Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

Parts Bin suspension

Started by _Sprog_ , Aug 11 2008 08:00 PM

Prev

Next

Please log in to reply

76 replies to this topic

#26 TerrA LX

Fulcrum Fixture

Members
14,241 posts

Location:Sid 'n' knee
Joined: 31-May 06

Posted 15 March 2009 - 01:26 AM

QUOTE (ALX76 @ Mar 15 2009, 01:43 AM) *
I reset (bent?) my standard ones (I used someones jig) (press?) and saved hundreds.

Not picking, just asking.

(bent?) Sorta yes and (press?) NOOOOOOOO way buddy.

Edited by ALX76, 15 March 2009 - 01:28 AM.

Back to top

#27 LhMusL

Forum Fan

Members
468 posts

Location:Melbourne
Joined: 08-November 05

Posted 02 May 2009 - 03:09 PM

Just a quick sum up, if you wanted to use the Hoppers 290mm kit on a LH, would you just get a UC front end, lower the upper control arm bolt holes 25mm and get a kit to suit UC??
Is the main reason for swapping stubs etc just to get a better caliper on there eg. HX, HQ etc so if your going Hoppers kit which is better than HQ, then you dont need to go through the hole changing stubbs, steering arms etc????
Or is it more the ride height drop and the thicker stubs (a9x, HX 1tonner) that you would swap stubs for???

Back to top

#28 76lxhatch

That was easy!

Members
7,195 posts

Location:Unzud
Car:SS
Joined: 04-August 08

View Garage

Posted 02 May 2009 - 05:48 PM

Mainly the brakes that you would swap for as you've written, I doubt many people would be too worried about using them for drop stubs when lower springs are so readily available

Back to top

#29 LXCHEV

Lotsa Posts!

Members
3,536 posts

Name:Brett
Location:Melbourne
Car:'76 LX - 383 Chev
Joined: 08-November 05

Posted 02 May 2009 - 10:21 PM

Agree - the main reason for going to all the effort of converting to HQ stubs is for running HQ brakes. By doing so, introduces the steering geometry issues, hence the need to fit A9X style steering arms, to bring it back to normal specs again.

So if you can fit bigger brakes onto the factory stubs these days, there's not really a need to perform the stub axle conversion.

One question for cruiza - you mention "weld bracing plate to underside" of any sub-frame / k-frame. What's the reason for this, is flex really an issue? Any pics to show what you're talking about, I'd be interested to see that. As for the rest of your list - I think you've summed it all up beautifully. It's pretty much how I built my front end too - besides things like Bilstein shocks as well (I used Sports Ryders)... the other thing I would like to change, is to go for the solid bushes to mount my LX rack - is anyone making these yet? I reckon there'd be a few interested people if someone did a run of them.....

Edited by LXCHEV, 02 May 2009 - 10:22 PM.

Back to top

#30 _Bomber Watson_

Guests

Posted 03 May 2009 - 12:14 PM

I was gonna spin some up out of 4340 steel at work, although i have been looking into getting myself an aluminium billet to make them from.

Though if a lot of people are interested i may be able to price an aluminium billet, might even be able to talk the boss and the cnc operator into the feasibility of ripping up a program....

That or someone qualified can have a go at it and save me the dramas....

Cheers.

Back to top

#31 76lxhatch

That was easy!

Members
7,195 posts

Location:Unzud
Car:SS
Joined: 04-August 08

View Garage

Posted 03 May 2009 - 02:03 PM

What's the reason for the solid mount bushes, to keep the slightly quicker LH/LX ratio or just because its cheaper and easier than a UC rack?

Back to top

#32 LXCHEV

Lotsa Posts!

Members
3,536 posts

Name:Brett
Location:Melbourne
Car:'76 LX - 383 Chev
Joined: 08-November 05

Posted 03 May 2009 - 06:48 PM

I would have thought to keep the quicker LH/LX ratio rack in place, and do-away with the rubber or nolathane type bushes, whichever you run. Would be cheaper and more effective than going and sourcing an entire UC rack and swapping them over, plus then you end up with a slower ratio rack.

Back to top

#33 _CHOPPER_

Guests

Posted 06 May 2009 - 07:42 AM

If you want to run a high castor angle without power steering, the UC rack would give lighter steering whilst keeping the benefit of better directional stability of the higher castor angle.

Back to top

#34 _cruiza_

Guests

Posted 06 May 2009 - 08:49 PM

One question for cruiza - you mention "weld bracing plate to underside" of any sub-frame / k-frame. What's the reason for this, is flex really an issue? Any pics to show what you're talking about, I'd be interested to see that. As for the rest of your list - I think you've summed it all up beautifully. It's pretty much how I built my front end too - besides things like Bilstein shocks as well (I used Sports Ryders)... the other thing I would like to change, is to go for the solid bushes to mount my LX rack - is anyone making these yet? I reckon there'd be a few interested people if someone did a run of them.....

