EIGHTDOLLARS

I read the thread about the rear swaybars and Gulstrands recommendation against them. What about the match of 1-1/8 front, 9/16 rear that Duntov came up with in the FE-7 susp option? That was supposed to be the HD street susp option, just below the race option, which were developed by the man himself. Does Gulstrand recommend that combo not be used?

I'm not anti-Gulstrand, it just seems like there are 2 camps on the subject. Many run the beefy setups front and rear and rave about them; then there are the Gulstrand'ers who go without the rear bars and argue Gulstrand knows best. I personally think Duntov knew what he was doing when he developed these cars, and their options, as well.

I purchased the equip to upgrade to the FE-7 susp (550# front/330#rear springs, shocks, 1-1/8 front/ 9/16 rear swaybars). Obviously what I'll do for myself is try it without the rear bar (but with the beefier bar up front), then with the rear bar and see which I like best. Wanted to get a little more opinion from those with some practical experience.


[Modified by EIGHTDOLLARS, 1:48 PM 8/19/2001]

75 Hot One

Try the rear sway bar & see how you like it. The rear bar can be sized to tune the car so it's balanced in a turn. I run 1 1/8" front & 3/4" rear bars & the car is fairly evenly balanced--i.e. a nice 4 wheel drift around wide corners. It's hard to beat that feeling (with your boots on-as you Americans would say).

Jay M

The best thing to do is as you plan, try it yourself. After Dave at Guldstrand suggested that I remove the rear sway bar I searched the forum and then doubted his suggestion. The next day while they still had my car in their shop I called and asked for further explaination. Dick Guldstrand himself took the call and explained why he doesn't like them.

My personal opinion is that the car is safer and easier to control without the rear bar. I can go into a turn at full throttle and rear end doesn't come out. Right now I only have 236 rear wheel HP, so if I had more power then I most likely couldn't get away with that.

I know that Dick has worked very closely with GM as a suspension consultant for a very long time, he and Duntov may have even had this debate!

I tried my best in that other thread to explain why it's best not to use a rear sway bar, but you may want to call http://www.guldstrand.com Dave is the guy in the office and he can do a far better job of explaining.

Once you know what to look for it should be easy for you to decide which is best after trying both ways.

Please post your test results!

~Jay

gerry72

There are two basic camps on the bar issue. Those that use a softer spring with a heavy bar(s), and those that believe in tuning the springs to control the roll rate and going with a smaller bar.

There are, as you would expect, advantages and disadvantages to either method. Gulstrand's perspective on this is that the stiffer bar tends to make the suspension less independent. Others feel that tuning the suspension using Gulstrand's spring method isn't up to the abilities of the average Joe and uses the easier bar method.

Personally, I would use Gulstrand's method...if I had the ability to do the fine suspension tuning which comes from his years of experience. I'm doing the best I can here by keeping the stock thin bar up front, heavy 550 springs and the stock rear spring. Perhaps I just got lucky, but my car corners like it's on rails.

ZD75blue

Big springs , Big Bars , Poly urathane bushings and a lack of fear ;)

ZD :cheers:

Gator81

Just finished a total suspension rebuild on my '81. Went from stock springs and stock 1.125" front bar (no rear bar) to 460 fronts, 330 rear monospring, stock front bar, added .75" rear bar, Bilstein shocks, and all poly bushings. I love it. I can't say how much of the improvement is due to the upgrades, and how much is due simply to replacing worn out springs and bushings. My springs were shot.

There is no noticable change in ride harshness relative to major bumps, small potholes, etc. There is a noticable increase in road "feel" relative to the road surface material, that is, it seems that I can feel the gravel on a rough-surfaced road now more than I used to. I would attribute that to the poly bushings, since the springs and bars would not be at work on a road that is flat but with a rough surface.

The cornering is wonderfully flat. Body roll is virtually gone. On a smooth asphalt surface, I would describe the total effect of the spring and bar changes this way: With the old setup, if I pushed hard into and then out of a corner, I could make the rear break loose with the throttle, but it would be a gradual thing. I could feel it coming and decide whether to let off the throttle and come out straight, and give it more throttle and come out in a controlled drift. With the new setup, it bites much better and it takes a lot more throttle to break it loose. But I can't feel the break-out coming. When it does break loose, it is not gradual at all, it's just suddenly gone and I'm smoking the tires. I am sure that the new setup is faster around corners. But it has an edge to it now that is new and will take some getting used to.

So I can see why an engineer might describe the stock setup as safer. The new setup could easily put me in the ditch tail first if I happened to hit a patch of sand or some oil in a corner, because the rear will break loose if very much torque is being applied. But holy cow, does it go around corners now! :D :D :D