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 think the C5 engineering team measured around 23 hertz with the coupe; the Z06 was slightly higher and convertible slightly less. In searching the archives I found someone with an engineering background discussing the topic and he thought the C4 wouldn't be much over 15. Any forum contributors in the know able to say for sure how they compare? When you look at the spring rate chart for the various suspension packages from 84 to 96 you see the 84 with Z-51 was equipped with much higher rated rear springs than anything else they built during those years. In fact the standard FE1 84 had stiffer front and rear springs than the 85 model with Z-51. I wonder how the chassis stiffness dictated spring choice?
I dont believe chassis stiffness contributed to the springs being softer in 85, though they add some bracing for 86 because of some issues with spider cracks in the earlier cars, the springs were softer because everybody with an 84 was complaining about being able to feel it when they ran over a nickel in the road.
I wonder how the chassis stiffness dictated spring choice?
According to McLellan's book, the spring choice was determined by
the tires. The objective was to constrain roll stiffness to 3.5º/g "to
keep the tires as upright as possible." "This was accomplished by
using relatively stiff ride springs and roll bars in the front and in the rear, ..."
Reeves Callaway commented about this at a workshop BG 2004. At that time he indicated that torsional integrity doubled from 87 to 88 model. I have also seen that that the inner structure or frame parts if you call it that was constantly changing and is even a different part number some years between standard suspension and HD suspension? . Everything seems to indicate small structural changes as C-4 progressed.
I think the C5 engineering team measured around 23 hertz with the coupe; the Z06 was slightly higher and convertible slightly less. In searching the archives I found someone with an engineering background discussing the topic and he thought the C4 wouldn't be much over 15. Any forum contributors in the know able to say for sure how they compare? When you look at the spring rate chart for the various suspension packages from 84 to 96 you see the 84 with Z-51 was equipped with much higher rated rear springs than anything else they built during those years. In fact the standard FE1 84 had stiffer front and rear springs than the 85 model with Z-51. I wonder how the chassis stiffness dictated spring choice?
Thanks, Greg
My recollection was that All Corvettes are Red had it as 23 hz vs 17 hz for C4, which is still a huge difference. I think this is torsional stiffness they are talking about, when you just say "stiffness" it could be measured several ways.
Hertz is cycles per second and relates to resonance frequency, not stiffness.
Correct. But in this instance the stiffness change will be the important factor comparing one chassis frequency to another, as opposed to a large change in mass--C4 is not that much heavier by any means.
My recollection was that All Corvettes are Red had it
as 23 hz vs 17 hz for C4 ...
Thank you. My recollection was that ACaR went into more detail
about Reuss, his last minute insistance to do the targa and the
consequences than McLellan did. I was too tired to look for it last
night.