Hi LX Chev
I was told when I was doing this that flex bending was an issue and for me it has helped protect the sump, (still had to weld up holes twice) sorry no pics but if you look at underside flat plate with slight kick welded at seam at front below rack mounting and then rest of way round. Another thought could be that plate also beefed up for jacking the car up, I didnt think to ask just did what I was told.

Also just as a follow up comment UC steering rack is slower then LX LH but I steer with right foot anyway so was not an issue

Back to top

#35 _Squarepants_

Guests

Posted 06 May 2009 - 09:30 PM

Hi LX Chev
I was told when I was doing this that flex bending was an issue and for me it has helped protect the sump, (still had to weld up holes twice) sorry no pics but if you look at underside flat plate with slight kick welded at seam at front below rack mounting and then rest of way round. Another thought could be that plate also beefed up for jacking the car up, I didnt think to ask just did what I was told.

Also just as a follow up comment UC steering rack is slower then LX LH but I steer with right foot anyway so was not an issue

I'd also be very interested to see pics of this "beefing up", "slight kick" and "rest of way round". I don't quite understand what you mean with your explaination.
As far as the slower UC rack and the throttle steering goes, I'm all for it, it just means more arm work when crossing up. That's why I'd prefer quicker ratio.

Back to top

#36 _cruiza_

Guests

Posted 06 May 2009 - 09:49 PM

I'd also be very interested to see pics of this "beefing up", "slight kick" and "rest of way round". I don't quite understand what you mean with your explaination.
As far as the slower UC rack and the throttle steering goes, I'm all for it, it just means more arm work when crossing up. That's why I'd prefer quicker ratio.

anyone got a pic of the underside of a front subframe? I will photshop mod to pic of standard one

Edited by cruiza, 06 May 2009 - 09:50 PM.

Back to top

#37 _Squarepants_

Guests

Posted 06 May 2009 - 10:20 PM

I hope these'll do.

Back to top

#38 _cruiza_

Guests

Posted 07 May 2009 - 07:33 AM

Yep they will do nicely, I see yours has a dent it which I figure is the reason for beefing it up.
out line in red foldline is ----- I am making sense now? :blink:

subframebottom.jpg 378.85K 75 downloads

subframe_front.jpg 343.35K 52 downloads

Back to top

#39 76lxhatch

That was easy!

Members
7,195 posts

Location:Unzud
Car:SS
Joined: 04-August 08

View Garage

Posted 07 May 2009 - 08:28 AM

You just put another plate over that area?

Back to top

#40 _cruiza_

Guests

Posted 07 May 2009 - 09:20 AM

You just put another plate over that area?

yip

Back to top

#41 _Squarepants_

Guests

Posted 08 May 2009 - 06:01 PM

Thanks Cruiza, I'm reading you loud and clear now.
What thickness plate did you use? I'm thinkin 5-6mm???

Back to top

#42 _cruiza_

Guests

Posted 08 May 2009 - 06:33 PM

Thanks Cruiza, I'm reading you loud and clear now.
What thickness plate did you use? I'm thinkin 5-6mm???

Nah 2 - 3 mm tops I cut the hole in the centre so it looked totally standard too only way to tell I had doine it was bit of weld at the ends, I thing the sandwich effect of two layers of metal gives it the strength as much as thickness, as I have mentioned in another thread the underside of my car copped a huge beating from lumps and bumps in the roads in NZ

Back to top

#43 _Squarepants_

Guests

Posted 08 May 2009 - 06:51 PM

Nah 2 - 3 mm tops I cut the hole in the centre so it looked totally standard too only way to tell I had doine it was bit of weld at the ends, I thing the sandwich effect of two layers of metal gives it the strength as much as thickness, as I have mentioned in another thread the underside of my car copped a huge beating from lumps and bumps in the roads in NZ

Aahh, yep. That makes sense. Thanks mate, I think I'll have a crack at that.

Back to top

#44 _cruiza_

Guests

Posted 09 May 2009 - 04:09 PM

Aahh, yep. That makes sense. Thanks mate, I think I'll have a crack at that.

If you do post some pics, also remmber not to weld too much in one area other wise heat will distort bend the K frame

good luck

Back to top

#45 _Squarepants_

Guests

Posted 09 May 2009 - 05:28 PM

Will do.
While we're here, does anyone know what the recess in the pass. side outrigger (on the right in the pic of the bare x-member) is for?
Posted Image

Edited by Squarepants, 09 May 2009 - 05:29 PM.