ok i'm doin the paper work for a camaro build and realize that a whole new front subframe comes out almost cheaper than building the factory front. so what subframe did everyone use and in your opinion what is the best for the money

I went with modified factory and am more than happy with how it came out and performs. If I was looking at an aftermarket piece, I would look at AME, SpeedTech, and DSE (in about that order) - and that is about it. It ultimately depends on what you want to do and what you want to spend to get there.

I like the modified factory ones .....whole lot cheaper, unless your building a canyon carver then go with a chris alston chassis one, it will pull some g's and hold it on the canyon corners!!

If you are doing an LSx conversion the AME can save you a little more money because you can use the stock F body oil pan and accessories. You can also use off the shelf C5 brakes and save some more.

Don

Well, we build a lot of cars and sell a lot of subframes. $ brands in all. I will tell you a original frame can be modified for great performance

I will list your options in order of cost and performance. this is the age old good, better. Best.

GOOD: If you want to upgrade your front sub, you can do a lot with these parts. We have sold and installed a lot of these packages and they work very well.

Speedtech upper and lower arms (lowers don't do anything, just look cool)
Ride Tech Tall Spindles (help correct camber gain and lowers the car 1 1/2")
Hotchkis springs
Hotchkis shocks
Hotchkis Premium Steering Kit
Hotchkis Tie Rod stiffeners
DSE 600 steering box and rag joint (feels damn near like a R and P)
Hotchkis sway bar

You can do this for $2500! and you have a very good performaing subframe that will lower the stance also.

BETTER: Your bext step would be to do a Speed Kit which wuld include a coil over conversion and some welding. You will spend abvout $3400 on that set up

MUCH BETTER: Next you have Chris Alston and Speedtech, both right at $4800.

BEST: Next comes Art Morrison and DSE are both true no compromise clips which are both the class of the field. I truley believe it is simply a matter of what style you like appearance wise between these 2.

The Art morrison is $600

The DSE is $6700.

Regardless of what you choose, we have great deals on all these, there are many other brands, but these are the ones we have used and know work!

I would call Mark at SC&C for the best and most cost effective solutions http://www.scandc.com/index.htm Why spend $900 plus on Speedtech tubular control arms that don't do anything other than "look cool."

Call SC&C - hard edged performance upgrades and no wasted $.

Why spend $900 plus on Speedtech tubular control arms that don't do anything other than "look cool."


Marcus (SC and C) is another viable source for product besides us.

But I must know what the SC and C arm do that the Speedtech does not. Both only increase Caster, that is it. Nothing more, but increasing caster is important for high speed stability.

I went with modified factory and am more than happy with how it came out and performs. If I was looking at an aftermarket piece, I would look at AME, SpeedTech, and DSE (in about that order) - and that is about it. It ultimately depends on what you want to do and what you want to spend to get there.

"It ultimately depends on what you want to do and what you want to spend to get there."

That's the most important words that have been posted to this point. You have gotten ALL good imformation here. Frank really knows what he's talking about. He builds these cars all the time. MkeIcy has given you a good suggestion also. James67RS has a car that he shared the build with us on this forum. Do a search. You need to see his car and look at the build. It's your money and your choise but buy what you need not the latest "now and wow". Good luck with whatever you choose.

Marcus (SC and C) is another viable source for product besides us.

But I must know what the SC and C arm do that the Speedtech does not. Both only increase Caster, that is it. Nothing more, but increasing caster is important for high speed stability.

For the cost of the Speed Tech UCAs, the SC&C packages include the tall ball joints that correct the geometry issues on first generation F-bodies. So no need to buy spindles as well. Even then, I'm not a fan of significantly dropped spindles, as in the Ride Tech package you mentioned. The SC&C packages are cheaper and - to my mind - better designed.

I'm not sure what the "tie rod stiffeners" do, other then chip when an alignment is done.

The DSE box is, indeed, nice; but the 3d gen IROC box is also very nice, for significantly less.

The Hotchkis shocks aren't, so I've been told, anything special, and are certainly no better than Bilstein shocks for a first generation F body.

The Hotchkis front springs are decent, but for about the same money, you could get AFCO spring adjusters (which are adjustable for height) and a spring with the stated rate of your choice.

The OP expressed a concern about spending his money efficiently. I'm simply trying to keep an eye on that goal.

