[Teetoe_Jones]

I'm thinking about producing a replacement subframe, similar to the old Rasmussen frame, but that holds Kyle Tucker's "Twister" components. It would be setup with new geometry, a rack and pinion, would clear an LS1, and have everything need for install. Any intrest in this sort of project?

------------------
1968 RS/SS Camaro w/ 94 vette LT-1 and T56 six speed, Cal-Tracs, Baer 12" crossdrilled brakes 17" rims, ect....
<A HREF="http://home.earthlink.net/~speedracer68/tyler.htm" TARGET=_blank>
My 68 with LT1 and T56</A>

[Rob Mears]

Gotta put my vote in for this one. Anything that furthers the cause of performance & handling for the 1st Gen's is a welcome product IMO.

I really like the idea of using the Tucker's 'purpose designed' suspension in place of the high dollar Corvette stuff. Definately a step in the right direction.
Let us know if things progress.

[OBNXUS67]

I would be interested. The lower the $ the better.

Tucker was talking about making a 1" longer spindle to go with his "kit" that includes a relocated A arm and new shorter A arms. I wonder if he has done this yet?

Also Teetoe, have you looked into putting a 2nd Gen subframe on a 1st Gen? I thought about doing this but, no one has the specs to see if it works. I think the only difference is the track is wider (about 2"). If the can put vette subframes on why not a 2nd Gen. Can you image all the surplus parts and cheap parts. Plus all the benefits of better handling without the high cost. Plus all the aftermarket stuff you can use.

anyway just a thought,
Tony

------------------
obnoxious 67 camaro under construction. TH350/383 stroker w/ aluminum Eldlebroc RPM heads,cam, and carb.

[This message has been edited by OBNXUS67 (edited 11-20-2000).]

[Teetoe_Jones]

You cant put corvette subframes on camaros. The rasmussen frame is designed to mount to a first gen, but use corvette suspension. The 2nd gen wont work because of the spindles body mounts ect. Not as easy as just bolting frames to bodys.

------------------
1968 RS/SS Camaro w/ 94 vette LT-1 and T56 six speed, Cal-Tracs, Baer 12" crossdrilled brakes 17" rims, ect....
<A HREF="http://home.earthlink.net/~speedracer68/tyler.htm" TARGET=_blank>
My 68 with LT1 and T56</A>

[Teetoe_Jones]

Here's what i've thought of:
Custom frame with all factory mounts- Body mounts, clutch, E brake, brake lines, bumper brackets ect..
It would have all new geometry designed by Kyle Tucker, have oil pan clearence for LS1's, and be able to use the stock pieces such as A arms, spindles, sway bar ect...The best part would be that it comes with a rack and pinion, and coil over shocks. Then you could reuse all the stock stuff, until you can buy the "trick" custom pieces.
Well? Want one?

------------------
1968 RS/SS Camaro w/ 94 vette LT-1 and T56 six speed, Cal-Tracs, Baer 12" crossdrilled brakes 17" rims, ect....
<A HREF="http://home.earthlink.net/~speedracer68/tyler.htm" TARGET=_blank>
My 68 with LT1 and T56</A>

[OBNXUS67]

Well it sounds good. But, there was a post about rack and pinion steering on 1st Gens. Because they are rear steers there is question about whether they can handle the strain. I guess there is different forces on a rear steer over a front. I not sure but I think Dave Pozzi knows.

------------------
obnoxious 67 camaro under construction. TH350/383 stroker w/ aluminum Eldlebroc RPM heads,cam, and carb.

[Teetoe_Jones]

That was about adapting rack and pinion to a stock subframe using Steeroids. I am designing a frame from scratch that would use the proper rack and pinion so there is no un due stress to the unit.

------------------
1968 RS/SS Camaro w/ 94 vette LT-1 and T56 six speed, Cal-Tracs, Baer 12" crossdrilled brakes 17" rims, ect....
<A HREF="http://home.earthlink.net/~speedracer68/tyler.htm" TARGET=_blank>
My 68 with LT1 and T56</A>

[davidpozzi]

teetoe_jones,
It sounds good.
First Option-
The geometry problems of a firstgen could be solved by changing to a taller spindle, and then rebuilding everything else.

Second Option-
If you want rack and pinion steering then going with a new subframe would be the next step up.
Doing it by re using as many stock components as possible would be great and keep the cost down.
At the same time you could improve the engine mounting for later engines and make Big block engine mounting better too.
I'd take a good look into using a coil over spring and shock on the front like an upgraded late Corvette.

I suggest the rack should be in front of the axle like the Corvette.
When the rack is in front of the axle the steering shaft is straighter and easier to deal with.

I visited your site and your Camaro is great!
I hope mine comes out half as neat.
Regards, David

------------------
Check my web page for First Gen Camaro suspension info:
David's Motorsports page
First Gen Suspension Page
67 RS 327
69 Camaro Vintage Racer
65 Lola T-70 Can Am Vintage Racer

[This message has been edited by davidpozzi (edited 12-06-2000).]

