option of what you buy rather than take mediocrity (or just rubbish aka rs)
Haha your very passionate about this arnt you lol if only everybody was this enthusiastic. Maybe you should pair up with a fabricator and see what yous can cum up with? It could be the next biggest thing and like you say it would actualy improve handling but also like you say it has to match the rear end. Good on ya mate. Cheers
LOL
No I just hate (with a passion) the second rate products and the second rate service that is the norm from Australian businesses. According to their own spiel these are the so called experts in their field and they produce top quality products. Proof is in the facts not in all the talk.
#93
ozyozyozy
-
- Members
-
- 950 posts
Forum Fixture
- Location:perth
- Joined: 13-February 08
Posted 08 December 2013 - 10:51 AM
I certainly didnt expect this response when i started thread.
I agree with you lxss350 alot of products been produced by alot of companies is shit, iv had repeated arguments with businesses about parts, they say part x is fine and good will do the job and i say its shit iv used it and DOES NOT do the job. I do think tho if you want a good handling street car the easiest and poss cheaper solution is grafting late model components into earlier cars as this cuts done on alot of the R&D side.
When it comes to circuit and targa, the Big issue is technical regs, we are heavily limited on what we can and cant do which in most cases does not allow a complete redesign only refinement of existing platform.
My goal was to create more adjustment to help vehicle setup during changing conditions.
One massive change that can be made is in shock technology, iv been lucky enough to drive a car this year that has been fitted with an exceptional(also expensive) set of shocks and this has shown me 95% if not more of the "off the shelf" shocks are absolute garbage, and this paticular car feels no different on a bumpy road at 200kmh to coasting round the road at 50kmh.
This is leading me to talk to DMS, MURRY COOTE(both leaders in ozy shocks building) to base part of of suspension design around being able to fit a QUALITY shock.
If you want good help or quality parts that work most corner shop places are usless they only sell you what there making money on, thats were self reseach and builing it yourself is so important.
I agree with you lxss350 alot of products been produced by alot of companies is shit, iv had repeated arguments with businesses about parts, they say part x is fine and good will do the job and i say its shit iv used it and DOES NOT do the job. I do think tho if you want a good handling street car the easiest and poss cheaper solution is grafting late model components into earlier cars as this cuts done on alot of the R&D side.
When it comes to circuit and targa, the Big issue is technical regs, we are heavily limited on what we can and cant do which in most cases does not allow a complete redesign only refinement of existing platform.
My goal was to create more adjustment to help vehicle setup during changing conditions.
One massive change that can be made is in shock technology, iv been lucky enough to drive a car this year that has been fitted with an exceptional(also expensive) set of shocks and this has shown me 95% if not more of the "off the shelf" shocks are absolute garbage, and this paticular car feels no different on a bumpy road at 200kmh to coasting round the road at 50kmh.
This is leading me to talk to DMS, MURRY COOTE(both leaders in ozy shocks building) to base part of of suspension design around being able to fit a QUALITY shock.
If you want good help or quality parts that work most corner shop places are usless they only sell you what there making money on, thats were self reseach and builing it yourself is so important.
#94
A9X
View Garage
-
- Members
-
- 5,024 posts
A fortunate run
- Name:Welby
- Location:Perth
- Joined: 09-November 05
View Garage
Posted 08 December 2013 - 11:08 AM
daz i spoke to both dms and murray back in '10 about building some shocks for the targa hatch. dms didn't want it but murray said for 10 k !!!! he would build a pair of 50 mm bodied , reservoir fitted double adjustable shocks.
i didn't think i'd get 10k's worth of gain so i let it go.
after the 2010 targa i did speak to alistair mcrae , who was building custom shocks here in perth, but he chat didn't get to $$$
#95
_LXSS350_
_LXSS350_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 December 2013 - 11:45 PM
You Targa guys what can you change? Upper/lwr arms, stub axle, pivot points, bare track (with-out wheel), shock position, coil -overs, rack position, steering arms etc
I know with Craig and his racing taxi that he is still building for barbs you might be lucky to be able to upgrade from 175 crossply tyres left over from the fj holden.
I have used 4 way Motons which I can highly recommend.
http://www.motonsuspension.com/
#96
A9X
View Garage
-
- Members
-
- 5,024 posts
A fortunate run
- Name:Welby
- Location:Perth
- Joined: 09-November 05
View Garage
Posted 10 December 2013 - 08:31 AM
I run now in unmodified, which means minor engine mods, brakes free, no suspension point changes , minor track changes, wheels 2 inches bigger than standard.
and then we go play with 900 kg porsches on 17 x 10's 
#97
_LXSS350_
_LXSS350_
-
- Guests
Posted 10 December 2013 - 03:19 PM
Some of these Q/A might cancel the question out , but bear with me.
Is it only the chassis/kframe original points you can't change or the outer points as well?
For instance if using longer arms can you simply adjust track with wheel offset to counter the length changes?
Run taller stub axles?
Can you replace standard arms to either fixed or adj tubular with coilover as long as you use all std kframe mounting positions?
Make the top ball joint adj (caster and or camber)?
Run concentric roll centre adjustment top arms?
Run bump steer adjusters?
