C2: Rear Sway Bar on 67 Small Block

[Michael S.]

Re: C2: Rear Sway Bar on 67 Small Block

Gerald,

This forum is by far the BEST for overall technical information for a Corvette ANYWHERE on the web, bar none! The focus here is restoration/stock. There are websites, Corvette Forum comes to mind, that focus on many aspects of Corvette including aftermarket parts and modification for your car. Many of the folks on these websites do exactly that, modify their cars.

Many of the members that frequent this board are truly "THE EXPERTS" in the generation of Corvette that they prefer. Again, while this is the FIRST place I would ask any Corvette related technical question, I would consider the type of question and realize the focus here is restoration.

NCRS is not a bunch of trailer queens. The road trips sponsored by the club this month to National Convention illustrates that. Sure, there are trailer queens, however most members also have a Corvette that is truly a driver. Stock in condition but none the less a driver!

I am proud to hear you have owned your Corvette for all those years and have all those stories to tell. Back in 69 when you installed the luggage rack and trailer hitch, it "just an old car"! What foresight you had. Your purchased one of the most desired collector cars in the world and did not even know it. Even more amazing is insight you had in keeping the car even though it was a table for junque in you garage all those years of storage.

I am sure there are lot's of jealous neighbors in Northern California that would like to have YOUR susupension problems on YOUR 1967 Corvette that YOU have owned for all these years!

Keep us informed on your progress, ask questions and join NCRS if you are not already a member!

[Michael S.]

Re: C2: Rear Sway Bar on 67 Small Block

Gerald,

This forum is by far the BEST for overall technical information for a Corvette ANYWHERE on the web, bar none! The focus here is restoration/stock. There are websites, Corvette Forum comes to mind, that focus on many aspects of Corvette including aftermarket parts and modification for your car. Many of the folks on these websites do exactly that, modify their cars.

Many of the members that frequent this board are truly "THE EXPERTS" in the generation of Corvette that they prefer. Again, while this is the FIRST place I would ask any Corvette related technical question, I would consider the type of question and realize the focus here is restoration.

NCRS is not a bunch of trailer queens. The road trips sponsored by the club this month to National Convention illustrates that. Sure, there are trailer queens, however most members also have a Corvette that is truly a driver. Stock in condition but none the less a driver!

I am proud to hear you have owned your Corvette for all those years and have all those stories to tell. Back in 69 when you installed the luggage rack and trailer hitch, it "just an old car"! What foresight you had. Your purchased one of the most desired collector cars in the world and did not even know it. Even more amazing is insight you had in keeping the car even though it was a table for junque in you garage all those years of storage.

I am sure there are lot's of jealous neighbors in Northern California that would like to have YOUR susupension problems on YOUR 1967 Corvette that YOU have owned for all these years!

Keep us informed on your progress, ask questions and join NCRS if you are not already a member!

[Mike Cobine]

Re: C2: Rear Sway Bar on 67 Small Block

I don't think you will find any group that drives to the shows more than NCRS. The goal in most groups who show their cars is to have the cars perfect in looks. Dirt and rock chips are to be avoided at all cost, hence, trailer.

However, NCRS actually awards points for driving to an event, something you will not find in others.

What you are mistaking as "you are doing this all wrong" is not about your attitude of driving and having fun, but that it is something that is not necessary in your car.

The advice to bring the car back to original specs first is good advice. The original suspension was a very good setup. They raced on this and went faster than all but a handful on this list.

The setup you have will improve the handling, however, while the percentage of change from a 37 year old suspension will be tremendous, the change over a stock suspension in new condition will be much, much less.

There are drawbacks. There are advantages. But unless you are cutting the canyons every weekend or at the track once a month on the road courses, the new suspension is completely not needed. If you are old enough to have bought this car back in '68, you are no 19 year old kid who is out racing the Hondas and Toyotas through the canyons, and are probably going to be surprised at the ride. It will be tight.

And while you like it, you may find yourself solo as your wife may not.

However, as Mike said, I think you have the bushings in already. You have to decide if you want to remove them and return the whole set, or figure a way to recover at this point.

You can install the bars with the kit. To do so, you will end up with holes you may not have wanted. Not much choice. but to run the big front bar, you will have to run the rear bar. Otherwise, every offramp will be run at 25 mph unless you like going over the edge.

With the stiffer bushings, you may not have a choice on bars. Suspensions require balance. To throw heavy springs and keep light bars is to have bad handling. To use heavy bars and light springs is to have bad handling, although better than the other combo. To stiffen parts of the suspenion and not others is to ask for bad handling.

This is why suspensions are engineered as systems. And Vette Brakes is a old and experienced company that produces good stuff. Odds are you don't have much choice if you keep those bushings. You can call them and see if there is something less in springs and bars, but you have to remember, it is a system and so all has to work together.

[Mike Cobine]

Re: C2: Rear Sway Bar on 67 Small Block

I don't think you will find any group that drives to the shows more than NCRS. The goal in most groups who show their cars is to have the cars perfect in looks. Dirt and rock chips are to be avoided at all cost, hence, trailer.

