C1 Forged Steel Monoleaf Springs
09-08-2012, 09:15 PM
#1
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
C1 Forged Steel Monoleaf Springs
I noticed Forged Steel Monoleaf Springs are available at Corvette Central for a C1 in standard and 2 inch drop. Has anyone tried these and if so what are your thoughts?
09-09-2012, 09:41 AM
#2
Race Director
Member Since: Nov 2000
Location: Beverly Hills (Pine Ridge) Florida
Posts: 10,152
Received 525 Likes
on
374 Posts
http://www.parts123.com/parts123/yb....~Z5Z5Z50000050
Plasticman
Last edited by Plasticman; 09-09-2012 at 09:45 AM.
09-09-2012, 09:43 AM
#3
Team Owner
I would NOT use a steel monoleaf spring...if for no other reason than this advice:
http://www.eatonsprings.com/monoleaf.htm
There is little upside to this change for early C1s and lots of (potentially dangerous) downsides...
http://www.eatonsprings.com/monoleaf.htm
There is little upside to this change for early C1s and lots of (potentially dangerous) downsides...
09-09-2012, 09:55 AM
#4
The Vette Brakes and Products C1 composite monospring might give you the drop you want, you should give them a call and see how much the drop would be. Also, I think they give a forum discount.
http://www.vbandp.com/C1-Corvettes/C...ings-Pair.html
http://www.vbandp.com/C1-Corvettes/C...ings-Pair.html
09-09-2012, 10:48 AM
#5
Team Owner
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Greenville, Indiana
Posts: 26,118
Received 1,843 Likes
on
1,398 Posts
Excerpt from the Eaton Spring link:
"GM spent millions of dollars designing, testing, building, and using mono-leaf springs on the F and X body (Chevy II, Nova, Camaro, Firebird) cars of the 60's and early 70's and they have not used a steel mono-leaf spring since.
One must ask - Why?
GM, with their drive to reduce costs and weight and with all the resources to design and test the latest and greatest is no longer interested in steel mono-leaf springs.
Could the reason be safety?"
Why? The answer to this question seems pretty simple to me! GM started using coil springs/control arms in the rear instead of leaf springs along with the rest of the manufacturers. Didn't matter whether mono or multiple leaf. Safety? I don't recall any class action lawsuits or other BS relating to mono-leaf springs. Anybody?
In all the years GM used that spring, I recall seeing one brand new 1962Chevy II with a broken rear spring. That's it. No Camaros, no later Novas. That's not to say it didn't happen.
I had an opportunity to talk to one of the engineers that worked on that design GM spring at Carlisle last month. He worked for Rockwell International who built the spring for GM. The name doesn't matter but lets just say his name is very recognizable in Corvette circles when you talk springs. In his words, "if that spring will last the first 30 days in service, it will last a very long time. The exception would be if the spring was impacted by a hard, sharp, object with enough force to cause a stress riser in the spring at the point of impact and that could lead to eventual failure."
What wasn't said is the same impact could cause eventual failure of a mult-leaf spring in the main leaf with potentially the same results as a mono-leaf spring.
I'd also take exception with the Eaton article that the body can come down on the tire when a spring breaks. I believe there is adequate tire clearance in that wheelhouse with the suspension in the full compression mode unless the owner has installed oversized tires.
Same way if the spring breaks in front of the axle. The axle can shift only as far as the rear shackle will allow which isn't much. If a spring broke behind the axle, the axle will not shift fore/aft at all due to the front eye on the spring being a fixed point.
I have owned a car that has had mono leaf springs on it for 47 years. Came from the factory that way. The OEM springs have been beat on by drag racing for a few years, both with/without radius rods or slapper bars. The springs are still doing their job to this day. There isn't even any appreciable loss of ride height in them.
That's my experience with mono-leaf springs. Yours may vary!
"GM spent millions of dollars designing, testing, building, and using mono-leaf springs on the F and X body (Chevy II, Nova, Camaro, Firebird) cars of the 60's and early 70's and they have not used a steel mono-leaf spring since.
One must ask - Why?
GM, with their drive to reduce costs and weight and with all the resources to design and test the latest and greatest is no longer interested in steel mono-leaf springs.
Could the reason be safety?"
Why? The answer to this question seems pretty simple to me! GM started using coil springs/control arms in the rear instead of leaf springs along with the rest of the manufacturers. Didn't matter whether mono or multiple leaf. Safety? I don't recall any class action lawsuits or other BS relating to mono-leaf springs. Anybody?
In all the years GM used that spring, I recall seeing one brand new 1962Chevy II with a broken rear spring. That's it. No Camaros, no later Novas. That's not to say it didn't happen.
I had an opportunity to talk to one of the engineers that worked on that design GM spring at Carlisle last month. He worked for Rockwell International who built the spring for GM. The name doesn't matter but lets just say his name is very recognizable in Corvette circles when you talk springs. In his words, "if that spring will last the first 30 days in service, it will last a very long time. The exception would be if the spring was impacted by a hard, sharp, object with enough force to cause a stress riser in the spring at the point of impact and that could lead to eventual failure."
What wasn't said is the same impact could cause eventual failure of a mult-leaf spring in the main leaf with potentially the same results as a mono-leaf spring.
I'd also take exception with the Eaton article that the body can come down on the tire when a spring breaks. I believe there is adequate tire clearance in that wheelhouse with the suspension in the full compression mode unless the owner has installed oversized tires.
Same way if the spring breaks in front of the axle. The axle can shift only as far as the rear shackle will allow which isn't much. If a spring broke behind the axle, the axle will not shift fore/aft at all due to the front eye on the spring being a fixed point.
I have owned a car that has had mono leaf springs on it for 47 years. Came from the factory that way. The OEM springs have been beat on by drag racing for a few years, both with/without radius rods or slapper bars. The springs are still doing their job to this day. There isn't even any appreciable loss of ride height in them.
That's my experience with mono-leaf springs. Yours may vary!
09-09-2012, 11:04 AM
#6
Team Owner
Whatever - steel monoleafs are a different beast than the composite monoleafs as we know.
My point in regard to a C1 is, why even take a chance ? There are quality multi-leaf replacements...and I think (I'd have to confirm) that you can get versions that will lower the car.
My point in regard to a C1 is, why even take a chance ? There are quality multi-leaf replacements...and I think (I'd have to confirm) that you can get versions that will lower the car.
09-10-2012, 03:00 AM
#7
Pro
As far as I'm aware there are no big issues with them as long as they are made well.
Alot of European cars and light commercial vehicles have been using them for years.
I was just measuring up a VW Amrock utility the other day, as part of a job I'm involved with and it had a monoleaf rear spring.