PDA

View Full Version : Boy Dummy Me!!!



tim
08-28-2004, 02:11 PM
I was cutting my front sway bar off today in my quest to get my doggy car in the 13 second bracket. I made a intersting discovery. The calipers are hanging up in front it takes quit a bit of effort to turn the wheels. Well I got the bar of and after lunch its back outside to see If I can get things freed up. The car sat a while and stuff got rusty. No wonder my 60 foot times were bad. As a side note if you want to hook up better get the bar off it is heavy and now I get a lot more liftwith it off.

turbospeed
08-28-2004, 03:25 PM
I was cutting my front sway bar off today in my quest to get my doggy car in the 13 second bracket. I made a intersting discovery. The calipers are hanging up in front it takes quit a bit of effort to turn the wheels. Well I got the bar of and after lunch its back outside to see If I can get things freed up. The car sat a while and stuff got rusty. No wonder my 60 foot times were bad. As a side note if you want to hook up better get the bar off it is heavy and now I get a lot more liftwith it off.

youre not using it for the street rigth? handling is going to get very very dangerous , and the whole car will twist a lot. in fact i think your 60ft would get worse from so much body twist

tim
08-28-2004, 03:37 PM
I really didnt notic that much twist, more lift. It make the car squat more too. I have drag radials on so the traction is there. Its still streetable but I dont drive it to work just a toy and the once and a while trip to the track.

XR7 Dave
08-28-2004, 10:13 PM
Driving without a sway bar is far from dangerous. You would be very surprised how well the car handles without one. No problems with stability whatsoever. Not all cars have sway bars actually.

tim
08-28-2004, 10:26 PM
Look at most of the old so called fast cars from the 60s. Most did not have sway bars. I wont be going around corners fast anyway. It didnt see much differant to me except lift and weight. That thing is heavy and right on the front end to. Think of it as a teeter totter. As you reduce weight off the front of the car it changes the center of gravity back. Pulling the a/c condensor and pump off with the lines and now the sway bar should really make a big differance. Wait till I get my manual steering box. :D :D

MercsSC
08-29-2004, 10:42 AM
the rack may not like the lack of a swaybar ...and bind up with the extra load placed on the tie rods and extreme angles they will move without the swaybar load ...as for fast 60's cars they were in a straight line ..they never handled good ...also had full frames for support ... the most common part I have broke on cars is swaybar end links and the body roll becomes a big frontend push from hell ..yet to break one on SC ..best design I have seen...mounted in the spindle.. instead of the lower control arm . I did break on my 87,88 tbirds ..93 pontic lemans ,76 chevell , 70 buick skylark , and a few others and they did not handle good at all ...dave

XR7 Dave
08-29-2004, 11:54 AM
the rack may not like the lack of a swaybar ...and bind up with the extra load placed on the tie rods and extreme angles they will move without the swaybar load ...as for fast 60's cars they were in a straight line ..they never handled good ...also had full frames for support ... the most common part I have broke on cars is swaybar end links and the body roll becomes a big frontend push from hell ..yet to break one on SC ..best design I have seen...mounted in the spindle.. instead of the lower control arm . I did break on my 87,88 tbirds ..93 pontic lemans ,76 chevell , 70 buick skylark , and a few others and they did not handle good at all ...dave Thanks for the tips, but misinformation is not helpful to anyone.

1) The sway bar does not limit suspension travel. The range of motion of the tie rods will not change one bit. Nor will the "load" on them change. Steering forces and angles are not affected by the lack of or presense of a sway bar. Increased body sway due to the lack of the sway bar will still fall within design parameters.

2) Unibody cars are much stiffer than frame cars, however this also has no effect whatsoever on the results of running sans swaybar. Softening the suspension, regardless of how you do it, reduces stress on the body/frame and puts it on the springs themselves. Sway bars actually create enormous stress on the frame rails/unibody.

3) 60's cars didn't handle well? Better not tell that to a musclecar enthusiast. Most 60's cars handled well enough. I would guess that there are far more SC owners who have had the car swap ends on them unexpectedly than 66 Chevelle owners. 60's cars and other like them were designed to give the driver plenty of communication about what was going on before things got out of hand than a newer car (and SC's in particular) do.

4) It will not be able to take corners as fast, but the handling of most musclecars (and SC's with no front sway bars included here) provide plenty of feedback and are actually very safe to drive with a very gradual breakaway tendancy and lots of understeer. From a safety standpoint this is very good.

It is much safer to drive your SC with no front sway bar than it is to drive it with a 1 3/8" rear sway bar like many people here do.

