Author Topic: Front sway bar for "better" handling  (Read 1899 times)

Offline ntstlgl1970

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
  • T a c o c a t
Front sway bar for "better" handling
« on: August 12, 2009 - 06:33:41 PM »
for a BB car, would you go with a 1 1/4 bar or 1 1/8" with the appropriate sized rear bar (3/4 or 7/8") of course.
I'm aware of the Hellwig, Firm Feel, Addco and Hotchkis - any other options? Or if you have a source for race car stuff (splined tube etc.) could you post it?
70 Cuda, 7.0L Gen-III Hemi, Viper T56 w/9310 gearset, 3.91's, Megasquirt MS3x v3.57, Innovate wideband, Firm Feel upper arms, torsion bars, springs and strut rods, QA1 DA shocks. I did everything on this car except the fancy paint stuff and I drive it...and I can't seem to stop messing with it....




Offline 72bluNblu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1836
Re: Front sway bar for "better" handling
« Reply #1 on: August 12, 2009 - 09:38:02 PM »
I'd go larger with a BB, but it also depends a lot on the rest of your set up. What size torsion bars are you running? Which rear springs? Planned use of the car?

If you're running stock mopar stuff even the 1 1/4" bar shouldn't be a problem as far as effective spring rate is concerned.

Offline brads70

  • C-C.com Expert
  • ********
  • Posts: 18747
Re: Front sway bar for "better" handling
« Reply #2 on: August 12, 2009 - 10:31:22 PM »
I am planning to someday get a spare k-frame and experiment with sway bars . The old Chrysler kit cars used sway bars like what you mentioned.
Check out these sites! Should give you some idea's!
http://www.schroedersteering.com/HomePage.html
http://www.mopardealer.com/chrysler.htm
Brad
1970 Challenger 451stroker/4L60 auto OD
Barrie,Ontario,Canada
Proud to own one of the best cars ever made!!!!!

My restoration thread 
http://www.cuda-challenger.com/cc/index.php?topic=59072.0
 My handling upgrade post
http://www.cuda-challenger.com/cc/index.php?topic=73985.0

Offline HP2

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 4478
Re: Front sway bar for "better" handling
« Reply #3 on: August 12, 2009 - 10:49:47 PM »
Generally yes, a bigger s-bar with softer t-bars would provide good road manners with good handling. On a basically stock suspension, a 1.25 front with a .75 frame hung or 1.0 axle hung bar wouldn't be a bad match up. It may be a bit tail happy depending on whether you use XHD or SS springs. But there are also a number of factors to consider when doing that mix and match. T-bar size, percentage of front weight, total weight, front wheel rates and rear wheel rates can all have an impact on the sway bar.  There also can be multiple ways of achieving balance of the chassis with differing combinations.

For example, on my car with my choice of t-bars I needed to either use a 1" front bar with no rear bar and heavier leafs or a 1.125 bar with a .75 rear bar and lighter leafs. Both achieved the same roll couple percentage. I  did the calcs on a 1.25 front bar, but it required a pretty decent step up in rear leaf rates or a drop in front t-bar rate for me to keep things balanced. But I also have a small block with a relatively heavy car for an E body.

Speedway Engineernig also offers tubular sway bars. http://www.1speedway.com/
« Last Edit: August 12, 2009 - 10:51:23 PM by HP2 »

Offline ntstlgl1970

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
  • T a c o c a t
Re: Front sway bar for "better" handling
« Reply #4 on: August 13, 2009 - 02:05:47 AM »
At this point the only thing I have is the car is a stock front sway bar and stock torsion bars. I have super stock springs in the back but I intend to replace those with something else with very little to no arch. I am planning to use the QA1 double adjustable shocks front and rear but other than that everything is open. Going with a "light" torsion bar (maybe a 1.06"?) and "light" rear springs along with heavier sway bars would be a good combination for me. I built another car with a large front bar coupled with heavier springs in the rear and no rear bar (it was an early mustang, not that it matters) per global west's recommendation. I really liked the way the car handled, but the ride was a little harsh (had konis in that one). Pretty sure I don't want to go as far as running delrin bushings all around like I did in the mustang.
70 Cuda, 7.0L Gen-III Hemi, Viper T56 w/9310 gearset, 3.91's, Megasquirt MS3x v3.57, Innovate wideband, Firm Feel upper arms, torsion bars, springs and strut rods, QA1 DA shocks. I did everything on this car except the fancy paint stuff and I drive it...and I can't seem to stop messing with it....

