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 would not use a 5/8's bolt on a rod end. A 5/8th bolt is about .614 in a .625 hole or about .011 slop. I would use a 16 mm bolt which is about .626 maximum. Stick the bolt in a lathe and a little emery paper brings it to .625 and a slight press into the rod end. A perfect fit.
Next the hub bolts. They are 3/8 yes but the knurl is .415. How about using a 10 mm bolt instead? It is slightly bigger then the original 3/8th bolt and with just a slight bit of opening the hole would be better??? Both metric bolts should be readily available anywhere.
The 3/4 inch rod ends are a problem. They don't make 19 1/2 mm bolts. 20 is just too big.
Opening what hole?? The bolt goes all the way through the hub, the stock stud has a smooth collar that's a close fit.
ZD, what's confusing about metric heads? Imperial, that's what's confusing. (if you didn't grow up w/ all those fractions)
lostpatrolman, I don't have the link but it's in one of the roll cage picture threads, gkull posted it.
Opening what hole?? The bolt goes all the way through the hub, the stock stud has a smooth collar that's a close fit.
You are looking for studs for the hub?? Stock they are 3/8th but a 10 mm bolt it just slightly bigger. YOu could substitute 10 mm for the hub studs. If they fit too tight a slight openning on the hub holes is all this is required and you should have no problem getting 10 mm bolts.
Here's some more snaps, I have 1 side almost finished and the other side is 1/2 done. Still need to add 2 more ears to the hub section but that's relativly easy.
Well, no the length is the same as the old ta but if you look for the instantaneous center (which on the normal ta is the front bolt) it's way further back, extend the lines of the 2 rods and you will see. A longer swing arm is a nice thing because the fore/aft movement of the wheel is reduced.
The 4 rod ends are the pivot arms. Also, unlike the stock setup the hub maintains a more lecel stance throughout suspension travel, on the normal ta the hub " rotates" as the suspension moves up and down, here the hub doesn't rotate quite as much.
Hubs are done, still need to add a coil over mount but I'll do that when I have it mocked up on the car.
Last edited by Twin_Turbo; Jan 5, 2005 at 12:29 PM.
So I guess you're going to weld the front brackets to the frame. I assume you figured where you wanted the instant center to be (at ride height) before you built it. I would think that you want at least one link mount on each side that is adjustable in order to fine tune the I.C. location and height once the car is running.
No, the front bolts in. You can see the long bolt, that's the bolt that the trailing arm uses, all that's required is a set of ears welded to the flat section below the trailing arm pocket, if you go to greenwoodcorvettes.com and look in the street car section, there's a pic of their setup in one of the wide body pages.
I did figure out where I wanted IC, primarily to minimize a jacking effect. I hope my calculations are correct
TT, your 5 link is turning out great. I wish I had the skills to do this to my car. I have been trying to contact greenwood to see how much they would want for their 5 link system, but so far they havent answered..
Yes, that's the pic. Notice where it says weld securely, those 2 tabs weld to the flat section just below the trailing arm pocket. Couldn't be simpeler. I like the greenwood brackets better than the Guldstrands, the guldstrands look to be shallow, as in they don't protrude into the trailing arm pocket alot which leads me to just 1 conclusion, theirs bolts through the hole for the cotter pin. Looking at the trailing arm section in the above pic, it appears to be a modified (chopped off) stock piece w/ a toe control rod tab mounted to the rear, a front moutn for the trailing rod and a clevis like adapter through the hub fork for the lower trailing rod. Also, notice how easy it is to properly set up a tab for the toe control rod on those earlier diffs, since us later diff owners have that damned batwing I have to build a subframe to hold it.
Now you have got my intrest in the 5 link. I think I am going to model this system now. Do you know anywhere that I can get frame dimensions? I can go and measure mine in the garage but I thought it might exist somewhere. Because I have been drawing a 78 I need to accurately know the position of the cross member mounts and the front trailing arm bolt locations.
It looks like the 5-link design addresses the wear on the side yokes.
Does it control toe change like the other picture that was posted in my thread?
Mark
I can fairly positively say that the trailing rods are both 17" on that system (rod eye to rod eye) and that the 4 lower struts are spaced 7" apart, the camber bracket has 7" long threaded rods welded in.
As for addressing the side yoke problem, no this kit does not handle that, this handles the toe control problem. For a best of both worlds you need something like this, or the greenwood setup above and add the extra member from the 6 link...guess what I'm doing
I have an 82, my camber bracket is ina a diff pos. relative to the hubs than the earlier models, also I don't have a diff mount, the batwing is part of the rear lid and alu, no way to mount stuff on that.