LQ4/T56 into my 69 Camaro
10-04-2011, 10:08 PM
#1102
Tonight I started to clean up the garage and while doing so I caught myself staring at a unproportional car. The front was either tooo low or the rear was way too high. I was leaning towards the rear too high. I like a low stance in the front but this was ridiculous. I knew prior to the swap that the rear was a little too high but figured the springs would continue to settle. I had a leaf added before the swap to combat the sagging "new" leaf springs. I tink the spring guy got carried away. I was concerned that my problem was in both the front and rear. Maybe the new engine tranny combination was heavier than before and that was causing the front to sag and/or the rear needed to come down. I started off by jacking up the front in the center of the subframe to see if the weight would alter the rear ride height. In normal stance on level ground the front was 3-5/8" lower than the rear. The front ride height was 23-3/8" and the rear was 27". I raised the front slowly until the front ride height was 26" at this height the rear never changed. Stepping back it looked like my car was a four wheel drive. So I got to thinking, I wonder if the rear squated would it affect the front. I added 254lbs of free weights and a boat battery to drop the rear to 25-1/2". With the front left alone and the weights added to the rear it actually raised the front end up to 24". This gives me a difference of an 1-1/2" front to rear. This stance is what I was hunting for!!! I like the differential at this height. So now for a question, what would it take to drop the rear end down? Should I remove a leaf or should I have the springs de-arched? Here are a few photos.
This is the normal ride height.
[IMG]
[/IMG]This shot is with the front raised up to a ride of 26".
[IMG]
[/IMG]Last but not least the rear with weight added, It dropped the rear as well as lifting the front.
[IMG]
[/IMG]
10-04-2011, 10:45 PM
#1103
Hey man.....CONGRATS on getting her out on the road in complete form! I'm very happy for you! Everything looks great.
I think the easiest solution to your rear ride height issue would be to throw in a set of lowering blocks. They're an easy bolt in deal and you can swap in different height blocks until you achieve the look you're going for. I wouldn't use much more than a 1 inch block because they can start to affect your suspension geometry. If one inch blocks don't get you what you're looking for, then having your springs de-arched is probably the solution. Congrats again though on getting this far!!!
EDIT: Here's a set of AFCO 1 inch lowering blocks from Summit. http://www.summitracing.com/parts/AFC-20246/
You would also need a longer set of U-bolts if you're currently running stock ones.
I think the easiest solution to your rear ride height issue would be to throw in a set of lowering blocks. They're an easy bolt in deal and you can swap in different height blocks until you achieve the look you're going for. I wouldn't use much more than a 1 inch block because they can start to affect your suspension geometry. If one inch blocks don't get you what you're looking for, then having your springs de-arched is probably the solution. Congrats again though on getting this far!!!
EDIT: Here's a set of AFCO 1 inch lowering blocks from Summit. http://www.summitracing.com/parts/AFC-20246/
You would also need a longer set of U-bolts if you're currently running stock ones.
Last edited by GC99TA; 10-04-2011 at 10:52 PM.
10-05-2011, 03:59 AM
#1104
Thanks Gary!!! I went and had the air conditioning charged yesterday and now she blows cold. Of course winter is coming fast so at least I have heat as well. I agree with you on the lowering blocks but there is a catch to my setup. It may not be a big deal but I am using the multi leaf perches on the rear end and with the bottom plate secure the springs are fully enclosed. If I add a lowering block it will move the bottom plate away from the perch and there will be a gap. I guess I could always make something to fill the gap between the perch and bottom plate. I am going to call the spring shop and see what he suggests. He is a great guy and owns a wicked 70-73 Camaro. If I get a chance to go by there I will snap a few pics of his car. Last I heard he was breaking into the 5's in the 1/8 mile with street ET's. Of course he had a centrifugal supercharger on there the size of a squirrel cage fan.
10-05-2011, 06:36 AM
#1105
Those dynamax headers hang low. I noticed the same thing on my ride, with 2" drop springs, my headers are about 2.5-3" from the ground. I'm hoping with the stiff springs I won't have to worry about it making contact. How low are yours? Do you have any scraping problems?
10-05-2011, 09:35 AM
#1107
When the suspension is at rest I have about 4" at the lowest point. I have only driven the car a few times an have not had any issues. I am curious as to what driveline angle your engine/tranny are set at? I am at 3-5 degrees tilted back. I have noticed this same problem on others that have used the Dynamax headers in the same type of body/chassis.
10-05-2011, 09:40 AM
#1108
Yeah we have almost identical cars! Thats crazy, I guess with as many 69 Camaros that were built there are prolly several more identical. I am slowly but surely changing out any original blue interior parts over to the new black. My kick panels are dyed and so is the rear view mirror bracket cover. I think that is it for the blue. BMF150 put in some new style kick panels that have speaker and tweeter holes in them that I really like. Its on the list for future purchases.
How is the Camaro coming along? Where are you at on it?
10-05-2011, 10:58 AM
#1109
I would pull the extra leaf first and see where that gets you. If it's not clamped in, removing it is as simple as clamping the pack together with C-clamps and removing the center pin.
Regarding the captured spring perch design, I have never really understood the need to do this. The spring pin interlocks the spring side-to-side to the perch. There are several factory designs, especially on spring-over-axle suspensions that do not capture the spring with anything more than the pin interlocking and the u-bolts. Here's an example: ford mustang with lowering blocks. Perhaps the captureing was done to ease installation or reinforce the axle tube where the u-bolts are clamping down. Or maybe it is considered to be a safety mechanism should the spring pin shear. Or maybe it is used in place of spring clamps to prevent the leafs from coming apart.
