No more torque arm. G-force suspension setup
04-29-2007, 04:49 PM
#141
Originally Posted by BlackHawk T/A
You know there are people with cars from other manufacturers (Ford, others) that are adding torque arms to their cars that weren't originally part of their design...and here we have people taking them off... 
05-17-2007, 04:14 PM
#143
Originally Posted by 95ttoplt1
Any word on this??
Straightline traction seems pretty good. I dropped the clutch on the street at about 3500, which resulted in about a 5 foot burnout then the tires hooked and just about killed the engine. Normally, that would result in a smoke show. I'm running 305 Nitto 555Rs.
05-17-2007, 04:16 PM
#144
Originally Posted by Tim @ EAD Performance
I only got a couple days worth of driving on it before I had to take my car apart again. Only thing I don't like about it so far is turning from a stop when taking off hard. It seems like one of the wheels just completely unloads, then as soon as you start going straight, it grips and hits insanely hard.
Straightline traction seems pretty good. I dropped the clutch on the street at about 3500, which resulted in about a 5 foot burnout then the tires hooked and just about killed the engine. Normally, that would result in a smoke show. I'm running 305 Nitto 555Rs.
Straightline traction seems pretty good. I dropped the clutch on the street at about 3500, which resulted in about a 5 foot burnout then the tires hooked and just about killed the engine. Normally, that would result in a smoke show. I'm running 305 Nitto 555Rs.
Cool, any pictures??
06-01-2007, 07:40 AM
#147
Originally Posted by Dragframe
shitty design... doesn't allow axle to move with pinion wen suspension moves....... no good.
If you are talking about pinion angle, which I suspect you are, it will still move in an arc when the suspension cycles. So the pinion angle should still be ok. How much does your suspension actually move while driving? Mine hardly moves up and down at all. Just enough to absorb some craters in the road. haha.
Besides, people have the bars, run them, beat on them, street cruise them, and arent having issues. I know there are more people with a set up like this I just wish they would chime in with pics and driving impressions.
Justin
06-09-2007, 11:22 PM
#148
Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
...Besides, people have the bars, run them, beat on them, street cruise them, and arent having issues. I know there are more people with a set up like this I just wish they would chime in with pics and driving impressions.
Justin
Justin
06-10-2007, 09:39 PM
#149
Originally Posted by Jon B.
I can't find any useful info on these Pete-Z bars that Ed Wright uses. I imagine they are like a typical four-link or a typical ladder bar setup. NOT anything close to what this G-Force setup is.
Maybe it's just me, but looking at those pictures again made me realize that the entire rear axle is hanging by the coil-over springs. That doesn't look all that great from my point of view.
Jon
Maybe it's just me, but looking at those pictures again made me realize that the entire rear axle is hanging by the coil-over springs. That doesn't look all that great from my point of view.
Jon
Read this thread.
Originally Posted by 95ttoplt1
Where can you get the Petes z-bars?? I googled and no luck. Can some one PM it to me if it can't be posted.
So the upper brackets seen above that you bolt into the inner fenders are just for the coil over conversion?
I was wondering how something like this kit could be used when minitubbing and using a narrowed rear. Traditionally that necessitates using offset LCAs. I was also wondering and someone mentioned it earlier of adapting a 8.8 rear with this system. Anyone have any thoughts on that? I'm going to try and do some research on this.
07-15-2007, 08:49 PM
#150
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SPRING, TX
Posts: 1,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone needs to get MADMAN in here. I'm sure he could tell you way more than you need to know about the difference between this setup and a torque arm setup.
07-17-2007, 08:15 PM
#152
Banned
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,990
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BlackHawk T/A
What i'm wondering is if that's really better then why did GM design the torque arm setup? There has to be some kind of pro/con tradeoff?
