It is easy to find a history of published 0 - 60 and quarter mile time #s for C4s but does anybody know of a database for published skidpad #s for lateral grip?

I ask because I'm wondering what the best year would be for a platform to set up to hold over 1G. I have read that the 1984 model had the stiffest susension which leads me to believe that a Z51 84 with some 315s on all 4 corners would do the trick without any other mods.

Did anything really significant in the susension tuning change over the life of the C4 other than wheels and tires? Wouldn't an 84 handle just about the same as a 96?

Thoughts?

 

The 84 did pull over 1g bone stock from the General. The exact number evades me at the moment and I don't have my trusty book to quote the numbers, but since then GM has soften the suspension to appease the doctors and lawyers and such. Momma didn't wanna raise no cowboys

 

The 84 they used to pull 1G had a revised alignment, but stock components.

A major change in GM's philosophy towards handling came about in 88, when they totally revised the suspension geometry to improve ride quality but maintain handling. They cut the spring rates and changed mounting points, stock stiffness, and sway bar size when they did this.

You can make a 96 handle as well as an 84, but it will require vastly different alignment specs and non-stock components.

 

Check this out... might help you make an informed decision:

http://corvetteactioncenter.com/tech/c4/susp_chart.html

You may find this site useful, too; lots of magazine articles and published stuff:

http://www.corvettearchive.com/


Happy hunting!!!

-Ed

 

So could one put the springs and sway bars on from an 84 and still be just as stiff?

I don't mind rattling the teeth at all....

 

wow... the 85 has bigger sway bars. I guess that's cuz the springs are much softer.

so you'd be waay overkill if you put on just 84 springs, and not 84 sway bars. you'd lose your "independentness" if you can call it that.

I have an 85, what can be done to it to make it handle better, besides coilovers, poly bushings, alignment?

 

From my experience any C4 will see HUGE handling gains just by dailing in a little bit of camber and using wider tires.

 

Vader, what non-stock components were you referring to? TIA..

 

Just a thought... you might get some more diversified responses if you post this in the roadracing/autocross section, too. Some of those guys could tell you more than you'd ever want to know.

 

To get the 96 to handle better you'll need stiff shocks, stiffer springs than Z51s, better bushings (or at the least, new ones) and probably a modification (or two) like the Camber Brace since it allows you to maintain your camber settings. On top of that, a different alignment than what you'd run everyday on the street.

You cannot simply put on 84 springs, the 84-87 parts will not interchange with 88-96.

The 84 is pretty stout when it comes to handling.

 

Thanks vadar I was wondering that myself.

 

Would it be true to say that the early C4s (84-87) handle better than the later C4s, but with a harsher ride?

 

 

Well:

1984 (Car & Driver, March 1983, 200-ft skidpad, Z51) .900g
1984 (Motor Trend, March 1983, 216-ft skidpad, Z51) .950g
1984 (Road & Track, March 1983, 100-ft skidpad, Z51) .896g
1984 (Road & Track, August 1983, ?-foot skidpad, stock) .842g
1984 (Car & Driver, October 1983, 282-ft skidpad, stock) .850g
1984 (Car & Driver, October 1983, 282-ft skidpad, Z51) .840g
1984 (Road & Track, January 1984, 100-ft skidpad, Z51) .880g
1984 (Car & Driver, May 1984, 300-ft skidpad, Z51) .860g
1984 (Road & Track, August 1984, 450-ft skidpad, Z51) .982g
1985 (Car & Driver, September 1984, 300-ft skidpad, Z51) .840g
1985 (Road & Track, December 1984, 100-ft skidpad, Z51) .879g
1986 (Road & Track, February 1986, 100-ft skidpad, Z51) .910g
1986 (Car & Driver, February 1986, 300-ft skidpad, stock) .850g
1986 (Car & Driver, March 1986, 300-ft skidpad, Z51) .840g
1986 (Road & Track, March 1986, 100-ft skidpad, Z51) .910g
1987 (Car & Driver, June 1987, 300-ft skidpad, stock) .860g
1987 (Car & Driver, June 1987, 300-ft skidpad, Z51) .860g
1987 (Car & Driver, June 1987, 300-ft skidpad, Z52) .870g
1988 (Car & Driver, May 1988, 300-ft skidpad, Z52) .870g
1989 (Road & Track, 1989, ?-ft skidpad, Z51) .910g
1990 (Car & Driver, June 1989, ?-ft skidpad, ZR-1) .890g
1990 (Motor Trend, June 1989, ?-ft skidpad, ZR-1) .980g
1990 (Road & Track, June 1989, ?-ft skidpad, ZR-1) .940g
1990 (Car & Driver, April 1990, ?-ft skidpad, ZR-1) .870g
1990 (Motor Trend, April 1990, ?-ft skidpad, ZR-1) .900g
1990 (Motor Trend, April 1990, ?-ft skidpad, ?) .890g
1990 (Motor Trend, April 1990, ?-ft skidpad, ?) .900g
1992 (Car & Driver, December 1991, 300-ft skidpad, ?) .890g
1993 (Road & Track, August 1992, ?-ft skidpad, ZR-1) .910g
1993 (Car & Driver, May 1993, ?-ft skidpad, ZR-1) .920g
1993 (Motor Trend, June 1993 ?-ft skidpad, ZR-1) .900g
1996 (Car & Driver, January 1996, ?-ft skidpad, Grand Sport) .890g
1996 (Road & Track, February 1996, ?-ft skidpad, Grand Sport) .880g
1996 (Motor Trend, May 1996, 200-ft skidpad, F45) .910g

I have no life...

 

I like this early C4 article:
http://www.corvettearchive.com/images/ads/85.jpg

It kind of puts the Corvette image in persprctive.

 

Wow, that's pretty amazing. I wonder how the 2005 C6 does against the current versions of that competition...