The LCA's are moved in beacuse we sucked the tire in more then everybody out there. It is lower then anybody out there, and you have to move the inner fender in as well as the LCA and shock (same mount bracket). If we move it back out it will rub the tire. The rear springs are in the stock mount locations. Also the stock mounting bracket is welded to the rear end and would have to be cut off and re-done, plus we would need new off set rims, and basically make it a 4x4 again! Just to get those mid 1.3 60 foots !!!! There is absolutly NO Geometry changes made. If I showed you a pic of the rearend area, you would not even be able to tell it is modified since its so minimal unless you have a trained eye. It isn't easy to switch it back, and we will not tear up a BEAUTIFULL looking car! I personally really thought everybody on here we're friends, although competive ones, but I do not feel very welcomed at the moment!

I think that if you are drawing a line somewhere, then all you guys with shortened to hell torque arms should be put back to stock tranny location. Build a beefy mount Jay and Brian! My 94 is in bone stock location!! ARE YOURS?!!!?

 

This is another reason why F-Body racing will never take off, rule changes every fockin race!

I spent $10 grand of my own hard earned money to change from a carburator to EFi because it wasn't going to be allowed and EVERYBODY wanted EFi/Stock Block/ Stock Suspension. Now we have AFTERMARKET BLOCKS & CARBS!!! No wonder my car sits, fock it!

 

Jay,

You've got valid statments but the parts you're talking about are not in question because they are stronger and heavier. Even though they are widely used, they are not stock mounts. How many of these auto trans cars are running their TA on the Trans tailshaft??? None... then they are not stock mounted are they? Sure lots of people put welded cross members in now but someone was the first and everyone else had to follow.

The true basis of this class is the Torque Arm concept and not one of these will be in a stock position or stock non-adjustable design. So, if the key component is conceeded by majority modifications, what's the differnce in the LCA sliding in an 1" when all the silly part does is hold the rearend in place so you don't snap a drive shaft at launch???

When you think about it, the only thing the movement of the LCAs inward does is provide strength in triangle of the TA and LCAs to hold the pumpkin with less movement. Does that mean you can get an extra -1 deg. on the TA angle beyond the aftermarket's most modifiable TA. I don't think that's going to be the case.

Is it unfair if there is a new TA prototype that might only be on 1 or 2 of the shop cars in the field??? I think everyone would agree that if an R&D suspension part were in play that it would be OK because that's the kind of pushing the evnlope that we want to see and it sells parts.

Let's face it, the way the conspiracy theory is being presented here, we are being lead to believe that a bunch of engine makers have come up with a top secret 1"+1" mod that must be critical to the performance of their car. It just seems pretty odd when it's coming from the guys that are supposed to be the suspension experts and yet they choose not to articulate what the advantage is other than to say; well they must know something we don't know or why the hell would they go through all the trouble of doing it.

In the end, it's your race, but I think that your customers and fans will enjoy it and remember it a lot better if all the Big Fish are swimming in the same southern pond. Maybe it won't happen this race or this year, but everyone should keep it in their rule making minds for the future.

Rick

 

"Let's face it, the way the conspiracy theory is being presented here, we are being lead to believe that a bunch of engine makers have come up with a top secret 1"+1" mod that must be critical to the performance of their car. It just seems pretty odd when it's coming from the guys that are supposed to be the suspension experts and yet they choose not to articulate what the advantage is other than to say; well they must know something we don't know or why the hell would they go through all the trouble of doing it."


Rick,

I believe we covered the advantages of a lowered ride height in an earlier post. The fact that we choose not to modify our own cars in this manner should support what we are attempting to protect.

"I think that if you are drawing a line somewhere, then all you guys with shortened to hell torque arms should be put back to stock tranny location. Build a beefy mount Jay and Brian! My 94 is in bone stock location!! ARE YOURS?!!!?"

Dave,

Our Torque Arms attach to the trans crossmember (stock length) adjacent to the trans.

Jay

 

Sorry to say, but getting up near 170mph, you better be tucked, and you know it.

 

There are mini-tubbed cars also competing in the race, and they are lower then stock ride height! Quick, somebody get some shovels in here fast! At least Jays torque arm is in 'legal' stock suspension form, but the Madman T/A is considerably shorter, I think Madman just took himself out of his own race if you think about it!

 

THe longer the torque arm the better. Shorter TA's have a disadvantage! Mini tubing is not moving mounts. How can you move the inner fender and not move the spring? The spring is right on the other side of that inner fender. My guess is the frame rail has been cut and moved over. Let's see some pics.

 

You got me on the torque arm length, I'm an engine builder!

Our car has a smaller diameter spring, same as Madmans.

 

Chris I think you are referring to a statement Brian made that was just screwing around with another member. My Car has not been lengthened. My car still runs a BMR extreme drag rear swaybar.

My car is a resleeved ls1 stroker, I just moved up to a solid roller this year, and had safety equipment upgraded correctly so that the car is legal for what I hope it potentially will run.

I could add more, but I'm at work in the middle of a god awful busy overnight shift, trying to make some mulla to keep working on the car.

 

Geez what a mess.

