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.
I think his (Glen's) plan is very sound and he will have a great back end to handle more down the road if he feels the need.
Thanks for your insight into my 'project'.
Originally Posted by DJ Dep
..... I thought he (Glen) was talking about running 9-10 inch slicks in back previously.
I had previously considered having the spare, un-narrowed 8.5" 10-bolt form my Z28 into the back of the '80 I bought, and running something like 30" x 11-12" slicks, without modifying the frame rails, using short 4-link bars.....
a local chassis guru said he could do it for around $3000-3500, if I supplied him the complete rear-end, and he'd build a cage, too.....
Although it WOULD offer a 'budget solid-axle' alternative way for a C3 not suffer rear-end/axle problems, I figured I'd go whole-hog, and get either this '80, or another, already-built '80-up C3, with a full back-half job, the reason being that I want MAXIMUM consistency, and the C3 chassis might-not be up to the task at-hand, as I am looking for 'the ultimate' Corvette Challenge Series bracket car possible:
this method may, however, serve your needs well.
It is interesting to say the least. They look like some kind of modified 4 link setup to control the pinion angle from climbing upward on accelerration. You can't really see the front of the lower mount from this angle to tell if it has some kind of connector on it also, but it doesn't look like it has one
It would seem to me that the lower mount would cause the spring to load and bind and cause wheel hop with the top mount being rigid under very hard sudden acceleration... if the force of a launch can't twist the pinion angle up from the top it will try to twist it from the bottom also causing the spring to take the load, i.e dragstrip and sticky tires.
The lower mount does look to be adjustable for ride height. I would think this setup would work very well if the lower mount was incorperated with some kind of floater-traction bar setup.
Cmon Quick, let's see some detailed pics of this setup from different angles.
Well someone hit on the head! this is my dana 60 here so i will try to answer some of the Q's. The springs are dana super-stock leafs that I removed about 3 leafs per side so there not as stiff as the heavier car they came in.( 69 GTX ) The chrome brackets you see holding up the leafs are FLOATERS that are adjustable. The top bars are left & right hand threads so you can adjust the preload for launches. They also stop any leaf spring rap up and there is NO wheel hop! I also made the adjustable brackets in front ( cant see in these pics ) so I can set the center of gravity. The rear x member was cut and I put a drive shaft loop in it. I did have to cut the center compartment about 4 inches for clearance. The whole thing is like a 4 link without coilovers, just that all the brackets were hand made and the axel floats off the spring. The dana was narrowed 1.5 inches per side with stock axels that had enough spline that I just cut them shorter. I kept the Drum brakes, they work just fine. The only thing I would like to do later if I were to go auto x ing is to put in a panhard bar, all in all, this setup was thought out and built 25 yrs. ago by two brothers sitting around the garage drinkin beer and wondering what to do after I broke the IRS. So I picked up the dana for 100 bucks and that was all she wrote! My brother did talk me into taking the body off and you know how the story gos, once you start putting parts back on the thing, everything has to be as nice as the last part thet went on! I didnt tub it because I wanted to keep alot of the things under there stock (gas tank, frame rails, battery box ) and I didnt have a lot of cash, in fact this car was built for under 15 g.s ( I was married to a $ hungry BEIOTCH ) so I knew early on I wanted a stronger set up and that is what I got! thinking back on it, its a nice set up for an 18 yr. old at the time, and still nice for a 47 yr. old today, other than that it rides very nice and straight and IT HOOKS!
Quick 1:
thanks for the information regarding your car, and I hope you didn't think I was belittling your ride in anyway.
I bet she's a BLAST on the street, and it is a nice way to have the security of a solid-axle in a C3 without building something totally-unstreetable!
Not At All! its more than a blast its a friggin riot! you know , when Im out floggin, Im so into the BIG BLOCK that I dont even think of the rear end at all, I guess thats what I wanted when I put it in there 25 yrs. ago!
..... when I'm out flogging, Im so into the BIG BLOCK that I dont even think of the rear end at all, I guess thats what I wanted when I put it in there 25 yrs. ago!
Students, put your #2 pencils down: class is over for today.
So what you're saying is that the lower mount is on bushings??? I could see how that would work now...although it is upside down and connected to an arm instead of wrapped around and axle tube...It's definatly different compared to any other floater I've ever seen. I bet with a Slide a Link, you could plant them even harder.
..... BERNADETTE and I went to our local strip ( www.pittsburghracewaypark.com ) this past weekend just to ' git the stink blowed-off ', and we happened to come-across this contraption that I 'guess' would be considered a straight-axle C3:
I thought I'd share my rather-crude pictures with my C3-brethren: besides, this thread has laid idle too-long, and needed a 'bump' to the top.
I'd be able to work on that well into my 80's when I'm so arthritic I can barely move (where's the geezer smiley?)
..... and it'd offer unlimited head-room for 'tall' drivers.....
I've lost touch with many of the racers at the track in the last few years, but I'da have LOVED to ask him about the car: imagine what stories a 35+ year-old Funny Car body could tell.....
I allways believed the C3 was evoluted competition for europen sports engineering, eg, the Jaguar, now unfortunatly in the hands of Ford, Lotus, Ferrari, we go back far enough to compete with the Sabb Sonet. But I'm sure the Corvette was never ment to be a dragster, allthough I've broken my share of drive shafts in the early Corvettes. That was just for the girls, not for the numbers. We didn't invent the Spitfire, just beat it with the P51!
I BELIEVE YOUR CORRECT HERE ,ONLY BECAUSE I HAD A LATE 60'S TRYUMPH ''HERALD'' (I BELIEVE ''GET SMART'S'' DON ADAMS DROVE ONE IN THE SERIES)AND IT HAD THE SAME TRANSVERSE LEAF SPRING 3 DRIVE SHAFT SYSTEM,,,ONLY I HAD A 4 CYL ENGINE,,,,,I REVVED HER UP AND DUMPED THE CLUTCH,,BROKE THE 1/2 SHAFTS AND BLEW THE REAR END!!!
..... BERNADETTE and I went to our local strip ( www.pittsburghracewaypark.com ) this past weekend just to ' git the stink blowed-off ', and we happened to come-across this contraption that I 'guess' would be considered a straight-axle C3:
I thought I'd share my rather-crude pictures with my C3-brethren: besides, this thread has laid idle too-long, and needed a 'bump' to the top.
Man! That thing is friggen COOL!!! I wouldn't be able to sleep with that in the garage. I'd always be out there drooling over it.
Geez Glen!!!...I thought this thread had died and gone to solid rear axle heaven!!!
Great pictures of that dropped tube axle Vette. Litevette's right. I wouldn't be able to sleep at night with that beast in my garage either.
I'd be worried about theft all the time!!!!
BTW...I finished installing the T&T column in my Vette. Had to get it steerable for the ride up the trailer and move to New Mexico.