Rob Noth
08-30-2004, 02:05 PM
3) 60's cars didn't handle well? Better not tell that to a musclecar enthusiast. Most 60's cars handled well enough. I would guess that there are far more SC owners who have had the car swap ends on them unexpectedly than 66 Chevelle owners. 60's cars and other like them were designed to give the driver plenty of communication about what was going on before things got out of hand than a newer car (and SC's in particular) do. I agree with that other stuff, but here are you kidding? :confused:

XR7 Dave
08-30-2004, 04:17 PM
3) 60's cars didn't handle well? Better not tell that to a musclecar enthusiast. Most 60's cars handled well enough. I would guess that there are far more SC owners who have had the car swap ends on them unexpectedly than 66 Chevelle owners. 60's cars and other like them were designed to give the driver plenty of communication about what was going on before things got out of hand than a newer car (and SC's in particular) do.

I agree with that other stuff, but here are you kidding? :confused: What part? :D

quick35th
08-30-2004, 07:50 PM
Wait till I get my manual steering box. :D :D

What kind of car are you getting the steering box from? Does it bolt right up to the kmember or do you have to mod it any.

Shane

tim
08-31-2004, 05:48 AM
The manual steering set up is a bolt on. The guy that owns the local napa store has a sourse that will build it for me. It is a bolt on part. All new parts in a rebuilt rack $250 dollars. Iam doing it for three reasons weight. More power. I will only be running the blower and the alternator and I will be able to reroute the lower ic tube. This will probably be my biggest gain, getting that away from the heat. If I can get it all done by the shootout I should be running 13.80. Tim

Darkside
08-31-2004, 09:20 AM
I am wondering, how are you going to get the belt to go around the alternator? It looks like the lower radiator hose would be in the way. :confused:

68COUGAR
08-31-2004, 10:29 AM
...also had full frames for support ...
What fast Fords had full frames? OR are you talking about Bow-Tie-Boys?

Confused 68COUGAR

68COUGAR
08-31-2004, 10:41 AM
It is much safer to drive your SC with no front sway bar than it is to drive it with a 1 3/8" rear sway bar like many people here do.
My OEM rear sway bar was so violent when it unloaded, that it would throw the a$$ end of the car completely in the opposite lane. Now with my Big Bar, the a$$ end hangs out, then steps politely back where it's suppose to be. I did question whether or not the cheesey OEM sway bar mounts were strong enough for the Big Bar though.

68COUGAR

XxSlowpokexX
08-31-2004, 12:56 PM
Thanks for the tips, but misinformation is not helpful to anyone.


1) The sway bar does not limit suspension travel. The range of motion of the tie rods will not change one bit. Nor will the "load" on them change. Steering forces and angles are not affected by the lack of or presense of a sway bar. Increased body sway due to the lack of the sway bar will still fall within design parameters.

I dissagree partially. A sway bar most definately can limit suspension travel. Also a car with stock springs will undoubtedly lean much more in a turn without a sway bar giving your one tire a run for its money because its now doing a majority of the work. Generally a stiffer sprung car will need less sway bar while a lightly sprung car will need more


2) Unibody cars are much stiffer than frame cars, however this also has no effect whatsoever on the results of running sans swaybar. Softening the suspension, regardless of how you do it, reduces stress on the body/frame and puts it on the springs themselves. Sway bars actually create enormous stress on the frame rails/unibody.

Sway bars definately put more strain on the body and frame rails. But putting less stress on your ubibody or framerails does not equal better handeling. Also I would question the strenght of full frame cars when compared to unibody cars. There are different types of full frames just as there are different types of unibody construction. For instance a C channel full frame car will not be nearly as strong as a box framed vehicle. A good example of a badly flexing full fram car would be an 87 G body with its c channel frame. When compared to an 87 F body thought its built like a truck.


3) 60's cars didn't handle well? Better not tell that to a musclecar enthusiast. Most 60's cars handled well enough. I would guess that there are far more SC owners who have had the car swap ends on them unexpectedly than 66 Chevelle owners. 60's cars and other like them were designed to give the driver plenty of communication about what was going on before things got out of hand than a newer car (and SC's in particular) do.

Dave what were you smoking when you came up with this one? I'd like to see a 66 chevelle on 78 series bias ply tires handle well....Muscle cars in general did not handle all that well. The pony cars did handled better but newer cars are far superior to either.


4) It will not be able to take corners as fast, but the handling of most musclecars (and SC's with no front sway bars included here) provide plenty of feedback and are actually very safe to drive with a very gradual breakaway tendancy and lots of understeer. From a safety standpoint this is very good.

