When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Hey everyone, I just picked up a 68 Convertible Camaro and I'm looking to upgrade the entire suspension. I'm looking at BMR, Hotchkis and all the other stuff on the market. I'm on a budget, since I want to replace brakes, and a few other odds and ends. I'm NOT looking to run autoX or track the car, this will just be a driver going to car shows, hot rod power tour and stuff like that.
Let me know what y'all think about the suspension kits on the market.
If you’re just cruising around and parking at shows then I’d keep it simple. OEM replacement type shocks/struts in the front and I’d even keep the rear leaf springs if it has them.
IF just a cruiser, I wouldn't get too wild as it's not needed.
Maybe just do some Global West upper and lower control arms, Viking DA front coil-overs, Viking rear DA replacement shocks, at most
The control arms should help with bump steer, and give better steering geometry.
The shocks will help dial in the ride you want.
Thanks everyone, I'm still a bit torn to be honest. on what to do. I get it sticking with the stock stuff just to cruise, but I have a little bit of a shake at 30mph that I need to diagnose. I was thinking replacing the tires and some of the suspension would be a good start. I'm guessing the wheel bearings might need to be replaced as well, but I haven't checked them out yet.
I'm still going through the car as I just picked it up and to be honest, I just changed the fluids, rebuilt the carb, tuned it up and been cruising it everywhere.
Does it still have the front and rear "cocktail shakers" (fluid dampers mounted in the engine compartment and trunk)?
If not, throw the BMR body mounts in 1st, see if that takes it away.
Assuming that the BMR mounts are poly, does anyone make rubber mounts? There’s always a trade off between “good handling” and “ride quality” when it comes to suspension but if one is just taking the car to car shows why the need for the fore mentioned trade off?
Assuming that the BMR mounts are poly, does anyone make rubber mounts? There’s always a trade off between “good handling” and “ride quality” when it comes to suspension but if one is just taking the car to car shows why the need for the fore mentioned trade off?
They are Delrin which is even better than poly (less creep, more robust against ageing from humidity, corrosive elements, ozone exposure, and temperature). Not as potentially stiff as solid aluminum, but my experience solids have no noticeable impact on NVH.
I've run solid aluminum for years. When I installed them, I did a direct A to B comparison because internet feedback was all mixed:
Drove it over bumps, small potholes (easy to find when I was living in Detroit ) and railroad crossings, did some tight circles.
Pulled into the garage, swapped them out.
Took it for another ride following the same route.
At the time, my suspension was completely stock. Amazing how much just the body mounts reduced body lean. No noticeable change in ride quality even over bumps and potholes. As long as you're not running super stiff springs and shocks, you're fine.
I think where most comments come are either:
Hypothetical (not based on actual experience)
Repeated hearsay
Someone changing a whole host of suspension components at the same time, not just the solid mounts (swaybars, stiffer springs, stiffer shocks, much lower profile tires, etc.)
Comparing a friends car with the above suspension changes to their completely stock car
When you think about it, modern unibody cars have no rubber body mounts.
Since then I've added stiffer springs, adjustable shocks, removed the leaf spring isolators, UCA/LCA with delrin bushings, 245/45 front 275/40 rear (I think even with the shorter profile, the width helps absorb more). Handling is more like a modern performance car. Rides nice. Is it as soft as stock? No. But for a performance setup it's a very comfortable cruiser that surprises people in twisties. My last change was the leaf spring isolator delete by itself after all the other changes. Again, the feedback on whether it would impact NVH was mixed. I didn't have potholes and tracks to go over, but ride itself hasn't had a noticeable change. Keeps the rearend from shifting as much in hard cornering.
Don't forget, when these cars were designed it was around bias ply tires. Radials are not nearly as stiff until you get down to super short tire section height.
One more note, before when jacking on the frame it'd take a couple extra pumps after the front wheel came up, in order to the rear to follow or vice versa). It now comes up evenly. And that's without subframe connectors (which are on the to do list, just not as high a priority). That's how much twist it takes out.
They are Delrin which is even better than poly (less creep, more robust against ageing from humidity, corrosive elements, ozone exposure, and temperature). Not as potentially stiff as solid aluminum, but my experience solids have no noticeable impact on NVH.