Im going to LA to hold the money. Now I wish I hadnt sold my motor. I wonder if I can talk the new owner into bring it down and kicking ***. LMAO

 

Another opinion nobody cares about, and note I have zero affiliation either way...

I've got an idea, just rename the race. Top Dawg "Stock Suspension" race. Of course to be stock you should not be able to move the front torque arm pickup point or use LCA relocation brackets or weld on sway bars. Also when you are adjusting pinion angles, relocating rear ends through adjustable panhard bar, Adjusting trailing arm lengths, adjusting shocks, etc how do you call this "STOCK" suspension? I must have missed all those options when I ordered my car. Stock style yes, but then again ARE fits that criteria.

Not that it matters, but I will not acknowledge any "records" by a fourth generation f-body that does not have an Lxx block and heads.

If you want to draw a crowd do not rule out the fastest cars. Sounds kind of like some threads a few months ago when a certain clutch shifted Jerico car got "ruled" out of a race.

 

Madman asked to see pictures of it right off the bat

 

Quote:
Dave,

Our Torque Arms attach to the trans crossmember (stock length) adjacent to the trans.

Jay
Quote:

Jay,
I agree that your TA is stock length but is that Non-stock cross member mount point 1" to the right to get clearance so that it can be adjacent to where an auto trans mount is??? And yes this was for humor to keep the discussion friendly gang. "Stock like" is in the eyes of the beholder and we need to keep this friendly.

In the end we are trying to present a case for "stock like" not "stock suspension" racing. So maybe the real test should be with a ruler and tech diagram. Perhaps any mount point that is within say 1" of GM's print is a stock mount point. The test would be applied for LCAs, Spring, Shocks, TA, sway bars with the only measurment difference allowed for the physical size changes of accepted rear ends and transmissions???

Maybe there isn't enough time to document this kind of thing for this race, but does it make sense to do for a race series next year??? Sure it's tough to find mesurments for all the cars, but since we are probably talking about 6-16 cars that might be ready for this class next year it shouldn't be tough to start with the known model years???

Sounds like a crazy strawman proposal but would the guys be willing to submit to the measuring tape at each race???

Rick

 

I dont know about some of you people, but its clear in my mind what the intent of STOCK SUSPENSION is and the ARE car flaunts its lowered height and tucked wheels. Yea it looks good but its been stated by someone who is in the business of suspensions, that it adds an advantage.

What isnt there to understand about it? Yes it takes the wobble out. Yes it helps with 170ish mph traps.

NOT doing those mods, is part of what makes going fast with a lot of power on STOCK SUSPENSION what it is.

 

If you are going to tout stock suspension you better make it stock and uniform across the board. INCLUDING STOCK TA mounts and STOCK swaybar/shock mounts. Otherwise it is a crock of ****.

Chris

 

the 'stock' suspension parameters have been pretty well known for many years. I remember a few years ago when baxter and madman were playing the game hard. it has always been a single torque arm, stock length LCAs in stock location, springs and shocks in stock locations. ARE CHOSE to move stuff that has never been allowed...

 

I dont disagree with what you are saying Brian. What I am saying is that the suspension is "stock style" otherwise every mounting point would be the same. (including the torque arm)

If exclusions are made for torque arm attachment point to the chassis/tranny why not for moving an LCA to the other side of the stock bracket? (The torque arm attachment point/adjustability gives FAR more advantage than moving the LCA anyways)

It's not like the car is sixtying in the 1.1-1.2 range anyways. I just think an exception could be made for the ARE car.

 

To the folks who called me to discuss this thread last nite, I was watching a 800rwhp blower car get dynoed (not mine) so I had the phone in the truck.

It's hard to standardize rules for the f-bodies, since we didn't have an organization like FFW or NMRA to rein everyone in ten years ago. We've got guys with carbs, Dart blocks, Brodix heads, 4 links, ladder bars, and a whole slew of other stuff that falls into the 'coloring outside the lines' category.

Brian and Jay have taken the initiative to make this special class happen. I know them both and they are both openminded and I think they balance each other out on this stuff. I remember Jay and Brian (and Hunkins) squaring off at GMTHP Bristol about tires.

Anyway, anyone who wants to race in this class better talk to them and get them pics if any of the car's parts are in question. If LS1Tech runs the Big Dawg class at any 2004 events it will be most likely coordinated by Brian and Jay since they know all the big dawgs.

The line has to be drawn somewhere.

And to the folks who say that people are trying to be exclusionary, that is NOT the case here. Folks would love to see the ARE silver Z/28 come out and run, they wanted the car to show up last year. But look at Ken from East Side's last response as a good answer, what if it's your $500.

 

I feel that personal and loyalist are getting chimed when they shouldn't. If you don't have a big dog car then really you have no say since it is not affecting you. This should be discussed by entrants with a big dog car only. Not outsiders who want to think without even having a competitive car. Just my $.02

 

This Stock Suspension is a touchy subject and is open to discussion as we can see. I say ARE come down to LA and set a better record with the change in altitude/DA/hook of NPR, etc. ***** up and show up down south of the Mason-Dixon Line for once when it counts.