Sam Strano

iTrader: (41)

Never shock style on the rear. The rear shocks were not designed for that type and they are completely uneffective unless they are hugely long (which nobody makes). Also when the bumpstop is on the shock, it's really not a bumpstop as the bushing on the shock will continue to deflect.

Stock type stops on the rear work best.

libertyforall1776

iTrader: (2)

Thanks, do you see any negatives to the stock style rear stops but made of poly and have you used them? such as these:

http://www.hawksthirdgenparts.com/ca...opnewgm-1.aspx

I assume the front Koni included shock stops are fine then?

Element

iTrader: (5)

Can't remember where it was (might be in the newbie section), but someone found a set of bump stops off a Jeep that fit on the rear for an f-body, and any third-gen should fit also. $120 for two chunks of poly is sorta steep.

I don't see why material would make a difference there, but poly is a harder durometer and is going to offer a harsher stop than a softer rubber one. Don't see why you'd swap them out unless the stockers were shot, though.

libertyforall1776

iTrader: (2)

Yes, one of my stockers is shot.

The ones in the link are also sold as just the aluminum adapter from them for less $, and you can use that same Energy jeep bumpstop with them (cheaper elsewhere). It is the same Energy bumpstop that attaches to the aluminum adapter...

Sam Strano

iTrader: (41)

I haven't tested the poly stops.... from what I've seen there are various types and I'd be more inclined to run the type that is not solid (softer, less spike in wheel rate and more like stock Z28 stops in their action). SS stops kind of suck, and no matter what I NEVER run that aluminum spacer as that just cuts working travel. So get rid of that no matter what you decide.

libertyforall1776

iTrader: (2)

Interesting. So SLP didn't do much testing, it would seem, as I believe the spacer is their part, supposedly "required" for 17" wheels (which I have) to prevent tire contact with the inner wheel well:

http://www.slponline.com/view_produc...46&BIG=80046-1

Sam Strano

iTrader: (41)

I have 17x11's on my car and don't run the spacer. Just took a set off a customer's 2000 WS6 who has 18x10.5" rears too.

You have to remember that as an OEM part they could not risk ANY rubbing of the tire, ever. Again, one thing you sometimes seem to miss liberty is context.

In fact if you ask you'll find a ton of folks with 17x9 and bigger without the spacers (like stock Z28 and Formula's) that have no issue.

Ironhead

You need to stop getting so much of your information from internet message boards (I'm aware of the irony in that statement). Spend less time searching for links and more time searching for people who know what they're talking about.

See this car? See those wheels?



It has the stock Z28 foam type, progressive bump stops. In fact, the originals were replaced a few years ago with new Z28 stops. The wheels are 17x11s with 315s on all four corners. The owner is not allowed to modify the car inboard of the wheel hub. Despite this, the bump stops do not touch anything, anywhere except for the axle pad. Don't believe me? Ask Sam. He's driven this car.

The stops actually contact the axle pad A LOT. This is why I would never want a hard, unprogressive stop. The car will be skittish at the limit and over bumps when driven hard. It would also ride rather harshly on the street. You don't have to believe me. A long time ago a local friend didn't either. He finally relented in an effort to shut me up. He removed the stock SS / SLP stops and installed the GM Z28 stops.

He couldn't believe the difference.

libertyforall1776

iTrader: (2)

I am likely to remove the spacers and give it a shot -- it's a little annoying that companies like SLP are not telling the whole story. But this friend noticed what sort of differences with them removed?

AFAIK, the SS & Z28 bumpstops are the same, but SS just has that spacer added...

On this topic, the "information" in this case was SLP... LOL, not internet message boards. ;-)

Never had a cam to actually watch the bumpstops in action -- wonder if they hit much on Konis with stock springs...

Not sure what you mean "not allowed to modify the car inboard of the wheel hub"...

Ironhead

The SLP stops are not even remotely the same as the OEM GM stops.

SLP used a harder, blunt shaped, black rubber stop (with the aforementioned spacer).


GM used a softer, pyramid shaped, off white foam stop.


As you can see, no underbody camera is needed. Just look at how shiny / clean the axle pad is.


From that pesky rulebook you don't like. The rules say that I can't modify the wheelwell inboard of the wheel mounting face to fit the larger wheels. The rules do allow for the removal of bumpstops however.

