17 replies to this topic

[neglectedtorana]

Hi All,

 

I know there are lots of threads on using the H series stubs but I haven't found an answer to whether or not standard Torana brakes will fit on the HQ-HZ stubs? I have seen the options of machined down HQ discs with HQ-HZ calipers etc but not sure if Torana discs and calipers will fit the HQ-HZ stub.

 

I have LX stubs with a VN Commodore disc, an adapter bracket and Wilwood calipers. I'm thinking about HQ-HZ stubs for the slight drop which I think is 20-25mm and that they are stronger/stiffer.

So I'm wondering if my brakes with the adapter bracket will line up with the mounting holes in the HQ-HZ stub and if standard Torana brakes fit I am thinking it is likely my brakes will fit. 

 

Are the mounting points the same?

 

Cheers, Tom

[neglectedtorana]

I think its likely the Torana and HQ-HZ stub have the same caliper bolt spacing as I used to have a Torana UPC brake kit which I gave to a mate and he put it on his HK with HQ stubs,

[UCSLE]

caliper spacing is the same but nothing else will line up

[yel327]

You don't want H series stubs. HD-HR are different to HK-WB. You want W body stubs, ie HQ-WB. Torana discs fit but calipers are in the wrong place.

 

The only Holden ones that will be stronger than Torana are HQ-WB cab-chassis. They are heat treated.

 

If you use HQ-WB stubs you need HQ-WB rotors which is what L34 and the last lot of LX SLR5000 (A9X) had.

[axistr]

It would be best to stay with the LH-UC stubs and fit Kings springs 1" heavy duty lowered springs if all you want to do is lower your car by an inch. HQ-WB stubs have 2 degrees less king pin inclination angle which relates to 2 degrees more unwanted negative camber that you can't wheel align out without camber kits. The lower KPI will also effect the scrub radius angle which generally gives more unwanted wander and tram tracking. Wider negative offset wheels will amplify this effect. You will also need to purchase the correct A9X steering arms off Harrop engineering to offset the spindle height change, and they will set you back around $500.00. If you think your car will handle heaps better with the HQ stubs roll centre and CG change then think again. I reckon you wouldn't pick the difference between 1" lower springs and the HQ spindle height drop. Lowering your car by springs will also give you a lower CG and more camber gain through hard cornering and HQ stubs won't.

 

 

Note: LH, LX, A9X and UC have 9 degrees KPI and HQ-WB have 7 degrees KPI. 

[yel327]

Here are some things to use for reference.

 

I forgot to mention HK-HG are identical to HQ.

 

 HR HK-WB.jpg   119.04K   6 downloads

 LH-UC.jpg   106.35K   5 downloads

 

 1 of 3.pdf   1.62MB   13 downloads

 2 of 3.pdf   1.37MB   11 downloads

 3 of 3.pdf   1.65MB   12 downloads

Edited by yel327, 06 March 2025 - 03:57 PM.

[neglectedtorana]

Thanks for the answers and info.

 

I'm only looking at the stubs from HQ onwards, not HD etc

I do have the 1" lowered king springs and my car is quite tall, could be the light weight of the LS1 as opposed to the cast 308

The harrop steering arms are $600 a set, expensive but Stub Tech drop spindles are $1400 and 2" drop I think is too much but noce to have the original KPI

 

Currently my steering arms are nice and level so I can't change to lower springs without ruining that but guess I could add lower springs and Harrop steering arms 

 

My car looks a bit tall right now, but not much. I would like it a bit lower to get the tyre closer to the guard and also lower the CG and as the rear has spring spacers I can remove one of them to make it even. Ideally I just want to lower the front 15mm and if the HQ type stub dropped it 25mm I would add a 5mm spring spacer in the front.

I could cut half a coil off the front and see where it ends up or see if Kings can reset my springs.

 

My car is engineered in NSW so I have to be mindful of using too low a spring and OEM parts are preferred over after market stubs.

[Heath]

I'd just lop a bit off each front spring. Simple, free, and if anything gets your spring rate a tiny bit closer to where it should be.

[claysummers]

Like Heath says. Lowers your roll centre when you chop the spring. Stiffer springs are too harsh. Just go for a stiffer damper setting f you can.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[rexy]

The beauty of cutting your springs is that you can do it bit by bit and get it exactly the height you want.

The only cost is your labour and you can finish the cut end to look like it was never cut.

[neglectedtorana]

Thanks for all the input.

 

Cutting springs sounds like an easy option.

From all the other info on bum steer I am conderned as I cut the steering tie rods will begin to point up possibly inducing bump steer.

 

Car is off the ground right now for other work so when it is back down I will have a good look at the current tie rod angle before I do anything.

[claysummers]

Shouldn’t be an issue if you are lowering stock suspension, and not too far. You should notice an improvement, more neutral handling, less under steer at least. The tie rod ends should line up with the inner and outer pivot points so lowering shouldn’t affect them much at all.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[rexy]

I too doubt you will notice any handling difference in a street use car if you install lower springs or cut your current ones lower.

I did notice an improvement in general twitchiness in the hatch when I took the HQ stubs out and put torana ones back in.

 

You could just buy lowered springs or get yours reset but its hard to get them just where you want.

 

 

 IMG_5733.jpeg   59.79K   3 downloads

 

Looks like wheels up action standing still…

 

It only took two careful cuts of the springs and a paint job to get it where I wanted it.

 

 IMG_5732.jpeg   66.74K   3 downloads

 

[neglectedtorana]

The original reason I was looking at the HQ-HZ stubs to make it lower is that I already have the Kings 1" lowered springs and have nice level steering arms/tie rods.

I might try get a spare set of springs to cut in case

[neglectedtorana]

As I have read a bit about the importance of having the steering arms level and not at an upward angle I was thinking I needed a drop type stub to lower the car without affecting the steering arms.

From the picture the steering arm is level, showing zero on the gauge, if I cut  some off the spring which will lower the car is the steering arm then going to be pointing up? Is that what induces bump steer?

 

 IMG_7269.jpg   125.44K   2 downloads

[claysummers]

My understanding is that the tie rod (steering arm is the pitman arm on worm and sector steering) inner and outer pivot points must be in the same axis with the lower control arm inner pivots and ball joints at all times to totally eliminate bump steer. In practice this is impossible of course, but the issue is minimised by having them aligned in the straight ahead position, or slight turn either way. So the tie rod should be effectively parallel with the lower control arm or wishbone.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[rexy]

Are your current ones V8 springs?

 

If so a set of standard 6cyl springs might be the go.

[axistr]

Harrop/A9X steering arms will drop the outer tie rod ends down.