I've got (God help me) two builds going right now - one is a '68 Camaro with a 21st Century Street Machine subframe with a front steer rack, C5 UCA/LCA and coilovers, an LD 3 link, DSE SFC's, DSE minitub, LSx power, a Viper T56 and other appropriate equipment. The other is a "budget" '67 that is getting the SC&C UCA/LCA, ATS tall spindles, AFCO spring adjusters with 550 lb./in. springs, an EFI 383 SBC, Hotchkiss SFCs and an Aftermarket T56. My current driver is a stock subframed '68 with the Guldstrand mod, delrin UCA/LCA bushings in stock UCA/LCA, AFCO spring adjusters with 650 lb./in. springs, DSE SFCs and FAF composite rear leaf springs with swivel bushings, just to hit the highlights. So, I've gone the high buck route and the middle route and the extreme budget route.

My extreme budget car - the '68 driver - has out performed Lotus Elises and other highly competent sports cars in the local mountains. Now that may be car or it may be driver, but my 40 year old Camaro is rarely (once) incapable of keeping up with anything I've encountered in the twisties.

My point is that all of these solutions work pretty well, and one needn't spend $2,500 on the front suspension do get a good handling car. Too many of us fall in love with how much we can spend, and ignore how little we can spend for substantially similar results.

Why spend $900 plus on Speedtech tubular control arms that don't do anything other than "look cool."



OK, I am not here to get into a pissing match with you. You are promoting Mark's products and poo pooing my suggestions, fair enough. To each his own. There are more then one way to get good handling and I will not sit here and bash the other idea.

But your reply the first time I quoted you addresses cost and things you prefer, or don't like. Your reply never retracts the incorrect statement. What I am trying to clear up is you exact quote.......................

Why spend $900 plus on Speedtech tubular control arms that don't do anything other than "look cool."


which is 100% wrong!

Your statement infers that the Speedtech Arm only "looks cool" and that the SC and C arm does something the Speedtech arm does not, and that is 100% wrong. They both do the same thing, they just get to the end result a different way! They increase caster.

Now the tall ball joint option in the in the SC and C arm helps correct the camber gain issues just like the tall spindles I suggested do. For that matter, just like the free gulstand mod does. It only changes the upper arm pivot point. A tall ball joint can be added to a Speedtech arm and it also can correct caster, just like the SC and C arm with the tall ball joint option, so again they are equal.

Personally, I prefer the look and function of a solid arm. I like the idea of having a drop spindle doing some of the lowering combined with the right spring therefore leaving more spring, more travel in the spring, more travel in the shock, and more stored energy. But that is just a selling point and a personal preference of how to achieve the ultimate goal based on a personal experience doing 100s and 100s of cars for 28 years.

As I said, I am not here to start a pissing match. I am a sponsor of these forums. I am in business and build a lot of cars and sell a lot of parts to these forum members. I also come on these forums and offer free technical advice from my 28 years of experience. And even when I may be selling product in my answer, in my post, I am always sure to give 100% accurate information.

And your statement is incorrect.

I only want to clear up your incorrect statement. Then we can go have milk and cookies!

To expand on the comment that Frank makes above - the SpeedTech control arms are (from what I have seen) probably the highest quality tubular CA's on the market today. Blake and his crew take a great deal of pride in the workmanship and it shows in the products that they sell today. The end result with any (quality) tubular (ie. SpeedTech) or aftermarket (ie. SC&C) control arm is, however, exactly the same...

I suppose though, that if you really wanted to watch costs, aftermarket lower CA's are really not neccessary provided you replaced the bushings. Not my preference, but it's definately one place to save some money.

On the other hand, a properly designed powersteering box from DSE (AGR) or ATS (LEE) is definately worth the investment. I would consider the LEE box to be one of the most impressive improvement that someone can make up front and is one of the first things that I replace on any of my builds.

Why spend $900 plus on Speedtech tubular control arms that don't do anything other than "look cool."
which is 100% wrong!

Your statement infers that the Speedtech Arm only "looks cool" and that the SC and C arm does something the Speedtech arm does not, and that is 100% wrong.

Frank: You inferred that my statement implied something it didn't and chose to ignore my detailed explanation of my recommendation, where I said:

For the cost of the Speed Tech UCAs, the SC&C packages include the tall ball joints that correct the geometry issues on first generation F-bodies. So no need to buy spindles as well.

