If you could recomend one or a few cheap suspension upgrades for improved handling and traction what would it be. A budget decision...
Thanks

 

cheap and better handling dont really go hand in hand..

what do you mainly do with the car? Daily Driver? 1/4 mile racing? Road Racing? Spirited street driving?

Shocks are one of the biggest components of suspension.. so are springs.. you need to look into these 2 area's 1st.. then look at swaybars.

so what exactly do you want the car to do?

 

Cheapest idea even w stock susp would be a performance minded alignment.
I run -1.5 Camber, +4.5 Castor, and Zero toe. Much better turn in, no crazy tire wear.

I agree that good (not cheap) shocks are important.

I think Strano Sway Bars would be a good addition to nearly any combo.

An adjustable rod ended PHB (UMI) is a helpful piece.

Don't waste $ on SFCs (just MHO).

And of course good tires (not all seasons).

Here is a helpful link if upgrades r in your future: http://www.angelfire.com/my/fastcar/suspension.html
It doesn't include Stano's Springs yet, but they r highly recomended and will b on my car soon!

And search and read B4 you spend your $. Buying cheap parts that don't help, and get replaced later r a waste of $.

 

Why don't you like the idea of SFCs?!

 

There just isn't any info to support that they benefit performance. They only support one plane (the floor pan). I don't think this makes a significant difference in torsional stiffness of the car. If anything they may help (minimally) on launch at the drag strip, but I question if that would even be a measurable diff. Plus, they only actually attatch to 2 or 3 points, which equal only a few square inches. So if they did bear a lot of load it would all be put into only a few squar inches of sheet metal to which they attatch. I think to significantly improve torsional stiffness a full roll cage-attatching to multiple point on the car is needed.

The 4th gen chassis is actually a fairly strong one. I put them on when I got my car. They seemed to harsh my ride, and make noise. What I can tell you 4 sure is they add weight, and take away ground clearance (especially the SLPs-you can c them hanging below my car in sig pic). What I cannot tell you is that they stop quarter panel dimples-they don't (search), and that they did not make my car any quieter (less rattles). I kinda think they are a gimmick, that adds weight to the car while making your wallet lighter.

Do I think they are evil, no. But I think your mod $ and time is better spent on things that make a proven diff.

Wow, that got lengthy....I'll get off my soap box now.

 

Lower Control arms....But they help with getting a bit more traction...

 

Get a STB. LOL

 

hold on guys... before you start suggesting parts.. he needs to tell us what he wants the car to do.. and what its used for.. albeit, shocks and springs are a must to change handling for any application.. but which shocks and springs will be determined by the car's usage.

 

Handing and traction come from different parts, which is why drag cars look, feel and drive so differently than sports cars.

So, I have to ask what's more important? Handling, stability and a decent ride, or straight line grip? There are some things we can do to help traction without hurting handling, but also not really helping it. There are traction things you can do that shoot handling, ride, etc. to hell and back.

 

Well the car is not a daily driver as its just a weekend cruiser...although I do plan on 1/4 mile tracking it once in a while. I dont want to spend much on suspension now because I want to do power modifications now. I want something relatively unexpensive that will give me better handling and drivability and also better traction if thats possible.
I am more so looking for sugestions of sway bars, strut bars, control arms, tourqe arms ect. as im not really sure which one benifits moreso.
Thanks

 

I know this is a little off track but, I think my SFC's are one of my favorite mods I had done to my Camaro...feels so much tighter.

 

I think I had a similar feeling when I did the TB bypass.....

 

If you have the slightest small amount of possible motivation that you might change your springs in a few years, this is what I recommend:

Koni's (not cheap but if you get those by themself, you are helping your handling a hell of a lot, and will be all set if you need springs)

If you have extra money, get Strano swaybars for front and rear. That will make your car handle a hell of a lot better with bars and shocks.

Coming from someone who has been doing some racing for a few years, I would only make a modification these days if it has a specific goal. For a daily driver, I would probably just do shocks, put on some nice wheels with Nitto 555 street tires since they wear awesome and are cheap and drive great in the rain, and maybe some minor appearance mods since I would use it for car shows . What do you need the car to handle better for on the street? Besides a shock change, the stock setup is more than enough for the street, and I wouldn't be chasing any 1/4 times. It can be raced on the 1/4 mile.

If you dont care about ever being competitive in autox, SFC's are awesome for jacking up the whole side of your car

 

My opinion on SFCs: I lifted my car by the left front pad and before and after I installed my diy subframe connectors and noted several inches less in flex. Chassis flex changes the relative alignment and location of the major suspension components. Limiting the range of those variables will back a more stable platform for your suspension works from.

If I had 300 dollars to spend on a street car I wanted to make handle a bit better, maybe make the ***-o-meter a little happier, I would make a set of diy LCAs with rod ends and put a better front sway bar on. And don't forget about tires. All the best suspension pieces if you don't have 4 good patches of rubber sticking you to the ground.

As with everything, opinions ~= ******** in that ∞ has one.

 

excuse my ignorance but what is SFC's?

 

Speed, are you saying that your chassis flexed several (3+?) inches before your SFC's (BatmobileWS6, SFC = Sub-Frame Connector) were installed? and now it's zero? I don't mean to bust your chops, but that seems a bit hard to believe. How were you measuring this exactly? Just curious.

