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.
From: Graceland in a Not Correctly Restored Stingray
Both have drawbacks. Which is "better" somewhat depends on your priorities. If restoring original handling and ride comfort are what you're after, stick with rubber, but if reducing compliance to maintain more stable suspension geometry under heavy cornering loads without going to all-out racing components is a goal, then poly may be a better choice than rubber. However, IMCO poly isn't best suited to locations such as the rear camber struts and TA's which inherently travel in 3D's, so I suggest stepping on up to heim-jointed rear camber struts and thinking about spherical TA's out back should handling be a very high priority. Poly also requires proper periodic lubrication to avoid binding stiction (evidenced by squeaking).
That's my $.02. Some will recommend one over the other regardless of your purposes, and there are plenty of threads debating this ad nauseam if you care to search.
Last edited by TheSkunkWorks; Mar 15, 2011 at 04:54 PM.
Both have drawbacks. Which is "better" somewhat depends on your priorities. If restoring original handling and ride comfort are what you're after, stick with rubber, but if reducing compliance to maintain more stable suspension geometry under heavy cornering loads without going to all-out racing components is a goal, then poly may be a better choice than rubber. However, IMCO poly isn't best suited to locations such as the rear camber struts and TA's which inherently travel in 3D's, so I suggest stepping on up to heim-jointed rear camber struts and thinking about spherical TA's out back should handling be a very high priority. Poly also requires proper periodic lubrication to avoid binding stiction (evidenced by squeaking).
That's my $.02. Some will recommend one over the other regardless of your purposes, and there are plenty of threads debating this ad nauseam if you care to search.
Interesting. I'll never race or attempt to drive the car beyond reasonable limits. It also won't see a whole lot of miles. I always thought poly was better primarily b/c it wouldn't deteriorate as quickly as rubber. Didn't know the other. I don't want a harsher ride and if they require maintenance, maybe I should stick with rubber.
I only used Poly on one of my cars BUT replaced them in about one or two years with rubber... too stiff...too harsh..and too noisy for my tastes for what I used the car for (Saturday evening cruising mostly
the poly bushings will definitely leave you with a much firmer ride than replacing them with the OEM rubber bushings. the upside to using poly if you can get comfortable with the ride is the poly last much longer than the rubber bushings do.
Rebuilt the front end of my '69 five years ago with poly. End of last year noted that one of the A-frame bushings was all eaten up after 7K miles and replaced with rubber.
Today replaced the leaf spring bushings that were about four years ago as there were just crumbles left on the bolts from poly bushings. Went back to poly.
Many similar guys in our Corvette Club in Houston have experienced issues with poly. GO rubber for sure.
Yep. Rubber bushings only last 10-20 years, or so....
My 68 still has 3 of the front A arms with the orig rubber....might need to change 10-20 to 45 or so...and I am in the middle of nothing but curves and mountains and lately very rough roads.
I am in the process of a full body off storation and researched this to death. Although it's a personal choice, I am replacing all rubber components with rubber components. Makes sense. Better ride, quieter ride, more original geometry, life cycle has already been proven. Of course I am bring my 68 as close as I can to original specs.