I've run solid aluminum for years. When I installed them, I did a direct A to B comparison because internet feedback was all mixed:
Drove it over bumps, small potholes (easy to find when I was living in Detroit ) and railroad crossings, did some tight circles.
Pulled into the garage, swapped them out.
Took it for another ride following the same route.
At the time, my suspension was completely stock. Amazing how much just the body mounts reduced body lean. No noticeable change in ride quality even over bumps and potholes. As long as you're not running super stiff springs and shocks, you're fine.
I think where most comments come are either:
Hypothetical (not based on actual experience)
Repeated hearsay
Someone changing a whole host of suspension components at the same time, not just the solid mounts (swaybars, stiffer springs, stiffer shocks, much lower profile tires, etc.)
Comparing a friends car with the above suspension changes to their completely stock car
When you think about it, modern unibody cars have no rubber body mounts.
Since then I've added stiffer springs, adjustable shocks, removed the leaf spring isolators, UCA/LCA with delrin bushings, 245/45 front 275/40 rear (I think even with the shorter profile, the width helps absorb more). Handling is more like a modern performance car. Rides nice. Is it as soft as stock? No. But for a performance setup it's a very comfortable cruiser that surprises people in twisties. My last change was the leaf spring isolator delete by itself after all the other changes. Again, the feedback on whether it would impact NVH was mixed. I didn't have potholes and tracks to go over, but ride itself hasn't had a noticeable change. Keeps the rearend from shifting as much in hard cornering.
Don't forget, when these cars were designed it was around bias ply tires. Radials are not nearly as stiff until you get down to super short tire section height.
One more note, before when jacking on the frame it'd take a couple extra pumps after the front wheel came up, in order to the rear to follow or vice versa). It now comes up evenly. And that's without subframe connectors (which are on the to do list, just not as high a priority). That's how much twist it takes out.
I don’t have any experience with aftermarket body mounts, but I have had a few with stiff aftermarket springs. Looking back since I never raced them on a road course other than the lowered appearance all I got out of them was primarily just a rougher ride. Maybe I could’ve gone around a corner a hair faster without hitting a tree, but since they were street cars there really wasn’t a good way to find “the limit.” All I’m getting at is since this is a “show car” why would anyone want or need to make the better handling and poorer ride quality trade off?
I don’t have any experience with aftermarket body mounts, but I have had a few with stiff aftermarket springs. Looking back since I never raced them on a road course other than the lowered appearance all I got out of them was primarily just a rougher ride. Maybe I could’ve gone around a corner a hair faster without hitting a tree, but since they were street cars there really wasn’t a good way to find “the limit.” All I’m getting at is since this is a “show car” why would anyone want or need to make the better handling and poorer ride quality trade off?
Everyone has their opinion of what they want in performance and that's their prerogative. If the attitude is, "it's a show car" then no need to change from factory heads, camshafts, brakes, etc. ever either Yet most (even those who mainly use them as cruisers), do that. OP wants to update, than that's their decision. They asked for input, we gave them. Maybe you missed my point that rubber subframe mounts in reality don't make the difference some people assume they do. It's absolutely nothing like the effect of changing from 400lb/in springs to 600lb/in springs (which is why I don't have 600lb/in springs). If it was, I would have swapped them back out long ago.
Despite being labelled as a "pony car" the 1st generation handles poorly from the factory even the hardtop. Even the suspension dynamic geometry is subpar (positive camber gain). Couple that with a lack of roof to maintain torsional body rigidity, makes it even worse. A Kia SUV literally handles better . I like my cars feeling planted and controllable, but not stiff. And if I ever have to do a defensive maneuver to avoid someone texting on their phone or animal in the road; it's going where I point it, not sliding on it's door handles.
The Ridetech package has progressive springs and other carefully chosen components to make a good riding car that also handles well. It's not a race setup that will jar teeth out. For sure there are aftermarket suspensions that will handle better than Ridetech, but either their much more $$$, or they do trade off NVH. My setup (which I put together with carefully selected components from what was available a couple decades ago) had similar goals; keep the ride, but improve handling. It feels pretty similar to my stock suspension 4th generation did. Makes driving it pleasurable.
Speaking of which, OP: If you want to up the handling even more, with minimal impact to ride (and have a large budget) the Detroit Speed packages are top notch. The original designers were GM ride and performance handling engineers. So they engineered it with a modern factory approach.