3 THOUSAND DOLLARS that is why gm didn't do it.
12-22-2007, 09:23 AM
#154
basically it converts the car to two REAL SHORT ladder bars. ladder bars will not allow articulation of the rearend, at all. you might as well remove the anti-sway bar in the rear end because the suspension can now only move up and down in a parrallel plane with the body of the car. pinion angle is gonna drastically change throughout rearend travel due to the length of the bars.
the torque arm makes the rearend a 3 point connection with pivots at all ends. this g-force setup does not pivot at the rearend. they are using a solid 3 point connection to control axle wrap, but it cannot pivot within its mounts, which is essential to a good working suspension.
i see this for one application only. low-powered, footbrake, dragstrip only car. this setup with being as short as it is, is gonna hit the tires real hard, then try to drive the rearend under the car instead of moving it forward.
and for 3000? whats up with that?
the torque arm makes the rearend a 3 point connection with pivots at all ends. this g-force setup does not pivot at the rearend. they are using a solid 3 point connection to control axle wrap, but it cannot pivot within its mounts, which is essential to a good working suspension.
i see this for one application only. low-powered, footbrake, dragstrip only car. this setup with being as short as it is, is gonna hit the tires real hard, then try to drive the rearend under the car instead of moving it forward.
and for 3000? whats up with that?
12-22-2007, 10:29 AM
#155
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: May 2007
Location: DFW, Tx
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So it looks like you need the ladder bar conversion from them - $449:
http://www.g-forcesuspension.com/pag...og/i.php/81/55
Then you need the rear coilover conversion - (double adjustable)$1,699:
http://www.g-forcesuspension.com/pag...og/i.php/81/91
Comes to $2,148 and could be cheaper with single adjustable. Was labor the remaining $850?
Couple that with the cost you incurr for a 12bolt or 9in you've got 5k in the rearend under stock fenderwells. To bad you have to do the coilover conversion...makes it real pricey
http://www.g-forcesuspension.com/pag...og/i.php/81/55
Then you need the rear coilover conversion - (double adjustable)$1,699:
http://www.g-forcesuspension.com/pag...og/i.php/81/91
Comes to $2,148 and could be cheaper with single adjustable. Was labor the remaining $850?
Couple that with the cost you incurr for a 12bolt or 9in you've got 5k in the rearend under stock fenderwells. To bad you have to do the coilover conversion...makes it real pricey
12-22-2007, 10:45 AM
#156
So it looks like you need the ladder bar conversion from them - $449:
http://www.g-forcesuspension.com/pag...og/i.php/81/55
Then you need the rear coilover conversion - (double adjustable)$1,699:
http://www.g-forcesuspension.com/pag...og/i.php/81/91
Comes to $2,148 and could be cheaper with single adjustable. Was labor the remaining $850?
Couple that with the cost you incurr for a 12bolt or 9in you've got 5k in the rearend under stock fenderwells. To bad you have to do the coilover conversion...makes it real pricey
http://www.g-forcesuspension.com/pag...og/i.php/81/55
Then you need the rear coilover conversion - (double adjustable)$1,699:
http://www.g-forcesuspension.com/pag...og/i.php/81/91
Comes to $2,148 and could be cheaper with single adjustable. Was labor the remaining $850?
Couple that with the cost you incurr for a 12bolt or 9in you've got 5k in the rearend under stock fenderwells. To bad you have to do the coilover conversion...makes it real pricey
the price total you show is only for the rear setup. the 3K includes the front coilover setup with double adjustables as well.
12-22-2007, 11:05 PM
#158
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Huh??? Are you saying that the pinion angle doesnt change with the axle movement??? haha...axle is always gonna move with the pinion because its attached.
actually no thats why there are u-joints on ur driveshaft so it does'nt affect pinion angle, if it did then that would mean the driveshaft would be a load baring suspetion arm. this is a standard two link or ladder bar suspention. it is not a 3-link (in the suspention world the pan-hard doesn't count) to answear the suspetion question yea the pinion will change alot but since u only have tops of 5-6 inches of travel in the rear not a big deal at all. black magic of link-type suspension.
actually no thats why there are u-joints on ur driveshaft so it does'nt affect pinion angle, if it did then that would mean the driveshaft would be a load baring suspetion arm. this is a standard two link or ladder bar suspention. it is not a 3-link (in the suspention world the pan-hard doesn't count) to answear the suspetion question yea the pinion will change alot but since u only have tops of 5-6 inches of travel in the rear not a big deal at all. black magic of link-type suspension.
12-23-2007, 12:34 PM
#160
On The Tree
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Port Huron
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i would like to hear from someone runnin this with 7-800rwhp....can't be havin **** break and need 60 ft times or if improved......and i agree that not ganna notice to much difference on 12 seconds cars......