138 replies to this topic

[ozyozyozy]

Geez this is getting a response I wasn't expecting.
Think people are underestimating the Torana, as a race car they are still very competitive especially in its categories (classic), I know number I Toranas that have stuck it to cars that on paper should not be close to. The rules we have to play by in itself limit us, most classes that a Torana would run in can use a max of 16x8 rim, right there is a limiting factor, specially when Porsches of same year are using 17's which opens a much bigger tyre range, even earlier commodore 17x9, that extra width is worth seconds on a track.
I have played with a suspension program and did find moving one pivot about 20mm can drop the roll centre a couple of inches and give about 1.2 degrees camber gain.
Me personally if you want full on modern ride qualitys best thing to do, buy a modern car.

[76lxhatch]

Does anyone have some accurate figures for the lengths and positions of the control arms? All I have at present are rough ones and they give clearly incorrect results.

What does the camber gain look like for a Torana front end with the top arms in the lowest position? Obviously not great but I wouldn't have expected it was all that bad

[ozyozyozy]

No prob i do like seeing whats out there and what people are doing, those sorts of mods on that corvette float my boat.
Iv driven few different race cars, im not going to say any one of them wasnt good, think they all have there merits, but i find my old torana the most rewarding due to the car feels like it has character you have to work at it.

As for camber gain if my measurements were correct or very close , with the upper arm mounts low ther was approx 1.5 degrees, but roll centre raised couple inches, with mounts high ther was less than 1 degree and roll centre much lower.
If you raise the front pivot and lower the rear camber gain is about 1.2 AND roll centre is low.

[76lxhatch]

The front roll centre almost needs raising a bit anyway once the car is lowered, if that's 1.5 degrees from ride height to full compression its not completely awful although a bit more would be nice especially if the spring rates could be softened up a bit with some more travel.

I have an old front cross member with bent outriggers that I cut around the steering rack for power steer mockup, almost curious enough to get out the plasma cutter and see if its possible to make room for a coilover assembly...

[355LX]

https://www.facebook...47898980&type=1

 

For anyone considering a tubular front end, this looks to be the best iteration so far. I know some people are chasing a comprehensive change to the front geometry, but for me I would be content with the fact I would have a greater choice of shocks, the increased adjustability of ride height and camber/castor, and also some possible weight saving.

 

The arms are already certified, and they are in the process of having the cross-member itself certified. 

 

My only concern is the angle of the outriggers, Its a shame they aren't a little more parallel so as to maximise room for 4 into 1 pipes, but otherwise they look great. I especially love they've pushed the lower shock mount out closer to the lower ball joint. 

 

Dave

[76lxhatch]

Weight saving, coilover mounts and adjustable camber for solving issues with lowered cars, but really still only a straight-line proposition from what I can see. Doesn't appear to be much if any caster or any additional adjustment for it, limited camber gain, etc.

Maybe that sounds harsh but I'm not trying to be negative, I think its just that their target market isn't those looking for improved handling. Pick up any Aussie car magazine and it would appear 99% of the market is weekend drag racers so that makes business sense.

[ls2lxhatch]

The upper arms are adjustable via the rod ends so you can have as much camber as you want. Camber gain can be tweaked by adjusting the length of the arm via the rod ends or moving the pivot bar.

 

The caster can be adjusted to a limited extent by adjusting the rod ends until you reach a point where there is too much twist for the nylon bush rod end to accomodate. If you want more caster after that you can shim the pivot bar that same as you do with a standard Torana arm.

 

There is a UC style offset ball joint arm  that is similar to the one below.

 

 

I doubt there is any significant weight saving for drag racing.

Edited by ls2lxhatch, 18 November 2013 - 02:58 PM.

[355LX]

I can appreciate your point of view, but coming from someone who is focused on track, targa and sprint style events this front end appeals to me for the reasons I've listed.

 

The rear end with it's converging 4 link setup and overly high factory roll centre fair enough certainly needs some attention, but the factory setup on the front in my opinion is just fine. For someone like me or i'd imagine 95% of the rest of Torana owners who like to punt their cars around corners, the feel of the car as it is feels pretty good. On top of the classic look of the old Torana and sound, it's also the way it feels on the road that appeals.

 

To say it's only a straight-line proposition in this instance is not fair. This front end open's up the choice of quality, affordable shocks and springs that are otherwise difficult or too expensive to suit to the standard front end. For me personally I have had in mind exactly this front end, with the plan of using something along the lines of Ridetech coil-overs. Add to that the huge choice of spring rates that it would open up for you and it's any but a straight line only proposition. 

