Gents, I'm doing my '65 Skylark front end right now with B-body spindles from an '81 Le Sabre, Spartan Rod Works upper A Arms designed for B-body spindles [with the correct shorter arm length for the 1.2-2" drop the B spindles give], refurbed original lower arms with new MOOG bushes and turned down Camaro ball joints from Spartan Rod Works which apparently match the bottom socket of the B-body spindle. I wanted advice from you all about if Im doing things right. Also Ive had some problems getting the Spartan upper A-arms to fit right and wanted to know if anyone else had similar problems with Spartan Rod Works, Hotchkiss, Global West or similar A-arms designed for use with B-body spindles. Ive just realised Ive hijacked Scotts thread on F body spindles 3 posts ago [v sorry Scott!] and think it only fair and decent to set up a new thread of my own. So below summarised the position form the hijacked posts and below some new info and questions for you: I'm using B-body spindles not F body. Part numbers 371676 RH and 371676 LH and calliper 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 but the spindles went on OK. I have a set of '67-9 big block Camaro front springs to go in to stiffen the front end up and support the weight of the bigger engine but didnt know what difference this will make to the ride height with the new engine. The difference in engine weight I understand is 290 lbs. 685 lbs for the 425 dual quad vs. 375 lbs for the 225 V6. I'm told this weight will compress the springs another 1 to 1.5 inches. The car currently has a very low front ride height [as per my avatar] with 5" only between the bottom of the frame and the ground. OK I know this is a bit extreme but I like although I plan to raise it about half an inch because of safety and Im getting fouling on one fender on full lock [athough I could dress it back]. Of the springs I have, my options are: The current V6 springs 14 3/4 high, 8.5 turns. Between 9/16th and 5/8th inch wire gauge 19/32th? And unknown poundage. They may have been chopped [or just sagged hugely] - from a pic of other springs it looks like the originals are 9.5 turns - is this correct? Big block Camaro springs are 16 1/2" high. 10 turns. Wire size is 11/16". Or in decimals 0.660", measured at just over 5/8th wire when powder coated and 327lbs. Standard 67-9 Camaro springs 15" tall and from memory the same 10 turns. Same wire size as the V6 Buick; between 9/16th and 5/8th inch wire gauge 19/32th? and 297lbs. 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 and then the Nailhead? BTW - Doug, if your springs are a true 500-600lbs then they must be almost solid circuit racing springs! I don know spring rates are quoted differently. Mike at Eton Springs advises me that the Camaro springs have the right diameters and end and will fit. It is just a question of poundage for length. I know Ford quote heavy duty Mustang springs at 650- 800lbs that are less heavy duty than the GM 350lb springs. By comparison on the rating GM truck springs - for a C10 for example - are only rated a 400lbs and are absolutely solid. You wouldn't want those on your front end or it would skitter all over the place! This is why I like to go on wire gauge, diameters, turns and height. This way you can figure out the total length of the spring unwound to determine its comparative strength to another spring - provided the wire gauge is the same and the tempering is the same] on the last point - is it - o No: ] Anyway: Mike was going to recommend setting me up with 380lb springs but said the 327lbs big block Camaro springs would be enough to stop any body roll. BTW for reference the Z28 springs are 380 lbs on the same equivalent rating. Does this help you? Anyway I put the front clip on yesterday and have a few observations: I used the Standard Camaro springs at 15" high. I used these because I couldn't get the compressor onto the big block Camaro springs. Rather than kill myself with the jack and crossed fingers method of compression I thought I'd try the mid size standard Camaro springs to see what it looked like. I see that in my disassembly notes I noted the original right spring seemed longer. I also noted that one of the standard Camaro spring was longer than the other and one end of the shorter spring looked like it had been cut off and the coils didnt match up from one end but did from the other. So I shortened the longer spring one half turn to match taking care to trim the same end. Not sure of I did the right thing. Once the new suspension was on both sides of the car displayed exactly the same standing height of 6 1/2" frame to floor clearance on both sides, absolutely no difference and free hanging height of 10 1/2" frame to floor clearance both sides. Did I miss something on road camber here? !! Interestingly the B-body spindles didn't produce a drop in ride height - but upped it 1". Granted I have the front sheet metal off so I will weight the front end down and see what the real drop is. Will connecting the roll bar make a difference to up down stiffness - shouldn't do? The lower arm was parallel to the ground, which is v good. Pointing up at the outer end is v bad news if something goes pop. When fitted without the roll bar and the suspension just loosely bolted [including the ends of the custom Spartan Arms loosely torqued] and no roll bar or steering arms it was very bouncy indeed. Very very bouncy, never seen such bounce! The Spartan upper A-arms didn't fit properly. The circular bushing on the ends of the offset cross shafts bound so much on the top frame mounts that I couldn't get them to sit snug down onto the top mounting bracket. This I feel just shouldn't have happenned on a custom designed unit. When I called them they said it was becuase they used the standard length, now offset, cross shafts, to try reversing the arm and see how it is after alignment. I needed to reverse the offset cross shafts and put in at least one shim to avoid them binding and even then one rear bushing wore the paint away on the frame and arm. This worries me since I think the arms and shafts should have been longer. I think these A-arms are primarily made for Chevelles but are / aren't the front frame uppers suspension points all the same for all GM A Bodies in '65 or is there a difference in BOP and Chevelle? The old A-arm of course is pressed so there is loads of frame-bracket clearance and the original suspension had 5 shims on the front left, 3 shims on the rear left and none on the right [- possibly for road camber adjustment - remember we drive on the 'other' side of the road here in the UK!]