Feedback is nice...Doesnt equate to better handeling or even maginal handeling however. All of the feedback in the world will not help a poor driver in a bad handeling car partially due to no front swaybar :O)


It is much safer to drive your SC with no front sway bar than it is to drive it with a 1 3/8" rear sway bar like many people here do.

In the end you need a compramise between sway bar size and spring rates to get a more nuetral type of handeling. I perfer stiffer springs with less sway bar. WIth my SC I have still yet to experiment with sway bars although I have purchased some to try out.

In the end you can drive around with no front sway bar and I have on a few of my straight line duty cars...You will definately get more suspension travel and more lift without it!!!

XR7 Dave
08-31-2004, 01:41 PM
Damon, put 78 series bias ply tires on your SC and see how it handles. Seriously. Obviously I'm going to get no support whatsoever for the statement about musclecar handling but that doesn't alter the truth. Having competed in SCCOA Solo II against some very OLD A$$ muscle cars, I have learned respect for them in many ways. To catagorically state that muscle cars suck for anything but straightline is extremely narrow sighted and simply not true.

It's not current, but there was an article done a number of years ago that pitted some well maintained but totally stock late 60's musclecars against what was at the time (1986 I believe) cars. I know it included a GN, Mustang, Camaro, and a couple others. For the old cars it included a 396 Chevelle, Olds 442, Torino, GTO and maybe something else. Anyway, all cars were equipped with the appropriate size of Goodyear Eagle GT's and put on the skidpad and roadcourse. You would be very surprised at the results. I'm not going to get on a high horse about musclecars, but if you ever have the chance to run your SC against one that is properly set up, you'll have your hands full.

The original post was about the feasability of removing the front sway bar on a car that sees mostly track duty and occasional street use. The response from some here was that the resulting bad handling and added stress on the unibody would prove detrimental to the car and create unsafe handling conditions. This is simply not true, it is speculation on the part of individuals who have not tried it.

Removing the sway bar certainly does increase body roll and decreases cornering capabilities. I stated this. What it does not do is make the car unsafe. The car still has less body roll than any number of other cars out there and certainly maintains a large degree of stability. I certainly made no comments which would suggest that removing the front sway bar improves the cars road manners. What I DID suggest is that removing the bar will increase feedback about an impending loss of traction in a much more gradual and responsive manner than a stock SC will. This is actually very safe handling. The car's rate of understeer is much more gradual with the sway bar off. I dont' suggest that you can take the same corners with the same speed as you used to, but it is a fact that you get very early communication from the car that you are going too fast and you have plenty of time to correct the situation as breakaway is very gradual and progressive. This equates to safer but slower cornering.

The reason I stated any of that is because the original question was not whether or not removing the sway bar would affect handling, but rather whether or not removing the sway bar would create an unsafe condition. I contend that it does affect handling (duh) but that it does NOT create an unsafe condition. Your SC's handling will be no worse than any number of other cars that people drive daily.

Something unsafe (and regularly practiced by SC owners) is to replace and/or mixmatch the tires (V-rated) that Ford put on the car originally with "S" or "T" rated tires. Anyone care to argue that the suspension of the car was NOT designed for V-rated tires and that using a lower speed rated tire (just because "I" don't go over 130mph) isn't unsafe? I'd like to hear the argument. How about all the "other" cars out there that drive around with "skinnies" on the front or with ET streets on the back? Those are unsafe on any car under any conditions other than straight line at the track, but I think there may be a few of those driving around on the streets, no?

tim
08-31-2004, 06:21 PM
Well I drove the car around town a little and to the track and home I really didnt notice anything wierd withe the front end. I ran it at the track and it did get more lift. There is a place by my house they makes springs. I will when money permits get a set of softer springs. Now I wish i could get a set of 90/10 shocks.

68COUGAR
08-31-2004, 06:50 PM
Now I wish i could get a set of 90/10 shocks.
Only if this is a Drag car ONLY & Never sees the street. What happens when you hit a pot hole with 90/10"s? Think about it!!!!

68COUGAR

XxSlowpokexX
08-31-2004, 07:12 PM
Dave,

Kinda like old muscle cars were made to run on bias ply tires..Not radials...Remember the old TA's...Radial tuned suspension! hehe

And there is no doubt in my mind you can make any car handle well. My Mustang runs circles around my SC.

What sets cars apart is how easily do they handle. Its what seperates a fully done up mustang when compared to an Italain exotic..The G numbers and lap times may be the same however who has a load in their pants at the finish line..Ya know :O)

tim
08-31-2004, 08:04 PM
Why not 90-10 I drove around with them on the street on my 1969 torino. I dont get it. Years ago we ran straight axle front ends on the street. Hey now there is a great idea.