the hydraboost? Is your brace from pod to pod or what?

Good luck on the not paying twiceon high end upgrades/mods!!!

If you're planning on running some monster events like Silver State, do you think that's enough motor? (Or was it another mentioning 330hp range?) I would think to be competitive in a high end event like that you need to get to the 8-7 hp/pound range as a minimum. More importantly, should you be considering going with an aluminum block to save a huge amount of weight?

What aero mods have you done or are you planning? I've only been up in the 160 range a few times and, while I didn't notice extreme problems, many complain of rear end instability at less than those speeds. From what I'm hearing, Silver State is run constantly at those speeds.

As far as the header debate, once you go from restrictive to any headers at all, you're 90% of maxed on what you're getting out of that - go with anything that fits.

As far as cage....I wouldn't think a 4 point would be sufficient for a car running hard in that speed range either.

 

Lest there be any misunderstanding, there are "Touring Car" classes. I think I could run in the 125 class w/6 sp. Even the 90 mph would be more strain than I want to put om my motor w/M21 3:55. Mine is a tq monster. It should pull .68 over w/3:70 @ 3500-4000. I wouldn't want to take my car over 140 w/o major changes. I think that a semi pro tourer should be able to run w/touring car. Thats why I want solid suspension/chassis. I have alm heads/man, pop up headlights removed #45 and headers later. Thats over #100 on the front. The rear is way too soft. I want to drop the car 1" to meet the 1" taller tires "275/50/17" that should give me better ride and handling.

 

...and I wasn't trying to criticize, only enter into the "where to spend X dollarage first" arena....

I know this spaceshuttlesque temporary small block quickly seemed anemic for my driving, both hours it's felt like running and it's doing 460hp/500ft-lbs. I would never dream of trying to compete in anything with it - it just seems too slow - yet it's beat three C6's and every C5 I've met since December. Now with the GearVendors I can't wait to try some higher speed "spontaneous events"...if...it....stops.... finding....the....idiot....engine....bui lder's.....screwups. (With the Comp Cams ProMag rocker arms and stud girdles coming in the next few weeks when I retorque the heads, the only things left to fail will be main reciprocating assy and timing chain set....)

Those sound like decent weight cuts.....on the suspension front for weight I think the monoleaf and tubular a-frames beat the coil over setups considerably, but, again, I don't know the performance differences (suspension wise) first hand.

With good valve springs and just decent components, there's no reason you shouldn't be able to hold a decent SBC at 4500-5000 all day. The little "target" goodwrench cheapy crate thing I had in there until last year (came with it) held 5000+ for hours and probably averaged 3750-4250 rpm the whole 80+K miles I had it. (I have 3.73's in mine - so 82 or so was 4krpm and 105 or so was 5K - and I drive it in that speed range and above almost exclusively.) Yeah, for higher speed events, money spent on a 6 speed is a good deal.

I just went through hell getting a GearVendors installed. It had one minor problem, but it did NOT just require "notching" the battery box.
Maybe that's all that's needed on a T350, but with a T400, we had to cut the whole tunnel out and rebuild it. I still don't have seat belts or p-brake (doing that when the rest of the p-brake assy is fixed in a week or two - and when the new signal cable goes in - but I wanted my CAR! and I never use the belts or the p-brake anyhow....) While I did measure and see there is just barely room for a second GV with about a 2" drive shaft and cutting and reforming the rear crossmember a bit, I think the end project is now going to feature a 6 speed horrible, primitive, clutch wearing manual after all, may God have mercy on my evil soul.....

You know I've debated the headlight change myself....can't bring myself to yet - mine are currently on "manual mode" too, but they've always proven easy to repair.

What about front dam and rear wing? I am really curious about decent practical aero mods, not just trim.

 

Rick - Unless you have a good racing resume, the silver state classic won't let you compete in anything over the 130 mph class. That's average speed. So you can drive 145 mph or something like that without getting DQ.

The first time I went I was in a nearly stock 79. All I had was a 355 ci motor and a 700R4 tranny with 4.11 year end. minor mods. 550/420 springs, z-rated tires, Smart struts. Custom chin spoiler that was in the stock location, but was within an inch or two of the ground. My rear wing.

550 springs are an inch shorter than stock and low profile tires gave my 79 body some front down rake. I had it all figured out on the gearing to use 6500 rpm as the steady state rpm which was right on the 175 mph max speed for the 150 average class.

My 79 felt fine - The two lane roads seemed a little narrow and i was about spent from the amount of nervous high tension energy used to keep your concentration level up driving like that for 92 miles.

Then I decided that to be more competetive I needed to install the 81 TT lighter and more earodynamic front end and use 17 x 9.5 & 11 inch wheels.

Once you get your mind set and drive a long time at high speed it just seems like your crawling when you slow down to 100 mph

 

Alan,
I was simply stating the facts that your employees told me. Your arms are not strong enough for the coilovers. They are fine for the transverse but not the coilovers. I'm not saying that you've ever had any come back b/c they broke and were not made good. If you would have read all the posts and not jumped the gun you would have read the GKull asked if these coilovers were for the tubular arms. No one else makes them except for Jim Meyers and he has a true coilover setup at an expensive price.
Dan

 

Wayne,
MagShocks are in the oven - I will have to find out when they will be finished cooking ...