There was no error; neither UCA by itself has any material effect on handling. The point I was making, and stand by, is I don't see a reason for a person on a modest budget to buy $500 Speed Tech arms and then spend another $450 or so for Ride Tech spindles to get an improvement in handling, when you can spend $500 on SC&C arms and tall ball joints that significantly improve handling. $500 to address the issue seems like a better deal than $950.

You're a vendor and your "day job" is to sell. I'm a hobbyist, and my day job isn't affected by anything that happens on these boards, i.e., I have no vested interest in what anyone ends up using for their project or how much they spend on it.

On the other hand, a properly designed powersteering box from DSE (AGR) or ATS (LEE) is definately worth the investment. I would consider the LEE box to be one of the most impressive improvement that someone can make up front and is one of the first things that I replace on any of my builds.

This is something I've wondered about for a while now. How would you say the Lee or DSE boxes compare to the 3rd gen IROC box? I've got a 3rd gen box in my driver '68, and like it a lot; but I've never driven a first gen with either the DSE or Lee boxes.

[quote=Mkelcy;1148630]I would call Mark at SC&C for the best and most cost effective solutions http://www.scandc.com/index.htm Why spend $900 plus on Speedtech tubular control arms that don't do anything other than "look cool."



i guess i gotta say something

900$ is that for uppers and lowers? if so we are talking 2 different things if you want to compare apples take the 499 plus tall ball joints, what 40$ and your 10$ more than the others.

would it make any difference if the Speed Tech UCA had tall ball joints??
and really ALL UCA do the same thing, yea the ones Markus sells are VERY adjustable............. what are you going to adjust them to??
+4to6 deg positive caster and -.5 to-1.25 Camber. it might take most alignment shops 6 hours to adjust the arms IF they even will, most won't, most won't even adjust the settings different than stock.The Speed Tech arms have 4 deg of positive camber built in, they also have CNC machined stainless steel off set cross shafts, Delrin bushings they use Moog problem solver ball joints (but we are also looking into the tall joints) the speed tech arms are 2.5 times stronger than stock. ours have the BEST powder coating you will find,
how much adjust ability do you need?? unless you are racing your car.

as for the tall spindles. the only ones to use are the ATS and that may soon not be an option. and there is allot more benefit to the spindles than the tall ball joints.bearing size 7/8 lower,c 5 brakes correcter steering arm location. IMO the tall dropped spindles are too tall. and cause interference with big back space wheels.
if you wanted you could buy the Speed Tech arms and tall ball joints, i would even lower the price of the arms and keep the ball joints!!

:beers:

I would call Mark at SC&C for the best and most cost effective solutions http://www.scandc.com/index.htm Why spend $900 plus on Speedtech tubular control arms that don't do anything other than "look cool."

i guess i gotta say something

900$ is that for uppers and lowers? if so we are talking 2 different things if you want to compare apples take the 499 plus tall ball joints, what 40$ and your 10$ more than the others.

would it make any difference if the Speed Tech UCA had tall ball joints??
and really ALL UCA do the same thing, yea the ones Markus sells are VERY adjustable............. what are you going to adjust them to??
+4to6 deg positive caster and -.5 to-1.25 Camber. it might take most alignment shops 6 hours to adjust the arms IF they even will, most won't, most won't even adjust the settings different than stock.The Speed Tech arms have 4 deg of positive camber built in, they also have CNC machined stainless steel off set cross shafts, Delrin bushings they use Moog problem solver ball joints (but we are also looking into the tall joints) the speed tech arms are 2.5 times stronger than stock. ours have the BEST powder coating you will find,
how much adjust ability do you need?? unless you are racing your car.

as for the tall spindles. the only ones to use are the ATS and that may soon not be an option. and there is allot more benefit to the spindles than the tall ball joints.bearing size 7/8 lower,c 5 brakes correcter steering arm location. IMO the tall dropped spindles are too tall. and cause interference with big back space wheels.
if you wanted you could buy the Speed Tech arms and tall ball joints, i would even lower the price of the arms and keep the ball joints!!

:beers:

Speedtech, thanks for your unbiased comments.

I have heard this mentioned before.

What is up with the ATS spindles. Are they going to stop making them or what is the story?

Thanks

I have heard this mentioned before.

What is up with the ATS spindles. Are they going to stop making them or what is the story?

Thanks

I think Tyler is going to continue the parts business.

Speedtech, thanks for your unbiased comments.

???biased... unbiased... or otherwise... is there anything that Blake posted that is not factual and technically correct???

