Author Topic: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings  (Read 4482 times)

Offline cudabob496

  • Sr. Resident
  • ******
  • Posts: 8024
72 Cuda, owned 25 years. 496, with ported Stage VI heads, .625 in solid roller, 254/258 at .050, 3500 stall, 3.91 rear. 850 Holley DP, Reverse manual valve body.

1999 Trans Am, LS1, heads, cam, headers, stall, etc! Love to surprise the rice rockets with this one. They seem so confident, then it's "what the heck just happened?"

2011 Kawasaki Z1000




Offline wantone

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 660
  • (O O {]{]{]||[}[}[} O O)
Re: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings
« Reply #1 on: March 23, 2016 - 07:38:30 PM »
I'll trust you after you report how awesome they are!
(O O {]{]{]||[}[}[} O O)
Want one?  Got one! ... finally

Offline brads70

  • C-C.com Expert
  • ********
  • Posts: 18747
Re: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings
« Reply #2 on: March 23, 2016 - 07:44:32 PM »
I'm running them, very happy with them but be advised you WILL need good shocks ,something adjustable as they react much quicker than steel springs. I used double adjustable QA1 shocks.  I found 175 to lite might be ok for a SB  though? ( I'm using a BB) , I replaced them with 225 lb rate ( expensive mistake!) You will also require different spring hangers as the springs are not standard e-body length.
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 cudabob496

  • Sr. Resident
  • ******
  • Posts: 8024
Re: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings
« Reply #3 on: March 23, 2016 - 08:21:48 PM »
I'm running them, very happy with them but be advised you WILL need good shocks ,something adjustable as they react much quicker than steel springs. I used double adjustable QA1 shocks.  I found 175 to lite might be ok for a SB  though? ( I'm using a BB) , I replaced them with 225 lb rate ( expensive mistake!) You will also require different spring hangers as the springs are not standard e-body length.

thanks. QA1 has an 18 way adjustable shock. Will that work?
72 Cuda, owned 25 years. 496, with ported Stage VI heads, .625 in solid roller, 254/258 at .050, 3500 stall, 3.91 rear. 850 Holley DP, Reverse manual valve body.

1999 Trans Am, LS1, heads, cam, headers, stall, etc! Love to surprise the rice rockets with this one. They seem so confident, then it's "what the heck just happened?"

2011 Kawasaki Z1000

Offline cudabob496

  • Sr. Resident
  • ******
  • Posts: 8024
Re: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings
« Reply #4 on: March 23, 2016 - 08:24:58 PM »
I'm running them, very happy with them but be advised you WILL need good shocks ,something adjustable as they react much quicker than steel springs. I used double adjustable QA1 shocks.  I found 175 to lite might be ok for a SB  though? ( I'm using a BB) , I replaced them with 225 lb rate ( expensive mistake!) You will also require different spring hangers as the springs are not standard e-body length.

so, if I ran the 175's, would i just be bouncing down the road? what does it mean to to be too light?
72 Cuda, owned 25 years. 496, with ported Stage VI heads, .625 in solid roller, 254/258 at .050, 3500 stall, 3.91 rear. 850 Holley DP, Reverse manual valve body.

1999 Trans Am, LS1, heads, cam, headers, stall, etc! Love to surprise the rice rockets with this one. They seem so confident, then it's "what the heck just happened?"

2011 Kawasaki Z1000

Offline cudabob496

  • Sr. Resident
  • ******
  • Posts: 8024
Re: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings
« Reply #5 on: March 23, 2016 - 08:25:44 PM »
do you still have the 175s ?
72 Cuda, owned 25 years. 496, with ported Stage VI heads, .625 in solid roller, 254/258 at .050, 3500 stall, 3.91 rear. 850 Holley DP, Reverse manual valve body.

1999 Trans Am, LS1, heads, cam, headers, stall, etc! Love to surprise the rice rockets with this one. They seem so confident, then it's "what the heck just happened?"

2011 Kawasaki Z1000

Offline cudabob496

  • Sr. Resident
  • ******
  • Posts: 8024
Re: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings
« Reply #6 on: March 23, 2016 - 10:19:30 PM »
I'll trust you after you report how awesome they are!

don't trust me. do your research and trust yourself.
:)
72 Cuda, owned 25 years. 496, with ported Stage VI heads, .625 in solid roller, 254/258 at .050, 3500 stall, 3.91 rear. 850 Holley DP, Reverse manual valve body.

1999 Trans Am, LS1, heads, cam, headers, stall, etc! Love to surprise the rice rockets with this one. They seem so confident, then it's "what the heck just happened?"

2011 Kawasaki Z1000

Offline brads70

  • C-C.com Expert
  • ********
  • Posts: 18747
Re: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings
« Reply #7 on: March 23, 2016 - 10:24:18 PM »
thanks. QA1 has an 18 way adjustable shock. Will that work?

Yep.
so, if I ran the 175's, would i just be bouncing down the road? what does it mean to to be too light?
It depends on what torsion bars your using. I'm using 1.120 and have 1.180" yet to install . Corner weights will also effect your choices here. BB or SB?

do you still have the 175s ?
No I sold them.
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 cudabob496

  • Sr. Resident
  • ******
  • Posts: 8024
Re: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings
« Reply #8 on: March 23, 2016 - 11:15:06 PM »
Yep. It depends on what torsion bars your using. I'm using 1.120 and have 1.180" yet to install . Corner weights will also effect your choices here. BB or SB?
No I sold them.