I mentioned it because I have a much larger wheel than SLP ever dreamed of, I have not modified the inner fender, I still have the stock GM bumpstops, I can jack the car up and let the axle go to full droop, and despite all of this..... THERE IS STILL NO CONTACT BETWEEN THE BUMPSTOPS AND WHEELS.

That the car was better behaved and more comfortable over big bumps, especially when loaded up in a corner on some back country road.

libertyforall1776

iTrader: (2)

Interesting again. My SS has black bumpstops and RS has the white bumpstops. I am uncertain if the SS stops are made by SLP (never seen SLP selling them) and unsure if they were once pyramidal, and now just worn...

What does that mean -- loaded up in a corner? Shocks loaded up, i.e. compressed on a big turn?

Ironhead

No insult, just curious.... how long have you been around these cars? You seem to not have a lot of basic background info.

GM built the cars with the white stops. SLP then removed those stops and installed their own black stops with the spacers when they performed their SS conversion related work.

This was the case up to the point when I stopped paying attention.

The black SLP stops were not pyramidal even when brand new. They're blunt shaped because they were made that way, not because they are worn.

Yes, suspension compressed in a corner. In other words, on or very nearly on the outer bump stop.

The car can and DOES get on the bump stops quite a bit even with the taller stock springs. I actually noticed this long before I started burning corners in search of little plastic trophies. In fact, I first noticed it when I used to change rear tires to visit the drag strip.

libertyforall1776

iTrader: (2)

I've driven Camaros since '98, owned three. Yes I know that SLP did various modifications -- but did not know that the bumpstop was one of them. Actually I do have a lot of background info on these cars, but like everyone, there are gaps. I will be curious to hear what SLP says about their choice of differing bumpstops...

Ironhead

Why do you care what they have to say? If you understand the situation and the components involved, what does it matter what they have to say?

Learn to think for yourself. Learn to utilize critical thinking.

99Bluz28

iTrader: (35)

We'll have to agree, to disagree.
The 2 shock mounted bump stops I listed are very effective (more so then the stock stops), at least with the factory 10 bolt rear.

Arc00TA

iTrader: (17)

Do you use a spacer to achieve this? Or a different offset? I ask because my 17x11 with 315 tires catches both sides on the inner lip of the rim if I let the axle down. The ride height is low so it doesn't happen on the street, but I have to take the wheels off to lower the axle all the way. Grinding the bumpstops won't help from looking under there, it sets fully on the top of it and I would have to remove the whole thing.

Ironhead

A little of both.

I used to have a cheap set of ZR1 knockoffs that required a 1/2 inch spacer front and rear. Backspacing on those wheels was about 7-7/8 to 8 inches IIRC.

I then had a set of CCW Classics built. When I specified the backspacing, I purposely left a bit of "wiggle" room back there in case my measurements were slightly off or things changed with the car in the future. Because of this, I now use no spacer in the front and require only a small 1/8 inch spacer in the rear.

I had the wheels built with a 7.5 inch backspacing. This works well for me but your car may vary.

libertyforall1776

iTrader: (2)

HA! Now THAT is funny! I think for myself more than probably 95%+ of Americans...

I care what they have to say for perspective -- you get the inputs from all the sources, and then make your own decision and formulate an opinion. If you don't also do that, then you are missing parts of the story.

Ironhead

Perhaps then you need to reevaluate how you portray yourself publicly.

From my perspective, you simply parrot a lot of bad message board "common wisdoms" here and then when called on it, resort to parroting claims from manufacturers' web sites.

You yourself have recently proclaimed to me that you can't be bothered to read a simple rulebook before branding stipulations within it as "absurd". How is that not "missing parts of the story"? Am I to believe that this is an isolated instance when your actions seem to indicate that it is the rule rather than the exception?

*shrug* Not trying to start argument. I have no idea what goes on in your head. I only know what I see.

Carry on.

libertyforall1776

iTrader: (2)

If I needed to know SCCA rules, I would read them for ownership.

You seem to portray yourself as a know it all, who also does not care to get all sides of a story -- when you are called out for it, you deflect. How long have you been driving F-Bodies and how many have you owned?

If a claim is made by a manufacturer, then LS1Tech is the ideal place to either prove it is accurate, or debunk it -- so where's the beef?!