66 Strut Arm

[Tom L.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

Ed, being as the guys say that the struts are the same for MY 63-74, why not crawl under the '64 and compare?

Tom Larsen (you know, the other Ed kosloski's co-worker)

[Joe L.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

[quote=Ed Kozloski (3333);452067]

Ed-----

I don't know how you're measuring the bushing diameter. However, the 63-74 bushing orifices are 1-1/4" (actually, more precisely, I think the orifice is about 1.21-1.22" if I recall correctly).

I'm probably measuring in the wrong place. I've never seen an arm without the bushing in place so I'm not sure what a bushing assembly looks like. I measure the visible RUBBER portion of the bushing at 1-1/8th dia, as per photo. The outside diameter of the metal sleeve, immediately surrounding the rubber portion is 1.197" dia, as per the second photo. I'm now thinking that 1.197 metal sleeve is part of the bushing assembly? Was that originally 1.21 or so and got squeezed down when inserting? It's only .005" off, a paper thickness is around .003 or .004.

Thanks for jumping in.

Ed-----


It's a little tough to precisely measure the bushings or the orifices when the bushings are installed in the rods. For one thing, the end OD of SERVICE bushings is slightly chamfered. In any event, no matter, I'm sure these are the 1-1/4" bushings.

So, this means that I don't know what these rods are. As far as Corvette goes, only 63-74 used this size bushing but NONE of those had "offset" ends. The 80-82 had "offset" ends but used the 1-3/8" bushings.

By the way, is the rod pictured in this photo the same as the one pictured in your previous photo? The rod in this photo does not look like a GM rod to me. If it is a GM rod, it has SERVICE bushings since original bushings were vulcanized in place. Only SERVICE bushings have the outer, steel shell.

[Ed K.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

Ed, being as the guys say that the struts are the same for MY 63-74, why not crawl under the '64 and compare?

Tom Larsen (you know, the other Ed kosloski's co-worker)

Hi Tom, nice to hear from you.
I tried. Cannot check the 64 yet - I'm in the process of tracing a tranny leak and have the front up in the air. I tried looking but with the nose up, the rear is down and I can't get my head into a position to see the struts. Cannot properly get a jack under it. Now that I know the struts are the same I will stop the tranny leak search tomorrow, back off the ramps and check the struts. However, I believe my 64 struts are original and therefore are probably bent as like the ones in my first photos. As for bushing diameters, I really don't want to take the car apart to check unless all else fails. Strange thing however is that I rebuilt the 64 rear 5 years ago and did not have any of these issues. My problems began now when I could not get align the 66 struts properly to the trailing arms. They were either pointing forward of the trailing arm attachment fingers, or behind. Therefore they are bent as everyone has been saying.

[Ed K.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

Joe, by "Offst" I assume you mean angled?

The strut in the second set of photos is the one a friend purchased from a vendor at Carlyle. The ends are not angled (bent)

[Michael H.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

I believe my 64 struts are original and therefore are probably bent as like the ones in my first photos.

I just dug out an original set of struts and, as I mentioned previously, the angle is 90*, just as it should be.

I'm pretty sure the one in your first photo is a correct, but bent, 63 to 74?? strut.

[Tom L.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

Ed, you sound like Jr. Nice old cars and you can't use them because they are a "work in progress".

[Joe L.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

Joe, by "Offst" I assume you mean angled?

The strut in the second set of photos is the one a friend purchased from a vendor at Carlyle. The ends are not angled (bent)

Ed-----


Yes, it could also be described as "angled". Do these have the 1-1/4" bushings (i.e. like the ones in your most recent set of photographs) or are they the 1-3/8"

I believe the rods in your most recent set of photos are REPRODUCTION 63-74 rods. The OD of the rod ends looks to be larger than original GM. I'm sure this was done to make the rods stronger as the original 63-74 were thinner (and weaker) in this area.

[Ed K.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

Hello Joe,

First photos: 1-3/8" bushing dia with bent end sleeves. OD of end sleeves is 1.79".

Second set: 1-1/4" bushing dia with 90 degree end sleeves. OD of end sleeves is 1.41 to 1.56". This is the part purchased from the Carlyle vendor and probably is a reproduction.

Ed

[Ed K.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

And.............where does it end? Bent struts only? What about a distorted strut to differential mounting bracket. Also, bent/distorted fingers on the spindle housing. Distorted strut/shock brackets (the cylindrical porton that retains the strut).
I'm now wondering if it makes more sense to put the bent struts back. Everything else may have deformed but all will fit together.

[Steven S.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

Ed, it's Carlisle

[Ed K.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

Thanks. I'm so focused on the problem that I'm not paying attention to spelling. Other than misspelling Carlisle, I see the "spell check" icon above to the right. I just don't like downloading possible unsafe items. I just had to abandon a virus attacked computer - in this economic environment I do not need another $800 expense.

[Steven S.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

Ed, I'm just playing, don't mind me

I didn't download the spell check either, and I'm sure I could use it

Steve

[Ed K.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

I did not sense any harrasment. I HATE spelling errors, especially when they're mine. Lately, my letters are correct, their order is wrong - except for "Carlisle".
Ed

[Joe L.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

Hello Joe,

First photos: 1-3/8" bushing dia with bent end sleeves. OD of end sleeves is 1.79".

Second set: 1-1/4" bushing dia with 90 degree end sleeves. OD of end sleeves is 1.41 to 1.56". This is the part purchased from the Carlyle vendor and probably is a reproduction.

Ed

Ed------


I'm fairly confident, then, that the strut rods in your first photo are the 80-82 rods. Everything "fits" now----configuration and bushing size.

[Michael H.]

Re: 66 Strut Arm

Ed------


I'm fairly confident, then, that the strut rods in your first photo are the 80-82 rods. Everything "fits" now----configuration and bushing size.

I think you're right. This has been a confusing discussion.