Regarding the captured spring perch design, I have never really understood the need to do this. The spring pin interlocks the spring side-to-side to the perch. There are several factory designs, especially on spring-over-axle suspensions that do not capture the spring with anything more than the pin interlocking and the u-bolts. Here's an example: ford mustang with lowering blocks. Perhaps the captureing was done to ease installation or reinforce the axle tube where the u-bolts are clamping down. Or maybe it is considered to be a safety mechanism should the spring pin shear. Or maybe it is used in place of spring clamps to prevent the leafs from coming apart.
10-05-2011, 12:45 PM
#1110
I would pull the extra leaf first and see where that gets you. If it's not clamped in, removing it is as simple as clamping the pack together with C-clamps and removing the center pin.
Regarding the captured spring perch design, I have never really understood the need to do this. The spring pin interlocks the spring side-to-side to the perch. There are several factory designs, especially on spring-over-axle suspensions that do not capture the spring with anything more than the pin interlocking and the u-bolts. Here's an example: ford mustang with lowering blocks. Perhaps the captureing was done to ease installation or reinforce the axle tube where the u-bolts are clamping down. Or maybe it is considered to be a safety mechanism should the spring pin shear. Or maybe it is used in place of spring clamps to prevent the leafs from coming apart.
Regarding the captured spring perch design, I have never really understood the need to do this. The spring pin interlocks the spring side-to-side to the perch. There are several factory designs, especially on spring-over-axle suspensions that do not capture the spring with anything more than the pin interlocking and the u-bolts. Here's an example: ford mustang with lowering blocks. Perhaps the captureing was done to ease installation or reinforce the axle tube where the u-bolts are clamping down. Or maybe it is considered to be a safety mechanism should the spring pin shear. Or maybe it is used in place of spring clamps to prevent the leafs from coming apart.
I am going by the spring shop when I leave work today and talk to the man that modified my original set. I will see what he suggests. The problem is, I will have to make up for the difference in the thickness of the spring pack since I am no longer running the bottom rubber pad. The spring guy took it out to make room for the extra leaf and he said it would cause more harm than good. Without it you get a better engagement concernng the locating pin. I am considering a new set of front springs to maybe help with the stance. I am just corncered that if I get the correct front springs it will be like the last set I purchased. They were way too tall and caused me to have a car that looked like it was due to take off for flight. Coil overs would eliminate all of my problems but they are rather expensive and it will require me to once again dismantle the front end to weld in the upper brackets. I am really just wanting to drive this car for awhile without having to redo each and every aspect of the restoration. I am going to take your advice and drop the rear and see if that helps first. It will be inexpensive an less tiresome than redoing the front end. I am just wondering if adding weight to the trunk will give the same effect as lowering the rear by the suspension? By adding the weight I moved the center point further back and relieved some weight off of the front. By dropping the ride height in the rear, will that in turn move the center of gravity rearward or is this wishful thinking? Maybe I can just leave the weights in the trunk, lol!!!
10-05-2011, 04:34 PM
#1111
Teching In
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: ny
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Gary!!! I went and had the air conditioning charged yesterday and now she blows cold. Of course winter is coming fast so at least I have heat as well. I agree with you on the lowering blocks but there is a catch to my setup. It may not be a big deal but I am using the multi leaf perches on the rear end and with the bottom plate secure the springs are fully enclosed. If I add a lowering block it will move the bottom plate away from the perch and there will be a gap. I guess I could always make something to fill the gap between the perch and bottom plate. I am going to call the spring shop and see what he suggests. He is a great guy and owns a wicked 70-73 Camaro. If I get a chance to go by there I will snap a few pics of his car. Last I heard he was breaking into the 5's in the 1/8 mile with street ET's. Of course he had a centrifugal supercharger on there the size of a squirrel cage fan.
been following youre build and like everybody keeps saying youre doing a great job
10-05-2011, 06:03 PM
#1113
snow 678
Damn. your car is gorgeous!!!
Damn. your car is gorgeous!!!
10-05-2011, 08:01 PM
#1114
Those are dynatechs and they do hang low. They hang even lower on mine. I have scraped a few times and have flattened out the bottoms slightly, but not to bad. I have eibach springs.
10-05-2011, 08:45 PM
#1117
It may be the heavy cast iron block. I dont know for sure as I didnt weigh the SBC nor did I weigh the LQ4. I was figuring a lighter combo but it may be the LQ4 is heavier and is sitting forward a tad bit. The intake, heads, and radiator have to be lighter so it must be the short block thats the bulk of the weight. These blocks do have a ton of internal webbing. I do have A/C wheres I didnt have that on the SBC.
10-05-2011, 08:50 PM
#1119
Is that an F1 blower? I talked Clark the guy with the second gen I described earlier and was going to snap a few pics but he had it in his enclosed trailer. I did check out his other rides, 62 Impala 409 with two fours, his big block Chevelle, and numerous other badass rides he owns.
10-05-2011, 09:06 PM
#1120
I talked to Clark today and asked him about his Calverts he has on his second gen and he says they work great. He owns a spring shop that mainly deals with large trucks but he does work on cars as well. He has just about every spring known to man at his shop. He said he built his first set and they worked great. The only reason he purchased a set from Calvert was his original set he built he used 5/8" heims(Claverts use 3/4") and he was uneasy with them since he is making so much power. He is 498ci BBC with an F1 blower so he is crazy fast. I tried to see if he still had the old set but I think he told me he ended up using elsewhere. I am definately interested in building a set or two. As far as buying them, I am about milked dry in the Camaro fund!!! I have dropped a small fortune on this car and it will take me a few weeks to generate some much needed funds for this ride.