. It's still a LHD car so I'm sitting on the kerbside. Has anyone else had any difficulty getting Spartan Rod Works upper A-arms for B-body spindles to fit properly? Or Hotchkiss or Global West for that matter, since they are similar in concept if not in execution? I noted the lower arm bolts went in rearwards on the left side and front facing on the right side. No problem except that I could not get the right rear lower bolt to go in from the rear of the car and point forwards because of the curvature of the frame downwards after the rear suspension pick up point [heck knows how I got it out!!]. So I put it in rear facing. Now on the right I have the rear bolt front facing and the rear bolt front facing. Is this a problem do you think? Whoever said anything about discs reducing the unsprung weight didn't compare by drum hubs and the B-body disc hub. It must weigh 40-45lbs whereas the drum hub [albeit smaller] is probably only about 25-30lbs! :shock: And finally all in all when on it looks real pretty! Wow, sorry for the long post but hope you can follow it and also others can provide some advice tips on what I have done wrong/ right. Many thanks, best regards and have a good weekend :TU: Nick
Nick Can only tell you about Global West stuff. But here are my experiences. Went with GW tubular uppers, rubber bushings, GW springs, Helwig 1 3\16 bar, spindles out of a chevy police car, stock lower arms from an El Cameno, and a steering box from a Jeep. I had no problems with binding or allignment. GW sends a billet offset shaft with their uppers. Without the offset shaft I do not think the uppers would have aligned properly. I only have 3 small shims total for alignment. All the suspension parts with the GM A bodies are interchangable so stuff for a Chevelle should work fine. GM did not make a lot of different chassis parts back then. Hope this will work for you because the ride and handling is worth the effort. Doug
Doug, Many thanks - I'll keep persevering! I guess it may all turn out OK whn I get it aligned. best regards Nick
I also have GW full front suspension with upper and lower control arms and spring they sold me. They are suppose to be the medium spring rate of 500+lbs. I had this set of control arms on two separate cars and both had problems with alignment. The perches were to far in or the control arm is too short. With all the shims out it still did not align to GW specs. I got it as close as I could. I also have either some type of binding in the front or the rear. The car sits up in one corner too much giving the car a lean with the driver side being lower. I have not been able to figure it out yet. Additionally the front end when pushed down stays down. I have adjustable shocks and think the reboud might be set to slow but I am still working on it. When I installed the arms I did not notice any bind but think I may have some. I will not be able to pursue this much more till warmer weather comes back. They also sent me the wrong springs orginally and the car sat 2-1/2" lower then stock. It looked really good but the lower A-arms were not parallel to the ground and additionaly the headers were only about 2" off the ground. A little too lower for street use. I wish I could help you more but I am still trying to sort out my own problems. Mark
Mark, Doug, Interesting experiences! Doug, youir's\ seems fine and mark's seems similar to my own. Doug, A question? What car was this on - the '70 GSX? Which way round dod you put the offset shafts. I had to rotate mine thru 180 degrees to get them even to mount up to the top perch. So the offset was pulling the mounting points of the shaft in further from the centre line. [Are you with me?] Also I've noticed it is both the back mounting of the arms that is binding - fronts are clear. Maybe the holes are slotted - I'll have to see - although that looks a little dangereous to me. If I try to take some metal away from where it is binding [and only a tiny tiny amount] is it the safest to take it away from the edge of the bushing holder or the perch. I'l thinking taking down the edge of the arm slightly is best since it's thicker metal and would only be taking a chamfer off the edge of the bushing holder. best regards nick
The BIG problem with the "tall spindle conversion" with B body spindles and tublar upper arms like Global West is the bump steer. The B body spindles move the steering arms into a poor geometry position that causes the bump steer. It is really bad from a geometry perspective. Most folks who have done this conversion say it's not bad. That's due to the fact that their car does drive MUCH better than the stock suspension of which they are acustomed to. If you change the front end again to one with a total/proper geometry, the car will again drive that much better. Like a lot of bolt-on modifications, it is a compromise using some aftermarket and some factory parts to arrive at something better but certainly not BEST!
