Correct me if I am wrong. Does the 3rd gen f-body spindles, backing plates and calipers work on my 72 GS? If not, does anyone know what, if any, other cars can donate their front disc setup? Thanks, Scott
You can buy basically the entire disc brake set-up for your car from www.opgi.com as well as several other places. I know the F-body from 70-81 will work but you need different A-arms. You can also use the larger rotors from the 71-79 B-body but that requires modifications too.
Hey George, Thanks for the great packaging on the HEI Dist!!!! I am aware of some kits avx, but for 6-800$, I just figured I could go a different route for less $. Do you have anymore info on the f-body swap? Or do you think I should buy the pre-assembled package? Thanks, Scott
You can get some more info on the set-up from Gary Fanning. I think he is on here as Notnss. If not, get on our email list and ask him which vendor he used for his orange car. You can also find a stock set-up, typically for $200-300. All you really need is the spindle w/caliper brkt and backing plate. All other items can be bought new/rebuilt.
I'd stay away from the F-body spindles. I drove my car for several years before doing upgrades on the front end. I did notice right after buying the car that there were NO cotter pins in the front wheel bearings... :jd: but that's a story in itself. Last summer I was putting new pads and rotors on the GS while thinking my spindles were B-body (big car) stuff. Well, the bearings on the new stuff were different from what I took off the car. So back to Car Quest and we find out it's Camaro spindles and rotors. Figure I'd replace ball joints, etc. while I'm at it and lo and behold the bolt part of the new ball-joint won't reach far enough through the spindle to get the castle nut on far enough to get a cotter pin in there... hmmm. So back to CQ for different ball joint, expense of removing the old/new units and installing the new/new units. The installer got one in with his "press" (a vice and a BFH - I HAVE those tools) but we see that it oblonged the hole in the a-arm - correct bolt length but wrong diameter. Back to CQ and they don't have and can't find/don't make the ball joint that will work with the spindle/a-arm combination. Meanwhile I have a ruined a-arm. So I did what I've wanted to do since going tubular on the uppers; I coughed up the cash (read: plastic) to put Global West tubular lowers on there. Sweet setup but spendy - I don't remember exactly how much. Upon further inspection of the "original" ball joint that we dug out of the tire store dumpster I see that the idjit who installed the spindles (pre-'98) simply drilled a new hole in the ball joint bolt to accomodate a cotter pin, since it wasn't long enough to go through the spindle properly. This hole was in the 2nd thread down on the ball joint. No doubt it was the same meathead who didn't bother with a cotter pin at all in the wheel bearings (either side). Yeah, and here I am putting an OD in the car so I can run the open road races at 125mph ou: Short story long, unless someone here can give you EXACT specs on the stock a-arm with f-body spindles I would avoid that. B-body stuff works much better according to Steve at Global West. Give him a call and I'll bet he can set you straight and even sell you the setup if you need. I think they have the spindles and all without having to use their tubular if you're not ready for that. BTW I absolutely love the GW tubular setup. Indescribable the difference in cornering ability and comfort. I have a pal here who restores Corvettes but is building a '66 Chevelle for a guy now. I told him about the GW stuff so he called Steve and was informed of their 200+mph road race Chevelle; my buddy was incredulous, knowing that a-body GM cars are known for lots of things - but handling isn't one of them. He's sold on the stuff now. I haven't even come close to running the GS to it's potential in the twisties but have run it through 45mph corners at no less than 75mph with utter ease. Now I need rear discs and the balls I had when I was young. :eek2: http://www.globalwest.net/
This guy has a stock set-up from a 69 Grand Prix which is exactly the same as the ones on Skylark models. Price is $350 kvrabec@geisinger.edu
I am in total agreement with Gary. Global West is the way to go if you do not care about money or being original. I have no idea what the limits are on my suspension because it needs to be on a race track at the speeds it can handle now. And this is with 15" rubber not rubber bands.
Years ago, I installed F body spindles on my 72 Skylark. HO Racing used to sell a kit that included 2 upper, and 2 lower ball joints, and 2 outer tie rod ends. The kit installed fairly easy. I had to have the lower joints pressed in to my lower control arms, the upper joints bolted in the same as stock A body pieces. Installed the outer tie rod ends, and used spindles from a 79 Firebird. There were a few drawbacks back then. For one, to align it correctly, you needed about 1" worth of shims on the upper control arm shaft bolts. Using an offset shaft eased this somewhat. Also the upper joint stud ended up at a weird angle. This caused a wear problem, but it never caused a problem for me. I also need different brake hoses to mate up with the F-body calipers(metric). All these problems are addressed by the Global West arms, but back then, I managed to make it work. Let me tell you, nothing you do will make as dramatic a difference, as this upgrade. The front of the car will stick like your on rails. The reason for this is that the stock A body front suspension has + camber gain as the suspension compresses. In a turn, the outside tire camber will go positive. The top of the tire will tilt out, and the tire will roll onto its sidewall. This causes understeer. Installing the F body spindles, causes the tire camber to go - as the suspension compresses. The tire stands up straight in a corner, and sticks like glue. Like I said, you wont believe the difference. I actually removed my large sway bar in the rear, because the car would oversteer with thwe big bar, when pushed into a corner. If you have the money, and you want the ultimate in handling, this is the way to go.
Thanks Larry, Doug, George and Gary. I am just trying to make a cruiser on a budget, for the wife and I. I was hoping I could yank something out of a yard for low $. Scott
Scott, On a budget??? I know that story. All you need is a disc brake set up off any 69-72 GM A Body or Monte Carlo/Grand Prix from the junk yard. Just replace the worn components and install. Last set up I purchased was $150. Good luck w/ your project! Regards,
I agree! I did the swap 14 years ago, and just got everything right in 2002! It is not an easy bolt in. Figure on spending $$ for either Hotchkiss or GW upper arms. You will get great handling to boot. For low $$, use a stock set up. For killer cornering, use F body (actually B Body) spindles. The only thing I regret about doing the swap so long ago is that I didn't use B Body spindles!