 

Naaa bust away. i'm always up for learning.

What I did was mark a spot at the front and rear next to the wheel wells with the car sitting at ride height and measured the distance to the ground. Then I jacked up the car under the front pad until the rear tire came off the ground and measured the difference. Repeated after I installed the subframe connectors.

I don't remember the exact numbers but there was a several inches of difference in height between the two marks. There was about an inch afterwards. I interrupted this as the subframe connector helping to support the load difference between front and rear subframes.

I thought I recorded the differences in my little build thread but I guess I didn't. Sorry.

 

Speed, please do not take this as any type of attack or disrespect. I am tired, and at the moment cannot find a tactful way of expressing my opinion on this. This is a simple disagreement, and my ONLY intent is to express my side. I do realize this is basically an opinion only issue, and my real point to this responce is to show the lack of proof (for either side).

But... you cannot b serious. This means nothing. The suspension is compressing, the change in the car's torsional flexing is not changing to a degree measurable in inches. When you jacked the car by the SFC, the SFC was distributing the weight differently. In other words the weight distribution was differnet, requiring the loaded side of the suspension (still on the ground) to react differently. You are measuring suspension compression, not chassis flex!

Again, please don't take this personally, but seat-of-the-pants feel, placebo effect, unscientific "experiiments", and what happened to (this) one guy (in band camp) w one car w one set up does not make for truely informed decisions.

My point is not to make out SFCs to be a bad thing. I just do not feel that bracing that only connects to 3 (6 combined) small pieces of sheet metal in the middle of the car, cannot be expected to significantly effect the torsional rigidity of said car. Too few tie in points, minimal triangulation, and only reinforcing 1 plane.

Think of it this way: Build a box from paper. It will twist when you apply opposing torsional force 2 its corners. Now reinforce only the middle of the bottom side w 2 popcicle(sp?) sticks only glued at the ends (or make up 3 pt types w 1 more glue point). Will this keep the box from twisting..No, it will force other sides to twist and likely just rip the paper where the sticks are glued. To truely reinforce the box you would have to build a triangulated interior structure attatching to multiple points (like a roll cage) to distribute the force.

So do they help...maybe a little (unmeasurable) amount. Are they the end all be all solution some seem to think, surely not. Do they do enough to justify the weight and expense...thats the real question here (guess which way I'm leaning).

But my point remains: The "gain" of SFCs has NOT been measured or proven.

Wow, probly my longest post ever...and no smiles?
I always liked this one--------------------------->

 

Edit: Fixing some of the grammatical and spelling errors

Hell no dude. No offense taken at all. This is good stuff! I think too often, there is bs going back and forth and not enough good constructive conversation. I'm really tired too but I can't fricken sleep for some reason. I'll address my feelings in your post below.

Actually, I never jacked it up by the SFC. I always jacked the car up by the front lifting pad just behind the front tire. The loading placed on the subframe connector was transmitted through the pad into the left front subframe rail to the front SFC mount.

It was chassis flex between the rear of the front subframe and front of the rear subframe. The reason I jacked the car up by the front until the rear tire was fully off the ground was to unload the suspension on that side of the car. The difference in height between each point represents the flex between those points.

Agree for the most part but I do believe an experienced driver can feel the difference in how his car is performing.

Well you aren't worried about triangulation as much as reinforcing existing load channels. . As the front subframe flexes the stamped steel monocoque that comprises the floorpan, firewall, etc, is attempting to resist, transmit, and distribute that load to the rear. Picking up the front left tire should compressor the suspension on the rear right tire. All the subframe connector does is support that structure and help transmit the load through out the chassis. In reality, the two points connected on the front and rear subframes by the SFCs are significantly supported by the rocker panels (outer several inches of the monocoque) because those areas see the most flex. The SFCs help support that load. And the loads seen by the subframes are primarily bending, not torsional loads. I did the math on it once and if you follow the arc, the SFC sees less than 3* of torsion for every inch of height difference between the front and rear ends of the SFC.

That's actually a very good analogy. Please allow me to take a shot at it. Build that same paper box and build two squares the same width as the box out of popcicles sticks(same spelling lol). Glue the box to the appropriate lateral members of the squares on each end. Now suspend the assembly at the 4 corners of the box and place a weight on a corner of one of your popcicle squares. Continue loading until the box fails.

Now repeat but glue two popcicle sticks between the front and rear square popcicle stick boxes. What you end up with is something of a ladder frame with a steel monocoque welded to it. So the SFCs don't replace the support the floorpan structure provides, it augments it. It resists the bending loads caused by the relative changes in height between the corners of the car. Really all they do is help keep the chassis square and add support to the existing structures. My SFCs take that into the design which is why I not only attached them to the three points described but welded them directly to the floorpan itself.

No worries here. I see my self rereading and fixing spelling and wording errors so if a sentence doesn't make sense, I'm too tired to realize it .

I really liked the box analogy because because we build little wire frames and place various weights on levers around the structure to test loading and flex. If you are ever building a tube frame car, there is nothing better than mocking up a miniature frame in thin steel tig rod and trying various configurations.

 

For some reason my post above is blank but all the text is there when I try to edit it. That happened in a PM too....