Because of the tyre limits the aim is to get as much negative camber gain over the limited travel as possible within the rules. What I would be aiming for is to increase the bite with much more aggressive camber change in a softer more subtle suspension set-up that wouldn't upset the chassis as it hits mid corner bumps. Within the standard points and without being able to lower the rear roll centre with an adj watts the front roll needs to come up significantly. Taller stubs is one way to improve things without changing the factory mounting points, but once again not sure on the limits of the rules.
#98
A9X
View Garage
-
- Members
-
- 5,024 posts
A fortunate run
- Name:Welby
- Location:Perth
- Joined: 09-November 05
View Garage
Posted 10 December 2013 - 04:03 PM
#99
_LXSS350_
_LXSS350_
-
- Guests
Posted 11 December 2013 - 01:25 AM
4. SUSPENSION
The suspension type/configuration as fitted front and rear must remain original (eg, MacPherson strut, dual wishbone, live rear axle, de Dion rear axle etc), but may be modified only in accordance with the following regulations:
4.1 All sprung and semi-sprung suspension components may be replaced, and/or modified. Suspension sub-frames are free, providing they are attached exclusively at the original mounting points.
4.2 The material used in suspension bushes is free. Rose joints, spherical bearings or heim joints may replace elastomeric bushings.
4.3 Springs, torsion bars, MacPherson struts and dampers and their mountings are free.
4.4 Anti-roll (sway) bars, mountings and links are free, save that they may not be adjustable from the cockpit.Automobiles fitted with existing cockpit adjustable sway bars shall have either the adjustment system sealed or the actuating rods removed.
4.5 Rear suspension is free, subject to the following:
For live rear axles:
• The body shell may be modified to allow the fitment of brackets to mount locating arms. To that end, the minimum required amount of metal may be removed from the standard body shell to allow the construction of a forward mount for the suspension arms inside the cockpit space.
• It is permitted make the appropriate modifications (such as removal of metal and welding in replacement panels of the necessary shape) in order to construct a “turret” in the rear wheel arch, inner guard and/or boot area, the purpose of which is to accommodate and mount the top of a damper or combined spring/damper unit.
The cockpit space must be effectively sealed from the outside of the automobile in the area where such modifications are made.
4.6 Suspension pivot points are free.
4.7 Adjustable strut tops which may have the effect of altering the camber and/or caster are permitted (where applicable, ie, on MacPherson strut equipped automobiles). Modifications are permitted to the bodywork at the point where the strut top is mounted to allow clearance for the strut top.
4.8 The addition of braces for strut/damper towers is permitted.
5. STEERING
5.1 The steering system is free. All changes to the steering system must be accompanied by an engineer’s certificate signed by an accredited engineer accepted by an Australian road authority. It is highly recommended that a collapsible steering column be used.
In 4.1 it mentions suspension sub-frames are free, providing they are attached exclusively at the original mounting points.
Suspension subframe being Kframe and original mounting points being the 2 bolts ea on LH and RH chassis??
Can see no reason why a 3 link with watts and coilovers for the rear which solves all the issues at the rear-end. You can enter the cabin and put a turret in for top coilover mounts.
Attached Files
-
47f629_c3f71245db2db9dfaf4966928a31f950.jpg 77.8K
10 downloads
#100
ozyozyozy
-
- Members
-
- 950 posts
Forum Fixture
- Location:perth
- Joined: 13-February 08
Posted 11 December 2013 - 10:36 PM
Thats why i have fitted a 3 link in my car similar to that. Made a huge difference on bumpy mid corners and the car actually squats under power but spring rates are up to shit and having probs getting help from most of major spring companys to make some.
Dont want to switch to coilovers till i can do both front and rear at same time to try keep it balanced.
We are allowed a number of mods, the biggest hurdle is rim size, track width. my concern is to make the car more adjustable due to the such varied conditions a targa car runs.
A big but at momnt is, the powers at be a rewriting the rule book for next year because the east coast octagon events have been bought out, they are finally looking at a national uniform set of rules that will suit east and west coast, until i see them im on hold.
The major changes in rules in the past say 6 years, have been the front suspension, going from free pickup points to factory points then factory subframe and minimal pickup point change, now to free subframe( this is a hot topic tho).
An issue some of us face is, the tyre to use is the yokohama 050, some of us cant get this tyre in the size we need, it can be worth 1 to 1.5 sec a lap on some cars at a track, can you get them for porsche, of course, once again wer onthe back foot. So the old girls do pretty well for what we have
Dont want to switch to coilovers till i can do both front and rear at same time to try keep it balanced.
We are allowed a number of mods, the biggest hurdle is rim size, track width. my concern is to make the car more adjustable due to the such varied conditions a targa car runs.
A big but at momnt is, the powers at be a rewriting the rule book for next year because the east coast octagon events have been bought out, they are finally looking at a national uniform set of rules that will suit east and west coast, until i see them im on hold.
The major changes in rules in the past say 6 years, have been the front suspension, going from free pickup points to factory points then factory subframe and minimal pickup point change, now to free subframe( this is a hot topic tho).
An issue some of us face is, the tyre to use is the yokohama 050, some of us cant get this tyre in the size we need, it can be worth 1 to 1.5 sec a lap on some cars at a track, can you get them for porsche, of course, once again wer onthe back foot. So the old girls do pretty well for what we have
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