However, NCRS actually awards points for driving to an event, something you will not find in others.

What you are mistaking as "you are doing this all wrong" is not about your attitude of driving and having fun, but that it is something that is not necessary in your car.

The advice to bring the car back to original specs first is good advice. The original suspension was a very good setup. They raced on this and went faster than all but a handful on this list.

The setup you have will improve the handling, however, while the percentage of change from a 37 year old suspension will be tremendous, the change over a stock suspension in new condition will be much, much less.

There are drawbacks. There are advantages. But unless you are cutting the canyons every weekend or at the track once a month on the road courses, the new suspension is completely not needed. If you are old enough to have bought this car back in '68, you are no 19 year old kid who is out racing the Hondas and Toyotas through the canyons, and are probably going to be surprised at the ride. It will be tight.

And while you like it, you may find yourself solo as your wife may not.

However, as Mike said, I think you have the bushings in already. You have to decide if you want to remove them and return the whole set, or figure a way to recover at this point.

You can install the bars with the kit. To do so, you will end up with holes you may not have wanted. Not much choice. but to run the big front bar, you will have to run the rear bar. Otherwise, every offramp will be run at 25 mph unless you like going over the edge.

With the stiffer bushings, you may not have a choice on bars. Suspensions require balance. To throw heavy springs and keep light bars is to have bad handling. To use heavy bars and light springs is to have bad handling, although better than the other combo. To stiffen parts of the suspenion and not others is to ask for bad handling.

This is why suspensions are engineered as systems. And Vette Brakes is a old and experienced company that produces good stuff. Odds are you don't have much choice if you keep those bushings. You can call them and see if there is something less in springs and bars, but you have to remember, it is a system and so all has to work together.

[Gerard F.]

Re: C2: Rear Sway Bar on 67 Small Block

Mike,

I took your advice and sent in my NCRS membership. I do think that this is the BEST forum for me. Where else can you get so many expert and diverse opinions on any topic or problem, and within a very short time. Based on the comments, I received, I changed my project and chucked the new front and rear sway bars. Thanks to everyone who commented.

So now the only change from original is the 460# front springs, polyurethane bushings all around, gas shocks, and a new 9 leaf rear spring plus the new Coker tires. When I found out that I'd have to drill holes in the original trailing arm, that did it for me. I'm really a future restorer, but I like to experiment. Had I known about the holes in an original part, I'd probably not bought the kit, or would have bought new trailing arms, if the rear stabilizer were really necessary.

As I think I said before, my garage is full of all the original parts I've taken off in the last three years, all marked, down to the nuts and bolts from here and there. Modifying an original part would be a no-no for me.

The problem I was trying to resolve with this project was a badly sagging front end, and the little flip which required a reverse turn at the end of a sharp turn; I guess they would call it oversteer??? We found that the original bushings all around were badly shot, especially the trailing arm bushings.
I hope this project works, I'll take the car though the paces, and let everyone know. If it doesn't work out, I'll do something else.

While I got you here, I'll tell you another story. In 1971, I was a construction engineer for the contractor on a 7 mile state highway, 3 miles of which was straight as an arrow with very little grade(which is rare in this area). The job was freshly paved and striped and ready to open on Monday. So I thought I'd see what this 67/327/300/4 speed would do on the Sunday before. I pulled the barricades aside and made the 3 mile run twice. In fourth, the tack read 5300 rpm before the front end started to drift across the road. With the noise and pressure on the convertible top, and worries about the tires, I chickened out and pushed it no further. The speedometer read around 135 but I have been never sure of the calibration with the tires. I was hoping someone on this forum could calculate it for me. I believe its a stock 3.08 rear end, Munci 4 speed and the tires were the older (1969) Michelin X radials, 195X15.

My next project is the exhaust system, and rest assured, I'm going to check with this forum before I buy anything.

Jerry Fuccillo
Sonora, California

[Gerard F.]

Re: C2: Rear Sway Bar on 67 Small Block

Mike,

I took your advice and sent in my NCRS membership. I do think that this is the BEST forum for me. Where else can you get so many expert and diverse opinions on any topic or problem, and within a very short time. Based on the comments, I received, I changed my project and chucked the new front and rear sway bars. Thanks to everyone who commented.

So now the only change from original is the 460# front springs, polyurethane bushings all around, gas shocks, and a new 9 leaf rear spring plus the new Coker tires. When I found out that I'd have to drill holes in the original trailing arm, that did it for me. I'm really a future restorer, but I like to experiment. Had I known about the holes in an original part, I'd probably not bought the kit, or would have bought new trailing arms, if the rear stabilizer were really necessary.

As I think I said before, my garage is full of all the original parts I've taken off in the last three years, all marked, down to the nuts and bolts from here and there. Modifying an original part would be a no-no for me.