Alan G.
Vette Brakes & Products, inc.
http://www.VBandP.com
alan@VBandP.com

 

Van Steel - I did read the thread all the way back. Thanks for the clarification ... Have a good one...

Sincerely,
Alan Gonzalez
Vette Brakes & Products, Inc
http://www.VBandP.com
alan@VBandP.com

 

Yeah. You have an e-mail too.

 

I have a 75 coupe I just bought. Previous owner, says "fiberglass, mono-spring" was installed several years ago" He does not remember what was installed, and no documentation.
How do I tell what brand, type and or number it is, i.e. 460 or 550 or whatever. It does ride r o u g h !!!

 

Aside from the 4 pt roll bar and rear end rebuild w/poly, what will give the best ride/handling? I was going w/#330 glass rear and #460 front. Even if I can't change w/o align, will the transverse work better, if so how much? I'll spend the extra money if the performance is there. TIA

Rick

 

Rick - Now that it's all clarified that the front mono spring can be made extremely stiff without changing the ride height and Van Steels QA-1 coil over setup is nice setup if ordered with the BB springs for about $570.

The cheapest setup is 460/550 coil springs with Bilstien shocks or how ever it’s spelled.

Line item price out each system and then make an informed decision.

For the rear I originally went with a TRW 340# or so spring from VB&P. The rear IMO had way to much squat on the hit of the throttle. I went back to a rear steel spring in the 420# class. I don’t drive on rough roads. So a 360# with good shocks and 9/16th or 5/8th sway might be in order. The rear dual mount is also an option.

 

George: Like you the rear is way too soft. While my front could be firmer, they don't bottom as is. I like the idea of being able to adj both ride highth and spring rate. So many have been unhappy w/results and they have to cut springs and use longer bolts. I have the mid size rear VB&P bar. I know it's not used w/transverse. By the time I get rid of rear spring, spare tire cover and rear bar, less spring will be needed. I like the idea of getting the car lower until tires fill the wheelwells. With 275/50/17 that would require about 1"-1.5" drop. Sounds like the f/r transverse will give me what I want. The others may need some fabbing to do what I want.

Rick

 

THAT will level the playing field in handling against C5's, C6's and others!!! OUTSTANDING!!!!!

Waiting patiently....

Are they out yet?







How about now? They out yet?








OK, how about now?

 

Is your spring the same width from one end to the other or is it flared out at the ends. If it's the 1st one I mentioned, remove the spring bolts at the t-arms and remove the plate under the rear cover. There should be a series of numbers there. Post those numbers or call me and I can tell you what you have.
Dan

 

I give up, what are MagShocks? I couldn't find them in the catalog. I take it that these shocks are the thing to have. With my luck they will come out just as soon as I buy something else! I just want to be soft enough to be comfortable. I don't like to get beat up driving. I don't have to feel every bump to feel in control. I'd really like to get SSBC and drop #40 of unsprung weight, now that should effect ride/handling.

Rick

 

ultimate suspension, will require changing absolutely everything to use them and, overnight, every older system will be as irrelevant as the suspension on a horse drawn wagon.....and they will be less than HALF the cost of what you just installed........

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Mag shocks will generally require enormously lightening spring rates as they do a lot of the work of the spring. They are "shocks" filled with a viscous magnetic fluid (I think basically an iron or iron salt slurry.)

A current runs through them which greatly affects the stiffness of the fluid and thus the ride and the amount of current is decided by computer control based on the type of road the motion of the wheels indicate. This is the cat's *** about C5's (I believe just the latter ones.) One writer took one over some monster pot holed roads and cattle crossing type things and beat the hell out of the four wheeler competing with him.

Couple this with an ignition/fuel injection (engine based) traction control system and any of the high end upgrades from our vendors here and, aside from all-wheel-drive, there is very little to distinguish such a modified C3 from the best machines yet made - but with the ability to take huge powerplants which many new platforms simply cannot endure (or be made to fit.)

I would imagine such a system requires a number of sensors on control arms or springs, a central computer, the shocks themselves and, most likely, a lightening of the springs. Possibly the shock mounts would have to be significantly beefed up to as the magshock bears a lot more stress than regular shocks. This central computer would be better a more user customizable thing like an aftermarket ignition box, rather than the more limited selections on factory settings. That control box (or the electronics involved) is probably where the worst effort would be needed to make it work on such a different setup (different control arm geometries and distances, etc.) The shocks also themselves would probably have to be a much different size and reaction range than the exact ones for the C5 (and, I assume, C6.)

Ask about them over in the C5 section to get reviews.

 

I saw that on "Rides". Rod Millen was using something similar on off road vehicles.I'm sure a few forum members would like to try to retrofit to C3! With that out of the way, I just saw post on 460/330 riding too high. I don't want to go there.

Rick

 

Gkull,
340 lbs is definitely too soft for a car with a lot of torque. FYI, we don't sell TRW springs - just our own ... A 360 or even 420 pound composite monospring sounds like a better fit 4 U ... Those heavier springs or the rear dual mount are WAY different from the 330 ...

Alan G.
Vette Brakes & Products, inc.
St. Petersburg, FL
http://www.VBandP.comalan@VBandP.com

 

I went with all VB&P stuff many years ago. It was a pieced together grand S kit. I really couldn't remember if it was yours or TRW fiber mono and it was either a 340 or 360# I've been very happy with how it's handled since i first started upgrading in the mid to late 80's