Gents, I'm doing my '65 Skylark front end right now. I'm putting on B body spindles from an '81 leSabre with Spartan Rod Works upper arms [with the correct shorter arm length for the 1.2-2" drop the B spindles give]. I've refurbed the lower arms with new bushes and turned down Camaro ball joints which match the B spindles. I have a set of '78-'88 Pontiac Grand Prix flexi hoses since they have the banjo ends for the B body calipers. I have a set of '67-9 big block Camaro front springs to go in but don't know what difference this will make to the ride height with the new engine - the 425 dual quad in place of the 225 V6. Difference in engie weight I understand is c.300lbs. The car currently has a very low front ride height [as per my atavar] with 5" only between the bottom of the frame and the ground. OK this is a bit extreme and I will raise it about half an inch becuase I'm getting fouling on the right fender on full lock [must lose some wieght! ] At this ride height and with the V6 the current V6 spring specs are 14.5 inches high, 8.5 turns. Between 9/16th and 5/8th inch wire gauge 19/32th. From a pic of other springs it looks like the originals are 9.5 turns - is this correct? If so the current springs have been cut by one turn. The BB Camaro springs are Height 16 1/4". 10 coil turns. Wire size is 11/16". or in decimals 16.250" high, wire diameter 0.660", measured at just over 5/8th wire when powder coated. I also have some ordinary 67-9 Camaro springs which I might put in temporarily until I get the Nailhead ready. These are 16 1/2" tall and from memory the same 10 turns. Don't know the wire size, sorry and can't get at them easily to measure them [does anyone know??] The question is what l height do I need the ordinary Camaro springs to be to give me the 5.5" bottom of frame to floor ride height with the B body springs and the V6. Does anybody know please [Eaton have confirmed that the '67-9 Camaro springs are the right fitment for the '65 Skylark, it's just a question of height!!] I hope this helps anyone contemplating the swap - definitely use the shortened A -arms otherwise you'll need about 1 inch of shims. Best regards, Happy Thanksgiving and thanks in advance for any advice anyione can give me on the springs I shold use from your collective never-ceasing-to-amaze-me depth of knowledge! Nick
It is real hard to tell what you will happen with springs and ride height. For most of us the turns and wire size are not useful information. What is needed is the spring rate and spring height. The next question is what does a nailhead weigh. I know that the 455 is the lightest big block and we usually use 500 to 600 pound springs. On my 70 I used an S-48 from Global West. I did have a problem with tire clearance but a little hammer work took car of that. I have no problems with clearance on the road with headers. Global West does not have the same part #'s for your car and a Camaro. I think I would find someone like them, Hotchkis or the company that you got your arms from and go with the recomendations they make. Link to GW www.globalwest.net
Third-Gen F-body spindles will not work. 82-92 Thirdgens use Macpherson front suspension. There are no upper ball joints or control arms. the spindle is bolted to a strut that it mounted above the wheel. The suspension works really well, much better than then the doble control arm setup. The rotor sare really, really small too, somewhere around 10-10.5 inches. way too small
Doug, 436'd skylark, Thanks for the info. BTW I'm using B-body spindles not F body. part numbers 371676 RH and 371676 LH and caliper part #'s K18007151 N GM for the right and 18002328 GM for the left. Something makes me think they may have been from a Canadian car since I knew the car before we broke it. It had a block heater and if it's Canadian I'm a bit worried it may be metric fittings on the brake pipes. To clarify on the springs; I'm not sure on the poundage of the originals and they have either been cut or are sagging horribly. [It drives OK actually]. The replacements plan to be either the 67-9 SBC Camaro at 16 1/2" height and 297 lbs or the BBC Camaro springs at 16 1/4" height and c.350 lbs. Would this help you any with advising me on ride height? The 425 Dual Quad Nailhead I'm told weighs about the same as a big block Chevy at 685 lbs. The 225ci Buick V6 weights 375 lbs 310 lbs difference about twice!!! Apparrently this will compress the springs another 1 to 1.5 inches I'm also told. Do you guys agree? Doug, if your springs are a true 500-600lbs then they must be almost solid circuit racing springs! I plan to put them on tomorrow and will take some digital pictures and post them here [if I can figure out how to resize then from about 300kb and post them!]. I got the original idea for the swap from Chevelles.net and it seems from you guys it's a pretty popular swap in Buick land. The rears of the front fenders have been slightly dressed back and I do plan to dress them back further before fitting them back to the car. I'll call Spartan [who I got the upper arms from] when they open and also check with them for advice as you suggest. best regards & thanks Nick
Nick, Not sure how each company rates springs. I do know that on our oval track street stocks we used 1100# right front and 900# left front. This was on 3300# cars with small block chevies (had a Buick body though!) I could be wrong on the spring rates but at one time GW had the spring rates listed and I thought mine were in the low 500# range. Basically I went with the springs GW recommended and have been very happy with the results. You are correct about not wanting the suspension lowered too much. With the tall spindles you drop about an inch a half. Go to low and your suspension geometry will be to negative and handling will go as well as the clearance problems. My car is put away for the winter or I would check my ride height for you. It was about 5 1/2 inches front and 6 rear. This is much better than stock. I think stock called for more height in the back. Will check on a few of these items if I get a chance.
Doug Scott and all, Apologies I've just realised I've hijacked the original post so I will start a new one. best regards Nick
