Ok, maybe not twice as well, but my 92Z28 would have really embarrassed my Formula on a road course.

 

oh ok, i was mostly into camaros back then and birds were an afterthought....i was young n ignorant until a buddy of mine got an 89 formula, 305, 5-spd, ws6 suspension and smoked my *** lol......i just remember when i was shopping for a third gen it was tpi or die.

 

i agree with that....totally different feeling car.....oh and my front tires are cupping...thats probly fuggin up alot of it.....so they have to go and i might as well get some 275 avon tech m500s (seem to be the best based on tirerack ratings) and rims to boot....shocks are already ordered and we'll see how they do....where can i get the bilstien HD's if these edelbrocks dont hold up?....and sam strano ull be getting a call on one of your sway bars real soon.

 

I've noticed a few people recommending the 35mm hollow bar recently. It's kind of subtle, but you are basically swaying them to Sam's product because he is the only one that makes it. Sam's a nice guy and all and I tend to point people his way for parts or serious advice, but you don't have to limit yourself to that one bar.

A 35mm solid will work just as well. It may be heavier, but it is a lot cheaper. $140 shipped is nothing to overlook. The point is, I recommend a 35mm bar up front for most folks, but I don't limit it to just the one hollow one. I think if I started neglecting to tell people about other choices that are good and valid just to drum up some business for one person, that it would be wrong in some way. It kind of takes away what these forums are all about. Anyway, that's what I wanted to say.

Now if KannibaliztikTA knows his choices and decides he wants the hollow bar, then by all means get it.

As far as the 275 avon tech m500s. I've never heard of them. Maybe someone here has some feedback. The Nitto 555RII is pretty hardcore for the street, they work real well, just don't last more than 6-8K miles. I have them on the front and I'm going to have to replace them with something that lasts longer. I'm switching to the GY GSD3, they are pretty damn good as well. Almost as grippy as the Nitto R's, but last a lot longer. A general rule is that the cheaper the tire, the less it will perform, but that's really a whole other subject. Maybe you could read up on some tire reviews from here or start a new thread focusing on tires.

 

The 35mm hollow is a touch softer than the 35mm solid. And, if we pointed someone towards a 35mm solid, they wind up with suspension techniques 99% of the time (there may be a couple others out there, but not many), but the S/T is the common one. We're still recommending a particular product. And, Sam can get you the ST 35mm bar too or you can order it about anywhere (I deal with Sam and Stranoparts, I also deal with others, call who you wish, but the 35mm hollow bar is a Strano only item, that's correct....so pick one and call someone). I don't think the 35mm hollow is being recommended to "drum up business" for Strano. Maybe it's because it's light and works very well. Since it is made for one particular shop, I guess it's different than suggesting Koni's or the S/T bar (Koni's are more expensive shocks, but you can get them several places). The hollow 35mm is not a bad bar for street (or autocross use, it has been used successfully for both) use and it's light. The 35mm solid works great as well. And, Hotchkiss does a 36.5mm hollow bar, but it is even more expensive than the other two. So, "generically", you need a 35-ish mm bar. Hollow/solid/or 36.5mm hollow, your choice.

Jason, I think you're getting paranoid....

Both (all 3) bars will work great for you, pick your budget and order accordingly. I still recommend parts that work, if I can support sponsors in the process, great, but it's not a primary goal of mine to the point of skewing my recommendations. But maybe that wasn't directed at me.

 

I realize that any time someone says 35 solid it is the ST one, but if we say "35mm" bar we now have 2 choices. When anyone says "35mm hollow" it is only one choice. Two is better than one, see what I mean. I don't even mention the Hotchkis one due to the price, but Sam's hollow 35 and the ST 35 are two very equal choices depending on price and weight.

I actually am a little paranoid, so maybe some of that came out, but I didn't realize it. I really don't know why people have been going around saying 35mm hollow is the one to get. Their both good.