 

Mcdonald Bros Racing are primarily focused on the 1/4 mile stuff, but in this case either wittingly or unwittingly they have catered for a wider market. I've watched the other front ends pop up in the market over the past year or two, and this is the first one I would seriously consider picking up. 

 

Edit; Something else to add, the factory pressed steel arms are known to crack under competition conditions. These arms would certainly be more suited, and definitely easier to monitor for cracks/fatigue.

Edited by 355LX, 18 November 2013 - 03:17 PM.

[355LX]

Geez this is getting a response I wasn't expecting.
Think people are underestimating the Torana, as a race car they are still very competitive especially in its categories (classic), I know number I Toranas that have stuck it to cars that on paper should not be close to. The rules we have to play by in itself limit us, most classes that a Torana would run in can use a max of 16x8 rim, right there is a limiting factor, specially when Porsches of same year are using 17's which opens a much bigger tyre range, even earlier commodore 17x9, that extra width is worth seconds on a track.
I have played with a suspension program and did find moving one pivot about 20mm can drop the roll centre a couple of inches and give about 1.2 degrees camber gain.
Me personally if you want full on modern ride qualitys best thing to do, buy a modern car.

 

This is basically the point I was trying to make, regarding the handling quality/performance.

[A9X]

Think people are underestimating the Torana, as a race car they are still very competitive especially in its categories (classic), I know number I Toranas that have stuck it to cars that on paper should not be close to. The rules we have to play by in itself limit us, most classes that a Torana would run in can use a max of 16x8 rim, right there is a limiting factor, specially when Porsches of same year are using 17's which opens a much bigger tyre range, even earlier commodore 17x9, that extra width is worth seconds on a track

not to mention those that are still playing with 15's, and older style springs and shocks.

 

The old girls still do ok.

[76lxhatch]

Camber gain can be tweaked by adjusting the length of the arm via the rod ends or moving the pivot bar.

There doesn't appear to be enough mounting surface to bring them down, the upper and lower arms are basically parallel so I can't see a lot of camber gain in bump. You probably want to dial that out for hard launches with significant front suspension travel at the drag strip anyway.

There is a UC style offset ball joint arm  that is similar to the one below.

That would be nice if it offered more static caster, maybe that's why the cross member doesn't have any allowance for it? Bump steer becomes an issue if its not all designed as a package though.

... but the factory setup on the front in my opinion is just fine.

Sure in many ways, I guess that's part of why it would be hard to open up the wallet for a rebuilt front end that doesn't offer much improvement (for what I look for, of course, your mileage may vary).

 

This front end open's up the choice of quality, affordable shocks and springs that are otherwise difficult or too expensive to suit to the standard front end.

Absolutely that's the biggest advantage, but I'm just not sure this rings true since its the only real advantage for the price tag (aside from purchasing the hardware itself such as the arms and coilovers which you could do separately).

 

The old girls still do ok.

True, just makes me want a lot more from aftermarket upgrades. The budget for parts that make small changes is small.


Again not trying to bag it, just a shame to look at it and see the improvements (for my interests) that could have been made for the exact same price of construction, but haven't. I'll shut up now... ;-)

[ls2lxhatch]

There doesn't appear to be enough mounting surface to bring them down, the upper and lower arms are basically parallel so I can't see a lot of camber gain in bump.

The upper control arm pivot is just a piece of bar roughly 20 x 20 drilled and tapped each end to accept the bolts for the upper control arm rod ends. If you run out of mounting space then it would be easy to make a new pivot bar to raise or lower the arm or to increase caster.

[A9X]

The old girls still do ok.

True, just makes me want a lot more from aftermarket upgrades. The budget for parts that make small changes is small.

 

I'm hearing that

 

Plenty of people are happy to accept aftermarket shortfalls because of low build numbers ( relative ) , but my argument is if you were making a single part, you still do the R & D to make it right.

 

The dollars asked for some of the crap we accept is staggering.

[ls2lxhatch]

The Southern Chassis works IFS was mentioned in this thread and also in this one. Not much detail though.

http://www.gmh-toran...ifs-front-ends/

If you have time some more detailed pictures would be great. I could not find any pictures in your posts.

Edited by ls2lxhatch, 18 November 2013 - 07:39 PM.

[ls2lxhatch]

I didn't think to look in your profile gallery. They are not used that much on this forum.

http://www.gmh-toran...tch/?tab=images