Hey everyone, I just picked up a 68 Convertible Camaro and I'm looking to upgrade the entire suspension. I'm looking at BMR, Hotchkis and all the other stuff on the market. I'm on a budget, since I want to replace brakes, and a few other odds and ends. I'm NOT looking to run autoX or track the car, this will just be a driver going to car shows, hot rod power tour and stuff like that.
Let me know what y'all think about the suspension kits on the market.
Thanks!
Originally Posted by 68Formula
Everyone has their opinion of what they want in performance and that's their prerogative. If the attitude is, "it's a show car" then no need to change from factory heads, camshafts, brakes, etc. ever either Yet most (even those who mainly use them as cruisers), do that. OP wants to update, than that's their decision. They asked for input, we gave them. Maybe you missed my point that rubber subframe mounts in reality don't make the difference some people assume they do. It's absolutely nothing like the effect of changing from 400lb/in springs to 600lb/in springs (which is why I don't have 600lb/in springs). If it was, I would have swapped them back out long ago.
Despite being labelled as a "pony car" the 1st generation handles poorly from the factory even the hardtop. Even the suspension dynamic geometry is subpar (positive camber gain). Couple that with a lack of roof to maintain torsional body rigidity, makes it even worse. A Kia SUV literally handles better . I like my cars feeling planted and controllable, but not stiff. And if I ever have to do a defensive maneuver to avoid someone texting on their phone or animal in the road; it's going where I point it, not sliding on it's door handles.
The Ridetech package has progressive springs and other carefully chosen components to make a good riding car that also handles well. It's not a race setup that will jar teeth out. For sure there are aftermarket suspensions that will handle better than Ridetech, but either their much more $$$, or they do trade off NVH. My setup (which I put together with carefully selected components from what was available a couple decades ago) had similar goals; keep the ride, but improve handling. It feels pretty similar to my stock suspension 4th generation did. Makes driving it pleasurable.
Speaking of which, OP: If you want to up the handling even more, with minimal impact to ride (and have a large budget) the Detroit Speed packages are top notch. The original designers were GM ride and performance handling engineers. So they engineered it with a modern factory approach.
I know everyone has their own taste, style, and prerogatives. But when I read, “I'm NOT looking to run autoX or track the car, this will just be a driver going to car shows, hot rod power tour and stuff like that,” my first thought wasn’t, “Yeah, this is a guy who needs heim joints.”
I know everyone has their own taste, style, and prerogatives. But when I read, “I'm NOT looking to run autoX or track the car, this will just be a driver going to car shows, hot rod power tour and stuff like that,” my first thought wasn’t, “Yeah, this is a guy who needs heim joints.”
No heimjoints on a Ridetech StreetGrip or anything else I mentioned.
Not sure a link is allowed, since they're not a sponsor. But from their website:
"Bolt-on1st Gen. suspension with lowering leaf springs, coil springs, shocks and everything you need for modern handling, ride quality and lowered stance. Designed to lower your vehicle andimprove handling and ride quality.StreetGRIP is perfect for restorationsandmildcustoms such as resto-mods and pro-touring cars."
If he's already looking at BMR and Hotchkis, this falls right in line.
The geometry back then was complete ***. To get any useful amount of caster you will need aftermarket front suspension pieces. I don’t know the specifics on a first gen but my cars (73 chevelle) share the 2nd gen front clip which was a fairly big evolution in engineering and in my opinion aftermarket upper arms that move the ball joint back are mandatory. Before I did that just cruising down the highway was a white knuckle affair.
For a cruiser I’d start with replacing any bushings that are rubber older than a few years and getting a good alignment with as much caster as you can. Low cost aftermarket uppers will probable be required. There’s a guldstrand mod that may or may not be depreciated at this point in time.
Very close to zero camber and -1/16 toe.
also fresh brakes with modern pads and all new fluid.
Assuming that the BMR mounts are poly, does anyone make rubber mounts? There’s always a trade off between “good handling” and “ride quality” when it comes to suspension but if one is just taking the car to car shows why the need for the fore mentioned trade off?
I did the stock rubber replacement mounts and they didn't last long showing cracks and splits.
I went with the DSE solid mounts the second time. The change in ride was very minimum, but the car feels more solid.
07-02-2024, 01:54 PM
1st Gen Suspension question 
) and railroad crossings, did some tight circles.