Offline autoxcuda

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 572
    • Spring Fling
Re: Front sway bar for "better" handling
« Reply #5 on: August 13, 2009 - 03:52:41 AM »
At this point the only thing I have is the car is a stock front sway bar and stock torsion bars. I have super stock springs in the back but I intend to replace those with something else with very little to no arch. I am planning to use the QA1 double adjustable shocks front and rear but other than that everything is open. Going with a "light" torsion bar (maybe a 1.06"?) and "light" rear springs along with heavier sway bars would be a good combination for me. I built another car with a large front bar coupled with heavier springs in the rear and no rear bar (it was an early mustang, not that it matters) per global west's recommendation. I really liked the way the car handled, but the ride was a little harsh (had konis in that one). Pretty sure I don't want to go as far as running delrin bushings all around like I did in the mustang.

I would call the 1.06 torsion bars are not "light" . I'd equate them to about a 750 lbs spring or a little more in a 66-70 Mustang or Camaro.

The hollow sway bars that Hotchkis and Hellwig makes are have slightly less rate than a solid sway bar. But they weigh 5-7 lbs less. When you get to a 1 1/8 or 1 1/4" sway bars, they are very heavy. Both of those brands offer adjustable rear sway bars. I really like the idea of an adjustable rear bar and hollow bars.

Hotchkis offers rear leaf spring setups for handling with a stiff rigid front segment to resist wrap up and axle hop under braking. They claim their springs are lighter as a whole than a stock set. Hotchkis also found that moving the front spring eye up reduced rear roll steer. They sell a front spring hanger with a lowering postion. Dr Diff also sells a lowered hanger that is moves the springs inward for more tire clearance.
Spring Fling XXX
April 22 & 23 2016

at Woodley Park Van Nuys, CA.
Special 30th Anniversary Event!
600+ Mopars, 300+ swappers,  50+ manf. midways.
Thrus: Mopar Track Day at Willow Springs Raceway
Fri: Caravan & Cruise
Sat: Mopar Cruise-In

Offline 72bluNblu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1836
Re: Front sway bar for "better" handling
« Reply #6 on: August 13, 2009 - 01:40:12 PM »
I would call the 1.06 torsion bars are not "light" . I'd equate them to about a 750 lbs spring or a little more in a 66-70 Mustang or Camaro.

The hollow sway bars that Hotchkis and Hellwig makes are have slightly less rate than a solid sway bar. But they weigh 5-7 lbs less. When you get to a 1 1/8 or 1 1/4" sway bars, they are very heavy. Both of those brands offer adjustable rear sway bars. I really like the idea of an adjustable rear bar and hollow bars.

Hotchkis offers rear leaf spring setups for handling with a stiff rigid front segment to resist wrap up and axle hop under braking. They claim their springs are lighter as a whole than a stock set. Hotchkis also found that moving the front spring eye up reduced rear roll steer. They sell a front spring hanger with a lowering postion. Dr Diff also sells a lowered hanger that is moves the springs inward for more tire clearance.


I would agree, 1.06" bars are not "light". I run 1.12" torsion bars on my Challenger and had to get drop spindles to get the ride height right. Probably not an issue with 1.06" bars with a BB as the nose will be heavier, I have a 318/904 in my car so I should be a few hundred pounds lighter with the engine combo. Then again, my car is a '72 so its probably heavier to start with. I'd think you *should* be safe with 1.06" bars unless you really want to put the nose in the weeds.

What do you plan to do with the car? Street driving, autocross, road race? I'm not one to talk, I'd put the 1.12" bars in my car again if I had the chance to do it over, but just be aware that there might be other things you need to do if you go really big. Also, I like my cars to ride pretty stiff, if this is just a street driver, you may not want to even go 1.06". I'm sure there's a lot of people that wouldn't like how my car rides on the street.

Offline ntstlgl1970

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
  • T a c o c a t
Re: Front sway bar for "better" handling
« Reply #7 on: August 13, 2009 - 05:26:06 PM »
I understand that the 1.06 bar isn't light. I was commenting on HP2's reply about a heavy spring, light swaybar vs light spring heavy swaybar setup. I have a 440 in my car, so I'm leaning towards a heavier torsion bar vs. what you would run with a small block but it may not be considered a "heavy" bar with a big block. Thanks for everyone's input.
70 Cuda, 7.0L Gen-III Hemi, Viper T56 w/9310 gearset, 3.91's, Megasquirt MS3x v3.57, Innovate wideband, Firm Feel upper arms, torsion bars, springs and strut rods, QA1 DA shocks. I did everything on this car except the fancy paint stuff and I drive it...and I can't seem to stop messing with it....

moparniac

  • Guest
Re: Front sway bar for "better" handling
« Reply #8 on: August 16, 2009 - 06:55:53 PM »
I had .960 bars in my challenger wit 1 1/8th rtorsion. it rode real nice.....  :working: