C3 ride height data sought for compilation...
Thread Starter
Le Mans Master
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 7,353
Likes: 72
From: Graceland in a Not Correctly Restored Stingray
C3 ride height data sought for compilation...
Some time ago, as homework for a comprehensive reference and technical article on the subject, I set out to catalog '68-'82 C3 ride height info, requesting that members post the years I don't already have. Unfortunately, response was inadequate for me to complete the task. So, I'm asking again for your help in this cause.
I already have data from several years, but lack '68, '71, '73, '74, '75, '79, '81 & '82. I'm specifically looking for "Z", "D", "J" and "K" trim height specifications (in inches only, please) such as is found in each year's AIM. Here's an example...
Note that some model years had extensive charts for various options while others were brief, as above.
Hopefully, once I'm able to finish this little project, the results will have been worthwhile. Thanks, in advance, for your assistance.
Charlie
I already have data from several years, but lack '68, '71, '73, '74, '75, '79, '81 & '82. I'm specifically looking for "Z", "D", "J" and "K" trim height specifications (in inches only, please) such as is found in each year's AIM. Here's an example...
Note that some model years had extensive charts for various options while others were brief, as above.
Hopefully, once I'm able to finish this little project, the results will have been worthwhile. Thanks, in advance, for your assistance.
Charlie
Le Mans Master
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 5,447
Likes: 3
From: Syracuse NY
Charlie,
I don't have a scanner so if these photos don't help and nobody with a 68 AIM speaks up I'll have my sister take these pages to work Monday to scan them.
I just realized that I didn't get a picture of the base motor or the L79, I'll get them tomorrow.
I don't have a scanner so if these photos don't help and nobody with a 68 AIM speaks up I'll have my sister take these pages to work Monday to scan them.
I just realized that I didn't get a picture of the base motor or the L79, I'll get them tomorrow.
Last edited by DZRick; Dec 27, 2008 at 12:06 PM.
Team Owner
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 65,492
Likes: 230
From: Orange Park Florida
All I have is from a '72 shop manual page Spec 3
coupe Z=2.51, J=7.95, K=7.90, D=2.10
Vert , my car, Z=2.59, J=7.94, K=7.75, D=1.89
F-41 coupe and vert....
Z=1.63, J=7.28, K=7.47, D=1.81
that's all I have....
coupe Z=2.51, J=7.95, K=7.90, D=2.10
Vert , my car, Z=2.59, J=7.94, K=7.75, D=1.89
F-41 coupe and vert....
Z=1.63, J=7.28, K=7.47, D=1.81
that's all I have....
Racer
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
From: Wichita Kansas
Charlie;
My car sits;
Z=.75
D=.0 A guess as the car sits so low it is almost impossible to get under it with the exhaust on.
J=4 1/2
K=between 4 1/2 and 5 inches depending on where on the frame one measures.
You gonna dis-own me?
What do you think this does to toe, in corners?
Jim
My car sits;
Z=.75
D=.0 A guess as the car sits so low it is almost impossible to get under it with the exhaust on.
J=4 1/2
K=between 4 1/2 and 5 inches depending on where on the frame one measures.
You gonna dis-own me?
What do you think this does to toe, in corners?
Jim
Thread Starter
Le Mans Master
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 7,353
Likes: 72
From: Graceland in a Not Correctly Restored Stingray
Charlie;
My car sits;
Z=.75
D=.0 A guess as the car sits so low it is almost impossible to get under it with the exhaust on.
J=4 1/2
K=between 4 1/2 and 5 inches depending on where on the frame one measures.
You gonna dis-own me?
What do you think this does to toe, in corners?
Jim
My car sits;
Z=.75
D=.0 A guess as the car sits so low it is almost impossible to get under it with the exhaust on.
J=4 1/2
K=between 4 1/2 and 5 inches depending on where on the frame one measures.
You gonna dis-own me?
What do you think this does to toe, in corners?
Jim
As for rear toe-steer (assuming that's where you were going), with D so low I'll wager your rear toe moves towards, if not into, toe-out in bump, depending on how much static toe-in you have; the rate at which toe changes increasing as you near max travel. Of course, the less travel has your suspension and/or if you've raised your diff (don't remember just now) this situation won't be as pronounced; requiring less static toe-in, which in turn means less tire scrub.
If only Santa had left me that C2/C3 suspension simulation package I've been wishing for...
Thanks KapsSA for the '79 info. Still looking for '71, '73, '75, '81 & '82.
C6 the C5 of tomorrow
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 6,665
Likes: 2
From: Twin Cities Minnesota
The OEM specs are NOT ideal for handeling.