[pdq67]

David,
Glad you got in this.

We never did figure out what the difference between a first gen subframe is and a second gen one. If its front track width, then section it the needed amount and weld back together and adjust motor mounts, etc...

Then change body mounts to fit first gen body to fit it if needed.

The second gen is already front steer and can use the big car 12" rotors and tall spindles, so brakes and spindle upgrade are stock.

Next if you want better springs with less weight, go with (I think) Vette Brakes transverse mounted fiberglass mono spring. Its fully adjustable and so-on.

Finally, the rack, if desired. We all got a look at how to bolt onea them suckers on the back, so shouldn't be any sort of deal to bolt one on the front either!!! Whatda you think??? pdq67

[pdq67]

Teetoe_Jones,

Sorry, didn't mean to get carried away and leave you outa this. Its just that I got caught up in mouthing at David!!

Please no hassle, illwill, etc.. meant. THX. pdq67

[68SSConvt]

Teetoe, how about designing a subframe that bolts into a 1st gen, but that uses 2nd gen suspension parts and with an option of rack and pinion in the front matched to the stock front steer setup? Kind of a merge of the two generations, with 1st gen mounting points and second gen geometry and parts availability.

Any thoughts on this David?

Ray

[68SSConvt]

No thoughts on the above reply?

[Teetoe_Jones]

That's not really the direction I'm leaning toward. I'd like to reuse as many 1st gen parts on the first gen subframes as possible. The advantage over stock would be better geomerty, less unsprung weight, rack and pinion, coil overs, ect. I want to offer a second gen frame as well, and it would be pointless to offer a frame that only had the added benifit of rack and pinion over the stanard 2nd gen setup.
Tyler

------------------
1968 RS/SS Camaro w/ 94 vette LT-1 and T56 six speed, Cal-Tracs, Baer 12" crossdrilled brakes 17" rims, ect....
<A HREF="http://home.earthlink.net/~speedracer68/tyler.htm" TARGET=_blank>
My 68 with LT1 and T56</A>

[davidpozzi]

I think some design goals need to be defined.
1.Cost
2.Fix geometry
3.Steering-Rack & Pinion (front steer)
4.Brakes
5.Weight
6.Tire width
7,Wheels

If low cost is desired you should either re use the stock subframe or make the kit a weld on to the stock subframe.

I think making use of as many stock components as possible would have the biggest effect on cost.
You could then have "premimum" components like tubular A frames and coil over shocks to further reduce weight and aid adjustability.
These A frames would be the same dimensions as the stock ones to provide an upgrade path for guys with stock subframes or with your upgrade subframes.
If you provide a slot or second pair of holes on the upper control arm shaft, it could be moved to the rear to increase positive caster without having to add so many shims to the rear stud which usually puts the RH upper A frame into the header tube.

If you want to do subframes to fit both generations. And clear the later engines.
I think you might want to do a coil over tube A frame setup with Rack and Pinion steering. You might get lucky and only have to provide slightly different body mounts for each and the rest can be the same.

Thinking out loud s'more, the second gen allready has front steer, so rack conversion would be fairly easy. The subframe is zig zagged to add more wheel clearance where the tires would hit when turned.
The geometry is good (as far as I have heard, don't know firsthand) and with the 1LE rotors, 12" brakes are possible.

From what I've seen of the ARD subframe is great with the Corvette components. It's just a lot of money by the time you are all done.
David

------------------
Check my web page for First Gen Camaro suspension info:
David's Motorsports page
First Gen Suspension Page
67 RS 327
69 Camaro Vintage Racer
65 Lola T-70 Can Am Vintage Racer

[This message has been edited by davidpozzi (edited 12-04-2000).]

[Teetoe_Jones]

I agree that the rasmussen frame is a good design, but the flaws have yet to be resolved. Yet he still sells the frame, knowing the problems it has. Talking to earlier customers, they can not run a large or wide wheel because the rack placement was very poor. Wayne compensated for this by raising the pick up pionts on the frame and increasing the ride height by almost 2". I only want a frame that the average Camaro/Firebird owner can afford. If it means modifing and existing frame as Kyle does- so be it. But I'd much rather make the whole subframe purpose built, and designed to work well. Not some exotic frame that uses high dollar corvette suspension.
David, I'd love to speak with you further as to the design of this as I respect your understanding of the first gen suspension.
Tyler

------------------
1968 RS/SS Camaro w/ 94 vette LT-1 and T56 six speed, Cal-Tracs, Baer 12" crossdrilled brakes 17" rims, ect....
<A HREF="http://home.earthlink.net/~speedracer68/tyler.htm" TARGET=_blank>
My 68 with LT1 and T56</A>