The fact of the matter is that there is only so much that an aftermarket control arm - tubular, billet, multi-piece, or chrome - can do and the majority of them are designed to make the same improvements. There is no magic and there is no secret. There may be differences in strength or quality and that is where informed shopping is important.

Tall ball joints can be installed in any control arm (including stock) so any benefits realized through their use would be beneficial across the board...

Yes Tyler has said that he is going to continue to sell parts, supply and delivery MAY, MAY be a bit of an issue, but i would not write him off by any means!!!
ATS Spindles are by far the best product on the market, we Certainly hope he can continue.

i dont think i will need the adjustable control arms. but with just normal drop spindles and the tall ball joints would i get the benifets of the taller spindles? and i'm look'n to spend around 4 grand on front suspention but less is always great. also will be going with air-ride and the bear 12" breaks. so ultimately i'm courious if i package deal front subframe would be cheaper than building the front subframe? also wich ever i go with will be smoothed over and painted body-color. this car will be just as much show as i will be go.

Still not cheaper to do a subframe. And Alston or Speedtech with Shockwaves will be $5400 which is a screamin deal, but still $2000 more then our modded subframe kit. Yes the tall spindles give the benefit without the adjustable arms. The tall ball joint is just another way to do the same thing, but I prefer the spindle route.

As for the Air Ride, your looking at another $700 for Shockwaveson our modded subframe kit.

I would suggest Wilwood brakes over Baer. Our Prodigy Customs Total Car G Machine Brake Packages are complete front and rear systems and are at a price Baer kits cannot compete with. You can do 12.2" (4) piston F / 12.2" (4) piston R W internal E Brake, Includes E brake Cables, Braided front and rear hoses, Master Cylinder, Prop Valve, Even Wilwood fluid and safety wire and pliers needed for proper rotr assembly for only $1850.

[quote=z2fast8;1149698]i dont think i will need the adjustable control arms. but with just normal drop spindles and the tall ball joints would i get the benifets of the taller spindles?

No One makes a drop spindle that is not Taller. so it is one or the other drop/tall spindle and a wheel with no more that 4.5??? back space (that measurement may be off a bit) or tall ball joints
what is wrong with just using the factory spindle? with air ride you will be able to rest the tire on the inner wheel well.

will be a custom inner finder. this car will lay the pinchweld of the rockers on the ground on 19" wheels. sounds like i'll just be doin alot of work too the factory subframe and that willwood break package is awsome

:noway:

i agree with David, the pinch weld will never see the ground, due to the fact that the sub frame hangs 3" lower than the pinch weld and the headers hang another 1-2 below that ( at least all the ones i have seen)
IMO ( biased i suppose ) the factory lower control arms need to be reinforced to run air ride. the stock shock mounting location is not strong enough to suport the vehicle weight. so you need lower control arms. depending on the wheel off set and width you may run into problems with the rim if you use drop spindles ( been there done that) then if you move the wheel out to clear the steering arm it my contact the fender, unless you are running a 235 on a 7" rim? just a couple things to think about prior to diving in head first! i think Franks car is one of the better examples of 19" rims, air ride.

the floor will be rebuilt and raised to accomodate the sub-frame trans and exhoust so that will not be a problem. and i've seen the shockwave mounts that are welded on to the factory frame so i've thought abot that and new control arms are a must

what does everyone think of the checkeredracing front subframe?

I have used the 2" drop spindles that have built in steering arm and brake brackets. If these are what you are referring to when you are talking about using drop spindles...my suggestion is don't waste your money on these in a pro-touring car. Like others have states above they interfere with large tires and you are limited to brakes. I would use Frank's tech service, he offers it to members and has years of experience and alot of vendors to choose from.

There are many ways to go as stated above and I can speak from experience on wasting money, believe me. I don't post here much but I thought I would give my 2 cents.

Shannon

the floor will be rebuilt and raised to accomodate the sub-frame trans and exhoust so that will not be a problem. and i've seen the shockwave mounts that are welded on to the factory frame so i've thought abot that and new control arms are a must

So I am guessing that you aren't very tall?

no i plan to build the floor in the fashion of the 4th gen camaro. i've measured the intirior deminsions of both and can save some inches here and there and make it work. have a lil faith

:noway:

Now that's funny!