I have the ST bar and sometimes I wish I had a bit more bar up front. I'm not going to ditch my ST bar and get the Hotchkis by any means, but these cars do like their big bars up front.

 

i was just stating the bar i was getting guys lol....and Jason Avons are new to the US but theyve been in business overseas for years..... go onto tirerack if u havent and look at all the performance tires for our cars in 275s....Avon is killin the competition as far as ratings (filter for Chevys n Pontiacs) and they have some nice qualities id appriciate in a tire....very low noise, predictable turn in, and great str8 line tracking....im experimenting a little by getting them but the people who did get them seem to be happy and ive seen a couple on this board suggest them as great daily tires.

 

I'm one of those guys running a 315 in back and I try to get matching tires. I don't think Avon makes a 315. I know of their motorcycle tires overseas, but not much more than that. I need to replace my 275 fronts and I had planned to get the GSD3's to match the rears, but money is real tight right now. If those m500s are real good, I may look into getting those instead and save some money.

 

My 275 fronts are open for discussion. I just need to find out more info. All the tests on Tire Rack compare the m550s to pretty weak tires. I want to see how it compares to the GSD3.

 

Your suspension on your 99 must be shot if you think your 3rd gen handles better. I am a F-body freak. I have had 3rd gen f-body's since I was 16. I have had 3 GTA's,2 formula, 1 Iroc . I still have 2 GTA's and 1 IROC plus my 02 SOMWS6. Now I'm a big fan of 3rd gens but my brand new 02 WS6 would kill my 3rd gens on a road course. One of my 3rd gens has all aftermarket suspension(koni adjustables all the way around) ,soild control arms, solid frame mount torque rail,adj. panhard,subframe connectors, strut support and with all of that I would not say it handles better then my 4th gen which has stock shocks and struts but does have all BMR stuff in the rear - adj. torque rail,lower control arms, adj. panhard bar, diamond subframe connectors. I love my low milage 3rd gens and don't ever plan on getting rid of them but none of them match up to my 4th gen

 

yea they're one of the most affordable performance tires available right now....really good for a budget....i would think str8 line tracking and predictable turn in would be good to have on the front of any car.

 

u sound just like me lol....and u have a WS6 i dont....ask anybody whos driven both....the "no nostril" TA feels like a boat in comparison to a WS6.

 

I've driven both and they felt the same to me. The WS6 has a 32 hollow front bar compared to the regular TA's 30mm hollow. That's about the only difference in the suspension unless it had the optional Bilstein or Koni package added on to it.

 

there was a thread about it not too long ago....and its possible his does have the bilsteins or koni's.....but like i said mine has cupped front tires and could easily have a bad shock or 2.....so id say it needs some refreshment before i can say it handles like ****.

 

Just to drop my .02¢ in - I had an '88 hard top GTA (in black... I miss that car ), it was totally stock, and I got it with about 80-someodd-thousand miles on it.

I now have an '02 WS6 T/A, which I got brand new, right off the transport, with 9 miles on it.

My area is full of backroads, hills, and turns. Fun driving has gotten very difficult because there are too damned many people (everywhere in the country now), but even still, I do get the chance every so often.

I used to take my GTA out in an area we called "the valley", which was long winding roads with plenty of elevation changes and virtually no stop signs or traffic lights, at night. I'd drive a stretch leisurly to get the feel for it, then get into it a little.

Prior to that I had an '84 T-Top T/A that I got with about 140-something-thousand miles on it. It too was totally bone stock but had the WS6 package on it. I would frequently take this car out in the valley as well.

Both of those cars felt great. They stuck well, and cut in, and tended to neutrally slide - all 4 wheels, rather than under or over-steering. The GTA was clearly a step up. Even over rough pavement, the live axle didn't (seem to) matter. It would take a set immediately, and be and feel very planted, and just go where you pointed it.

