QA1s don't Reach Upper Holes in UCAs.

[shmelty]

Well, this sucks. Do I really need to modify the UCAs to use the QA1s in the upper holes? I thought it was direct replacement? I got the kit from Dan Ruth.132479

[NAZ]

I'm curious, why do you want to mount them in the upper hole? I've never measured the newer control arms but the holes appear to be ~1" apart and if the motion ratio is the same as the 1st gen arms that would amount to ~ 1 3/8" ride height change if everything else was kept the same.

Also, if the 425/325 number in your footer above is the spring rates you plan to run, you should seriously consider using much lighter front springs. Like 200 lb/in lighter if your motion ratio is the same as the 1.37:1 of the 1st gen. That SBF is not that heavy to require springs better suited to a 1-ton truck. But you're gonna like the shocks, I run the same ones on my Hot Rod but with 250 lb/in front springs which are a bit heavier than ideal. Next time I have the shocks out I'll be replacing them.

[Brave Salmon]

I have to agree with NAZ. I have the sbf 347, ac, auto etc. The spring rates were like driving a skateboard. Now, I don't race so wanted the ride more like an aggressive sports car. I went with the QA1S but got them from Summit. I have 220# 9" tall springs up front that are Summit# QA1-9HT220. I run 12" 200# Qa1-12ht200 rear springs. The ride is incredibly better and a kidney belt is no longer needed. My car weighs 2460lbs wet w/o driver. That's 1240 front and 1220 rear. NAZ is an engineer and has been doing this stuff a long time. His advice is aound. Good luck...

[shmelty]

Thanks for the comments.

1) i purchased the QA1s complete from Dan Ruth at Innovative Rodding and these were the springs he recommended for a softer ride when compared with FFR Konis/Springs. I will change out to lighter springs per Naz's recommendation.
2) I was going to use the top holes as that is was is spec'd out in the manual (Upper Holes for 33 Hot Rod, Lower Holes for 35 Truck or Hot Rod with Running Boards). Mark Dougherty chimed in and set me in the right direction so I went with the Lower Holes. See pic below.132508

Thanks,

Sean

[NAZ]

Looks like you're on the right track Sean. You will find you need more pre-load than with the stiffer springs and that is actually a good thing -- it will improve the ride and weight transfer. If you use the same set-up as Brave Salmon above, you may be able to use his pre-load adjustment to get you very close. I suspect your two cars will be similar in front weight. I would suggest you start your damping adjustments at full soft and adjust from there.

[cob427sc]

I have been out slowly breaking in the car and have twice (horrible roads in Mass) passed over old trenches in the road which have settled. Yesterday I hit one at about 40 mph and the sound would have led you to believe the body broke in half. Both rear tires banged up against the body. I have the stock coil overs on the rear mounted in the lower holes and the coil adjusted as high as it will go, leaving me only about 1-1/2" clearence between the tire and body at the closets point. Tire diameter is 27". I'm wondering if anyone else has changed out the rear coilovers to a longer length that I could get some increased clearance over the tire? Any suggestions?

[JOP33]

I have been out slowly breaking in the car and have twice (horrible roads in Mass) passed over old trenches in the road which have settled. Yesterday I hit one at about 40 mph and the sound would have led you to believe the body broke in half. Both rear tires banged up against the body. I have the stock coil overs on the rear mounted in the lower holes and the coil adjusted as high as it will go, leaving me only about 1-1/2" clearence between the tire and body at the closets point. Tire diameter is 27". I'm wondering if anyone else has changed out the rear coilovers to a longer length that I could get some increased clearance over the tire? Any suggestions?

I have experienced some of the same with my set-up. I have the (4) link with the upgraded Konis, but don't have the adjustable LCA's which I think would give me a bit more travel. This is going to be a winter project for me. The bridge transitions seem to be the worst! I feel your pain!

[shmelty]

134231
This is at full droop with 3-Link. QA1 Proma Stars with 12" Springs.

19" Eye to Eye
12" Springs
10 1/4" Body
7" of Thread/Adjustment. Currently at 3" so I have 4" to go.

[wrp]

Been running this old time setup for two years with no issues, Dan's QA-1's. I had no idea the Gen I and later Gen arms were so different. Note how far down I have my springs turned. My nose is 6.5 inches off the ground


134238134239

[shmelty]

Been running this old time setup for two years with no issues, Dan's QA-1's. I had no idea the Gen I and later Gen arms were so different. Note how far down I have my springs turned. My nose is 6.5 inches off the ground


134238134239

Bill,

A couple posts above you will see Ron Everitt is having problems with the Koni Rears. I think he is running 4-Link as well. How much travel do you have in the rear? Maybe you can swap info?

[FF33rod]

So if #200 springs is the best choice for the front, what's the best choice on the rear? Objective is tight sports car type ride. I have the IRS and FFR provides 9" (well actually seems more like 8.5") #500!!
Just with the little go carting I've done I can tell the FFR setup is teeth rattling...

[NAZ]

I have been out slowly breaking in the car and have twice (horrible roads in Mass) passed over old trenches in the road which have settled. Yesterday I hit one at about 40 mph and the sound would have led you to believe the body broke in half. Both rear tires banged up against the body. I have the stock coil overs on the rear mounted in the lower holes and the coil adjusted as high as it will go, leaving me only about 1-1/2" clearence between the tire and body at the closets point. Tire diameter is 27". I'm wondering if anyone else has changed out the rear coilovers to a longer length that I could get some increased clearance over the tire? Any suggestions?

Before you purchase longer shocks, look for extenders. If you have the QA1 Summit Racing has 1" extenders. But you gotta do something about that tire rub so if it takes taller bump stops, longer shocks or different mounting points pull the trigger and get-r-done.

[shmelty]

So if #200 springs is the best choice for the front, what's the best choice on the rear? Objective is tight sports car type ride. I have the IRS and FFR provides 9" (well actually seems more like 8.5") #500!!
Just with the little go carting I've done I can tell the FFR setup is teeth rattling...

Consensus seems to be #220 up front and #200 in the rear. That is what I putting my build now.

[sethmark]

Naz and I are going to,disagree on this. I’m running 400 front/200 rear. Ride is stable and compliant, handling allows for some body roll. I don’t have a trace of bump steer, and at no point would I consider less spring. I would describe the ride as similar to a Porsche with a track package. Admittedly, I’m running A 16 inch wheel, which does allow for a little bit more sidewall flex.

Handling characteristics are such the turn in gives a little bit of body roll, and then is stable and predictable. If you push past traction, the car will slide nicely and recover with minimal drama. The snap back after sliding will not break your neck from shake side to side, so damping is good.

furthermore, spring rate on the front is not one to one. It’s determined by the inboard cantilever ratio.

[cob427sc]

Not sure which shocks I have. They are the units supplied with my kit a year ago. Going to measure their length and compare to the available QA's which come in several different lengths. I'll also check the Summit catalog for the extenders. Another inch could make all the difference. Thanks evryone for their input. The stock rear springs seem fine to me for ride - a little stiff but not bad, about the same as my 911. The front feel and react like a go kart solid axle! May have to look at something softer up front.