The problem I was trying to resolve with this project was a badly sagging front end, and the little flip which required a reverse turn at the end of a sharp turn; I guess they would call it oversteer??? We found that the original bushings all around were badly shot, especially the trailing arm bushings.
I hope this project works, I'll take the car though the paces, and let everyone know. If it doesn't work out, I'll do something else.

While I got you here, I'll tell you another story. In 1971, I was a construction engineer for the contractor on a 7 mile state highway, 3 miles of which was straight as an arrow with very little grade(which is rare in this area). The job was freshly paved and striped and ready to open on Monday. So I thought I'd see what this 67/327/300/4 speed would do on the Sunday before. I pulled the barricades aside and made the 3 mile run twice. In fourth, the tack read 5300 rpm before the front end started to drift across the road. With the noise and pressure on the convertible top, and worries about the tires, I chickened out and pushed it no further. The speedometer read around 135 but I have been never sure of the calibration with the tires. I was hoping someone on this forum could calculate it for me. I believe its a stock 3.08 rear end, Munci 4 speed and the tires were the older (1969) Michelin X radials, 195X15.

My next project is the exhaust system, and rest assured, I'm going to check with this forum before I buy anything.

Jerry Fuccillo
Sonora, California

[Gerard F.]

Re: C2: Rear Sway Bar on 67 Small Block

Hey Mike C.

About my wife! She wouldn't solo with me anyway. She thinks I'm a fanatic about this car. She likes the cushy cars, once had a Porsche and hated it.

I bought this car when I was single, and I put license frames on it, which say
"Happiness Is Being Single", remembering the days when I used to go up the Twain Harte grade at 100 with the top down and a babe at my side. When I got married, a lot of my friends would ask me and still do, "Now that you're married, why don't you take those frames off", I tell them "The statement is very true."

I'm only kidding, of course! Seriously, I appreciate your comments, thanks, and please see my comments to Mike S. With the new AC and Power Steering, perhaps my wife will now want to take a spin on her own. My only hope is that she doesn't tune into this forum! I'd be in real trouble.

Best wishes,

Jerry Fuccillo
Sonora, California

[Gerard F.]

Re: C2: Rear Sway Bar on 67 Small Block

Hey Mike C.

About my wife! She wouldn't solo with me anyway. She thinks I'm a fanatic about this car. She likes the cushy cars, once had a Porsche and hated it.

I bought this car when I was single, and I put license frames on it, which say
"Happiness Is Being Single", remembering the days when I used to go up the Twain Harte grade at 100 with the top down and a babe at my side. When I got married, a lot of my friends would ask me and still do, "Now that you're married, why don't you take those frames off", I tell them "The statement is very true."

I'm only kidding, of course! Seriously, I appreciate your comments, thanks, and please see my comments to Mike S. With the new AC and Power Steering, perhaps my wife will now want to take a spin on her own. My only hope is that she doesn't tune into this forum! I'd be in real trouble.

Best wishes,

Jerry Fuccillo
Sonora, California

[Mike Cobine]

MPH and RPM calculator

Here:

http://www.angelfire.com/fl/procrastination/rear.html

Rear Axle Calculator

[Mike Cobine]

MPH and RPM calculator

Here:

http://www.angelfire.com/fl/procrastination/rear.html

Rear Axle Calculator

[Gerard F.]

Re: MPH and RPM calculator

Doc,

I tried your program, but I can't find the diameter for a Michelin 195X15 (1969 version). I've been all over the internet, and they have changed the design and designation of tire. They were big tires but I don't know the ratio.

Jerry

[Gerard F.]

Re: MPH and RPM calculator

Doc,

I tried your program, but I can't find the diameter for a Michelin 195X15 (1969 version). I've been all over the internet, and they have changed the design and designation of tire. They were big tires but I don't know the ratio.

Jerry

[Scott G.]

Re: MPH and RPM calculator

Is this it?

http://www.coker.com/store/customer/product.php?productid=17669&cat=&page=1

[Scott G.]

Re: MPH and RPM calculator

Is this it?

http://www.coker.com/store/customer/product.php?productid=17669&cat=&page=1

[Gerard F.]

Re: MPH and RPM calculator

Scott,

I don't think that the Michelin 195/70vr15 is the right one. I found my original 1969 receipt and guarantee booklet, and they are shown as Michelin 195-15 XWW. The booklet also shows a 70 series, although the 195-15 XWW is listed under the Metric Radial column.

The tires I had were actually accepted as snow tires in most states.
Prices sure change, $282.00 each! I paid $46.00 each in 1969. In 1975, I changed them to the same tire and paid $60.33 each.

It's interesting that 29 years later, I brought them back to the same shop with less then 3000 miles on them, and they wouldn't honor the 40,000 mile guarantee.
See what happens when you get married!

I went to Coker Redline Radials P205/75R15 just recently. They have a 27.1" diameter and are probably near the metric 195-15 tire.

I'm sure there is an unkown tire inflation and thread factor in RPM vs MPH calculation, so I'll probably never know the true speed. I think the 135 MPH at 5300 RPM is in the ballpark.

Jerry