My '02 however (which is my first 4th Gen), I had expected it to be even better. Wider tires, lighter engine for better balance, 6-speed vs Auto for less overall weight, stiffer chassis, and just a newer design in a brand new car.

However, that just isn't the case. I didn't do anything but baby it for about 2 years while I waited for the cash to install some SFCs. I got SLP bolt in SFCs, took them to a chassis shop and had them first bolt, then weld, them in. Now between that and some assurances from reputable sources (including a sponsor here), I'm comfortable pushing the car a little with no fear of twisting it and fatiguing the chassis anymore.

So now I can see what the car feels like. And it's disappointing. I can hear and feel the car scrubbing the front tires (can see the results on the outside edge of the tires too), even while on the uphill side of a turn while on the gas (which should put the weight on the outside rear IIRC). If there is a bump in the turn, the car will bounce and not take a set. This bouncing actually affects me inside and causes the steering wheel to be moved, exacerbating the situation.

Even though it has been a few years, I know for a fact my GTA was MUCH better over these same roads and turns. And that with what was probably a beat suspension.

The 4th Gens might have more total lateral grip, and might do better on a course or track than a 3rd Gen, but on the less than perfect twisty backroads, they inspire just about zero confidence, whereas the 3rd Gens inspired a lot.


On a side note - I'm curious why a large front bar is so often recommended? I get the feeling that my car is too understeer prone in stock configuration, wouldn't going larger up front make that worse? I would think that changing the rear to a bigger one with a stock front would be the way to go. I gather that impression is wrong, I'm just curious why. (bear in mind that I've never gotten into modding a car before)

 

I was just thinking that perhaps corner entrance speed is what is making the 3rd gens feel better. The 4th gen cars are going to produce more straightline speed, and therefore a different braking threshold. I am probably not explaining it well, but I think you will all get the point. As an extreme example, I used to throw my 86 Cutlass around an old creek road back in the day. I quickly realized I couldn't be as aggressive with the Camaro because of the huge overall speed difference that the horsepower allowed.

 

HPP i feel exactly the same way....but i think you said it better than i did.....i have a road that i test mine on too and ur right the 4th Gens inspire no confidence in the twistys on a less than perfect road.....im worried that even if i do mod the hell out of my suspension that ill still be stuck with a car that doesnt handle to my comfort standards that i was used to in the 3rd Gens.....when you talk about your GTA and how it set in, went where u wanted it to, and felt planted it really reminds me alot of my last Iroc.....i really miss that car.

 

The 4th gen gains negative camber when the suspension compresses. When the body rolls, the suspension compresses, but not enough. The rolling action pushes the upper front suspension mounting point (on a 4th gen, the upper control arm, on a third gen, the upper strut mount) "out". When the body rolls, it pushes the mount out over the tire, this causes the wheel to lose negative camber (the tire no longer sits flat on the ground, and grip is lost). By limiting body roll with a large bar, we reduce body roll and the associated camber loss. This keeps the tires flatter on the pavement and allows them to work better, giving more grip. Adding bar to the end that has less traction is not the normal solution, but on these cars it is the way to help improve the situation.

Did that help?

 

Yeah, thanks.

 

HPP, the 4th gens came with crappy shocks and that sounds like what your describing. Just a shock replacement will give the car the stability it is lacking and improve your confidence with it a huge amount.

The factory also gives the cars no camber, but a good performance alignment will include 1 to 1.5 degrees of negative camber along with zero toe. That combined with the larger front bar really helps the front to grip the corners.

When I got my 99TA it was all stock. It was fast, but gave me no confidence at all. Once I added the better shocks, stiffer springs, bigger front bar and a performance alignment, it totally changed. I can totally get the car sideways with power oversteer if I want and not back out of the throttle. Just crazy speed in the corners and it's all predictable.

Then if you want more confidence, get some aggressive brake pads. Being able to out brake every car on the road also gives you a huge safety margin and again, more confidence.