There is a chevy paper out there that describes how to improve the vetyte for racing.
I have it somewhere.
I do remember the Z height being spec'd at 1", don't remember the D height.
Setting the suspension at that height helps the camber curve greatly.
There is a chevy paper out there that describes how to improve the vetyte for racing.
I have it somewhere.
I do remember the Z height being spec'd at 1", don't remember the D height.
Setting the suspension at that height helps the camber curve greatly.
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvette Engines RANKED by Peak Torque (70+ Years of Muscle!)
Joe Kucinski
Corvette ZR1X Will Be Pacing the Indy 500, And Could Probably Race, Too!
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvettes Coming to Mecum Indy 2026!
Brett Foote
Top 10 C9 Corvette MUST-HAVES to Fix These C8 Generation Flaws!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Revolutionary 'Corvette Firsts' Most People Don't Know
Joe Kucinski
5 Reasons to Upgrade to an LS6-Powered Corvette; 5 Reasons to Stay LT2
Michael S. Palmer
Melting Slicks
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,672
Likes: 6
From: Nevada City California
TheSkunkWorks,
1971 specifications are broken down into coupe, convertible, shipped or curb weights and coupe & convertible-F41 suspension in shipped or curbed weights.
Let me know exactly what configuration you would like and I will get it for you.
1971 specifications are broken down into coupe, convertible, shipped or curb weights and coupe & convertible-F41 suspension in shipped or curbed weights.
Let me know exactly what configuration you would like and I will get it for you.
Thread Starter
Le Mans Master
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 7,353
Likes: 72
From: Graceland in a Not Correctly Restored Stingray
427V8, I very much agree that OEM specs aren't typically best for optimum handling, and my SA has long been lowered to Chevy Power book ride heights; which, to paraphrase the General, are...
Z @ 1 - 1.25", D @ 1.25", fuel and driver aboard.
early shark, as my purposes include assembly of a fairly comprehensive reference for the subject, I'm looking for curb weight specs for all configurations.
Z @ 1 - 1.25", D @ 1.25", fuel and driver aboard.
early shark, as my purposes include assembly of a fairly comprehensive reference for the subject, I'm looking for curb weight specs for all configurations.
Racer
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
From: Wichita Kansas
My ride height decision was made specifically for AutoX. Since I wanted the car as low as posible to lower the center of gravity. The rear is set based on corner weighting. My concern with the front is that I beleive it toes in in tight corners causing understeer. Danny Popp ran 1200 lb springs in the front of his multi national championship 72 for that reason. I run 800 lb front springs, mostly to keep the front from diving too much under hard braking. I haven't raised my rear diff as that is not legal under SCCA street prepared rules.
Sorry to hijack the tread. It will be interesting to see what you find out. I beleive the factory ride height setting are to keep the car from bottoming out. I can't go over speed bumps.
Sorry to hijack the tread. It will be interesting to see what you find out. I beleive the factory ride height setting are to keep the car from bottoming out. I can't go over speed bumps.
Thread Starter
Le Mans Master
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 7,353
Likes: 72
From: Graceland in a Not Correctly Restored Stingray
My ride height decision was made specifically for AutoX. Since I wanted the car as low as posible to lower the center of gravity. The rear is set based on corner weighting. My concern with the front is that I beleive it toes in in tight corners causing understeer. Danny Popp ran 1200 lb springs in the front of his multi national championship 72 for that reason. I run 800 lb front springs, mostly to keep the front from diving too much under hard braking. I haven't raised my rear diff as that is not legal under SCCA street prepared rules.
Sorry to hijack the tread. It will be interesting to see what you find out. I beleive the factory ride height setting are to keep the car from bottoming out. I can't go over speed bumps.
Sorry to hijack the tread. It will be interesting to see what you find out. I beleive the factory ride height setting are to keep the car from bottoming out. I can't go over speed bumps.
Lowering the CG and rear roll center are good for reducing jacking force, as long as rear toe-steer hasn't become detrimental. I'm guessing you've played around with enough setups that you'd know by now if it had. Up front, do you have the bump steer blocks? They also increase Ackerman by having moved the outer tie-rod link point further inward. As for OEM heights being where they are, IMHO the rather soft springs the General felt most owners would prefer were part of the reason for them, too. Until stepping up to the 860's, at Chevy Power heights I was bottoming all over the place on 550's, what with that BB lump I've got. I can just clear most speed bumps if I take them just right. The alum heads will help, but I'm definitely keeping my Daytonas.
Appreciate the effort Vince'82, and thanks Frogday. Only need '73, '75, '81 & '82 (inches please, as I'd rather not add doing the conversions to this undertaking).
