I spoke to a guy at "dragvette" about suspension options for a 82vette. he said the drag sus. would be good for both. Is this true?
I am not planning on purchasing any suspension products soon but I am beginning my research. I know very little about irs so can anyone help chime in?
Also I am planning on running 500-550hp in the future...I am thinking of 3.90 gears w/ the t-56 trans.

 

Here is a picture of my car at the autoX with the Dragvette setup in the rear. Ihave the dual mount VB products spring in the rear with Vb tranverse spring in the front. I can keep up easily with the C5 cars in the auotX. I run right around 500 HP

 

..... an '82 Vette, with the Dana-44..... 500 HP..... and a stick?????

..... excuse me while I am

 

Hmmm...four out of six visible cones knocked over...

Are you sure that suspension works?? (Just kidding)

 

Gordon spoke for auto-crossing, I'll speak for drag racing...
I also have the VB dual mount transverse springs in the front and rear and managed to consistently pull sub 1.9 sec 60' times with the (4 year old) street tires in my signature last weekend in 50-65 deg temperatures. My best was 1.75 sec. I won't talk about my auto-crossing experience, as I REALLY suck as a newbie driver.

Bob

 

Always a wise guy in the bunch. Those are actually pointer cones to tell you which side of the standing cone to go around. I only hit one cone all day and that was on the parade lap!!

 

"..... I wont you to HIT the pace car.....


..... ya done hit ever'other car out-dere, an' I wont YOU to be perfect!!!!!"

 

Ahh...I see. That makes sense...

 

sure they are gordon... sure they are....






jk

 

dragvette doesn't do anything for you in autocrossing.

 

IMHO, the reason so many auto-Xer's have convinced themselves that parallel link setups (such as Dragvette's) are the way to go is because massive low speed understeer is such a typical problem. Not having optimal grip at the rear (due to the introduction of positive camber gain at the outside rear wheel in roll by parallel setups) tends to mask that understeer, balancing the car out somewhat. Thus, that fundamentally incorrect geometry functions as a crutch on tight auto-X courses, which is misinterpreted as improved handling because the car feels better.

True, you may see better times since you're not plowing thru turns, but there's a lot being left on the table that could be gained by sorting out the front to reduce/eliminate the understeer in the first place. Then, the benefits of correct rear geometry can be put to use, resulting in an overall increase of grip for the whole car, and even quicker times.

That said, parallel links are absolutely the right way to go at the strip (where you don't want any camber gain in squat), but it is not best suited for anything else, particularly if you plan on hammering around a real road course or you favorite country back road. I'll never convince some of you guys of this, but the fact remains for those seeking it.

 

Ouch...my project just got put on hold... I have a broken valve stuck in the piston of my truck. If things get ugly I will have to replace a piston/head/ and whatever else. I have to replace a piston I will just put the truck on hold while I upgrade the rods, get the pistons cut, and get beehive springs...(rods$2700, pistons cut$200, springs&hardware $700.) It looks like I won't work on my vette for at least a year On the other hand, the truck will make over 600hp and 1200tq.

 

Well skunk, I still wonder, why no vendor has gone through the trouble of satisfying both needs. Furthermore there is something to be done with the front as well (other steering components to eliminate bump steer and a longer spindle (according to norval).

I think it could be done and there is a substantial market for it seen the number of vettes that are raced. Something that resembles the Guldstrand kit and combines the upper link and half shaft loop of the dragvette. Of coarse I would like to see the price lower than that of Guldstrand, because I think it is way to pricey.

 

I think that the special stub axle carrier of Guldstrand's 5-bar is probably the reason that setup is so expensive. Dragvette's setup might allow camber gain adjustments, but there may also be binding issues that require parallel links(??). Tom's has a floating upper link and safety loop that may be worth another look.

There's plenty of stuff to help the front, as you remarked...

 

why does nobody bolt in a c-5 or c-6 back half suspension?

 

C5s and C6s have a transaxle in the back... that'd be a little difficult to incorporate. It would involve replacing the transmission with that transaxle and installing that huge torque tube thing-a-majig (I think that's what it's called.) Also, aren't C5s and C6s wider? It isn't much of a bolt-on setup. The C4 rear-end, though, is kinda do-able. Lot less work, that's for sure...

 

For my experience (after lots of studies for my rear-end project) the most cost effective bolt-on for a C3 corvette is....

The cheap and simple "Smart strut rods" from VBandP !!!

The system really reduces the jacking problem lowering the inner pivot nearly 1" and reduces the too high camber gain in the rear.
Even make longer the "swing arm" and reduce the traslation of the "roll center".
Dragvette is a very good system, but have lower and upper rods of the same length.... fixing for zero camber gain!
This is very good for dragracing..... but not ideal for handling.

The next big problem to sove is the "Pump steering" due to the fact that the trailing arm is rigid and have a single pivot point....... well located as per design.... but still single!

Try to imagine..... in the up and down traslation of the suspension, the wheel will describe an arc..... changing he's distance from the center of the car....
Because of the rigid trailing arm the wheel can only change the toe..... no way!!!!!!!

The toe changing in the back have a very very BAD influence on the predictability of the car reactions during hard cornering !

To be on the edge we can say that the very strong rod-ends in the upper and lower brackets make the situation even worst..... the only deflection point will be the fron rubber bushing of the trailing arm.... making even more toe-in.

I will try to explane the dinamics of the things.....

1) you drive fast in the corner...
2) the side load in the rear increase....
3) generating TOE-IN....
4) wich make even stronger the side load (steering inwards)....
5) as stronger is the side load, as much toe-in...
6) very soon you will reach the grip-limit of the tire.....
7) with a very fast reduction in the side load....
8) wich generates a huge reduction in the toe-in....
9) at this point the load seen by the tire is much smaller....
19) leaving to the tire the ability to stick again to the ground...
20)....... goto to line # 2......


As you can see the net result is a cyclic condition....

.....wich is the typical unpredictability of the C3 when driven very fast!


Long post.....
Bad english....

mha.......

 

LoL Don't worry about the english, it was a good post. Made it clear in my mind what exactly is happening back there.

 

Thanks!