Looks like my torsion bars are about .95 inches. Probably what came with a 72 Cuda.
Is that a problem??
72 Cuda, owned 25 years. 496, with ported Stage VI heads, .625 in solid roller, 254/258 at .050, 3500 stall, 3.91 rear. 850 Holley DP, Reverse manual valve body.

1999 Trans Am, LS1, heads, cam, headers, stall, etc! Love to surprise the rice rockets with this one. They seem so confident, then it's "what the heck just happened?"

2011 Kawasaki Z1000

Offline cudabob496

  • Sr. Resident
  • ******
  • Posts: 8024
Re: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings
« Reply #9 on: March 23, 2016 - 11:16:06 PM »
Yep. It depends on what torsion bars your using. I'm using 1.120 and have 1.180" yet to install . Corner weights will also effect your choices here. BB or SB?
No I sold them.

Don't understand the subject of "corner weights"
72 Cuda, owned 25 years. 496, with ported Stage VI heads, .625 in solid roller, 254/258 at .050, 3500 stall, 3.91 rear. 850 Holley DP, Reverse manual valve body.

1999 Trans Am, LS1, heads, cam, headers, stall, etc! Love to surprise the rice rockets with this one. They seem so confident, then it's "what the heck just happened?"

2011 Kawasaki Z1000

Offline brads70

  • C-C.com Expert
  • ********
  • Posts: 18747
Re: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings
« Reply #10 on: March 24, 2016 - 02:25:54 PM »
Don't understand the subject of "corner weights"

It's a balance thing, heavier springs are needed for heavier cars, front and rear weights also need to be balanced. Eg. 225 rear leaf springs wouldn't be favourable with /6 diameter torsion bars. ( Well unless the motor was mounted towards the rear enough  :D )  Driver preference is also a factor, me if having to choose  I prefer the rear end to be slightly loose over the front end pushing. Every E-Body pushes bad in stock form.  Shocks also play a big part. Handling is not just one thing it's the combination of parts chosen .   
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 wantone

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 660
  • (O O {]{]{]||[}[}[} O O)
Re: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings
« Reply #11 on: March 24, 2016 - 02:45:34 PM »
don't trust me. do your research and trust yourself.
:)
You're answer is my research hahaha.  You've got a cuda like I do.  I've only get the money to do it right the first time LOL
(O O {]{]{]||[}[}[} O O)
Want one?  Got one! ... finally

Offline cudabob496

  • Sr. Resident
  • ******
  • Posts: 8024
Re: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings
« Reply #12 on: March 24, 2016 - 04:01:32 PM »
I see, I'm a guinea pig! A lab rat!  lol
72 Cuda, owned 25 years. 496, with ported Stage VI heads, .625 in solid roller, 254/258 at .050, 3500 stall, 3.91 rear. 850 Holley DP, Reverse manual valve body.

1999 Trans Am, LS1, heads, cam, headers, stall, etc! Love to surprise the rice rockets with this one. They seem so confident, then it's "what the heck just happened?"

2011 Kawasaki Z1000

Offline cudabob496

  • Sr. Resident
  • ******
  • Posts: 8024
Re: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings
« Reply #13 on: March 24, 2016 - 04:04:11 PM »
It's a balance thing, heavier springs are needed for heavier cars, front and rear weights also need to be balanced. Eg. 225 rear leaf springs wouldn't be favourable with /6 diameter torsion bars. ( Well unless the motor was mounted towards the rear enough  :D )  Driver preference is also a factor, me if having to choose  I prefer the rear end to be slightly loose over the front end pushing. Every E-Body pushes bad in stock form.  Shocks also play a big part. Handling is not just one thing it's the combination of parts chosen .   
OK, thanks, if I just drive in a straight line most the time, and floor it from the line, would you
still recommend the 225s over the 175s.  I found out Mopar heavy duty leafs are 160 lb/in.
72 Cuda, owned 25 years. 496, with ported Stage VI heads, .625 in solid roller, 254/258 at .050, 3500 stall, 3.91 rear. 850 Holley DP, Reverse manual valve body.

1999 Trans Am, LS1, heads, cam, headers, stall, etc! Love to surprise the rice rockets with this one. They seem so confident, then it's "what the heck just happened?"

2011 Kawasaki Z1000

Offline brads70

  • C-C.com Expert
  • ********
  • Posts: 18747
Re: Chrysler Composite Monoleaf - Big weight savings
« Reply #14 on: March 24, 2016 - 04:24:24 PM »
OK, thanks, if I just drive in a straight line most the time, and floor it from the line, would you
still recommend the 225s over the 175s.  I found out Mopar heavy duty leafs are 160 lb/in.

I'd say for what you want 175 or less ?  I'd question whether the weight savings is worth it in your case for the expense? Also your car will sit low, not up higher like a drag car usually does?   I've had 4 different sets of leaf springs on my car in 5 years "experimenting" that gets expensive....
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