What's that saying about "you haven't been around long enough"?

are you implying that i have'nt been around long enuff? and just because you have'nt or cant do it, does'nt mean it cant be done

are you implying that i have'nt been around long enuff? and just because you have'nt or cant do it, does'nt mean it cant be done

Just a suggestion, but you might want to ask a guy (David Pozzi) a road racer with over 11,000 posts, the moderator of the suspension section here, who has been racing first generation Camaros since the '70s and who maintains a website devoted to first generation Camaro suspensions why he used the :noway: smilie. He may have been suggesting that you won't be able to get the pinchweld on the ground, or he may have been suggesting that the ability to do so isn't going to leave you with a very good handling car, or he may have been suggesting something entirely different.

Carl has owned and been modifying his '68 Camaro for 27 years and has one of the nicest stock subframed pro-touring Camaros around, and one of the very few running 275's on the front end.

Between the two of them, there's a pretty decent store of first generation Camaro suspension knowledge that might help you in your build.

i understand that he has more knowledge than i do but by raiseing the subframe up into the floor will not change any suspention geometry. and the lose in headroom can be worked around

and i do appreciate any and everyones help and information.

My off-handed gesture was directed at David, not you. It's an inside joke not meant to bash you.

i think the idea of raising the sub into the floor is very agressive. don't know if you have thought of all the other issues that will arrise from this mod.
like the carb being 5" higher? the steering shaft not lining up? the transmission being located where the radio should be? having to tub and move the rear frame rails up equally.
don't get me wrong if your up for it i say GO FOR IT, just make damn sure you have thought it all out so you don't ruin a perfectly good car.
good luck!:hurray:

i think the idea of raising the sub into the floor is very agressive. don't know if you have thought of all the other issues that will arrise from this mod.
like the carb being 5" higher? the steering shaft not lining up? the transmission being located where the radio should be? having to tub and move the rear frame rails up equally.
don't get me wrong if your up for it i say GO FOR IT, just make damn sure you have thought it all out so you don't ruin a perfectly good car.
good luck!:hurray:

Seems to me you'd have to "channel" the subframe to raise the rear, but have the front pretty much in the stock location. At that point it might be easier to buy a full frame and be done with it.

i've measured a 69 maro and 68 bird and looks like i only have to raise it about 2.5 inchs so not look'n to be that extreme. and will be no carb but a maggy'd ls2, the rear will be backhalfed with a 4link and watts with no rear seat so no issues in the rear.

i've measured a 69 maro and 68 bird and looks like i only have to raise it about 2.5 inchs so not look'n to be that extreme. and will be no carb but a maggy'd ls2, the rear will be backhalfed with a 4link and watts with no rear seat so no issues in the rear.


Sounds like you have it all figured out. Good luck.

Sorry, I just thought I'd make a little fun here, it's me being pessimistic again. I'm sure it can be done, but it's going to be a lot of work. I'd like to see how it turns out for you.

It does look like raising the sub 2.5" would raise the bottom of the sub above the pinch welds, Most headers hang down another 1.5" however. My bellhousing flange (lakewood) was the lowest point on my Camaro. Remember as you raise the sub, the engine get's higher too, so hood clearance is reduced, but I see above you will use an LS engine. Valve cover to brake booster may get close.
David

My saying:
If you aren't pessimistic, you haven't been around long enough.

gunna use hydra-boost so i'm hoping the resevoir will not be an issue. i will be useing a built t56 from a 4th gen camaro so it will not hang down far. i will be rasing the trans tunnel about 3 inches and make it a lil wider so the exhoust will be in the trans tunnel also. i realize i'm taking on a huge amount of work but i have built a number of crazy custom streetrods so i do have alot of experiance for my age (22) and have had a few make it to sema.
and i love the pessimisam from people it helps keep me in check for the most part and thanx for all the information, i do understand that yall have been there and done that and will accept any and all help and information i get

I was kinda doubtful that you knew how much work it would be, but I see I underestimated you. :)
I'll bet it's going to be a chain reaction deal where one mod triggers another and another. I admire your ambition!

You won't be able to lay pinch weld with 19" tire unless you have bulges like G-Force Cuda. I have a 68 Camaro, stock floor is raised 2" with half height sub bushings making the sub level with the rocker pinch. Car is sitting on 6" blocks on the rocker with 5.5" ground clearance. As it sits the 285/35/19 mocked up right now almost touches the fender structure and there is 5" to the top of the fender and you still have to allow for the hood, inner fender, and tire clearance when at rest. You are negative a couple inches.

anyone have pics or measurements of there lsx intake to hood clearance?