How can I get my chally to handle as good as my 86 Toyota pickup?

[Chlngrcrzy]

 

[Katfish]

Here ya go

[HP2]

I have a 73 challenger, 340, 6 pak, TCI tranny, and I am VERY interested in this thread. I am in the process of restoration, and now I am ready to do suspension upgrades/refurb. My challenger has the handling of a ski boat. My question is that since I have the small block, can I take the above advice/suggestions as being applicable to my situation as well, and I would like to stay with 15 inch wheels unless there is a compelling reason to goto 17's.

Thanks;

Yes, this would work for you. The variation I would suggest is 1.12 for small blocks and 1.16 for big blocks. XV's extensive research on the four post rig and road course showed this combo to be the best all around combination of performance feel, handling capability, and ride comfort. Interestingly enough, this is also the base line set up Chrysler recommended on the kit car racing program over 35 years ago.

[autoxcuda]

I think it's really important to get the offset Moog 7103 bushings. AND really important to run an performance handling alignment. Run:

1 degree negative camber
4-6 degrees postive caster
1/16 toe in

I run
1.5 degree negative camber
4.5 degrees postive caster
1/16 toe in

[priderocks]

Do you still need the Moog offset bushings if you had tubular control arms? Do the tubulars take into account whatever the Moogs do on factory control arms?

[ntstlgl1970]

If the tubular arms are marketed as allowing extra caster adjustment, I would say you can use the stock style bushings.
I run the offset bushings as in the diagram, 6 degrees positive caster with a little spread to compensate for road crown, .25 degree negative camber and 1/16 toe in. Even with stock springs and torsion bars, the way the car (mine anyway) drives is much nicer after the alignment.
If you are running rubber bushings, it helps the ride quality to loosen the lower control arm shaft nut before setting the ride height, set the height where you want it, then jounce the car so it settles, then tighten the nut to spec.

Probably the hardest part of this is finding an alignment shop that will set the car the way you want it and do it right.

[LAA66]

If the tubular arms are marketed as allowing extra caster adjustment, I would say you can use the stock style bushings.
I run the offset bushings as in the diagram, 6 degrees positive caster with a little spread to compensate for road crown, .25 degree negative camber and 1/16 toe in. Even with stock springs and torsion bars, the way the car (mine anyway) drives is much nicer after the alignment.
If you are running rubber bushings, it helps the ride quality to loosen the lower control arm shaft nut before setting the ride height, set the height where you want it, then jounce the car so it settles, then tighten the nut to spec.

Probably the hardest part of this is finding an alignment shop that will set the car the way you want it and do it right.

 How much setback on the caster for road crown, and which side? Thx

[ntstlgl1970]

I think I added a 1/2 degree positive on the driver's side. It's been a while since I did the alignment.
Pretty sure the rule of thumb is the car will pull to the side of least positive camber and most positive caster. I just use caster spread to compensate since caster isn't a tire wearing angle (for the most part) like I was taught in skool.

[Roppa440]

This all sounds a bit "over the top" just to get an E-Body to handle as well as a pick-up truck!

Just start with as much positive caster as the stock set-up will allow you (rear bushings IN max and front bushings OUT max) and then turn the front bushings in just enough to give you 1/2 a degree negative camber. Add just a touch ( 2.5mm ) of toe IN and away you go.

99% of the cars on this forum will drive on the street just fine like that as long as all the suspension busings are in good order (or poly).

The set-up for a race circuit is completely different. LOTS of caster (like 5 degrees) and 1 degree negative camber. Usually you would set the toe a little OUT on a circuit car.

[rusty dodge]

I agree with Roppa440. I was able to get enough caster with the stock stuff. Before XV started selling their kits, rarely did anyone recommend any T-bars over .96 either. I didnt do the offset bushings or tube arms, just replaced with a poly bushing kit and new moog components. Big front sway bar, and 17" wheels. I like the handling of the car now.

[brads70]

Good info guys Thanks!!

[LAA66]

 Maybe something is bent on mine then. It's about 50k on the second set of front end components and all we could get was a 0.1 degree positive caster (matched side to side). We even cheated the camber a bit to get there.

[autoxcuda]

Maybe something is bent on mine then. It's about 50k on the second set of front end components and all we could get was a 0.1 degree positive caster (matched side to side). We even cheated the camber a bit to get there.

Did you have poly strut bushings. If so read here: http://users.erols.com/mathewg/bushings.html That will help a little, but IMHO not make of you 3 degrees of postive caster.

The patience and skill of the alignment guy makes a BIG difference.

[Chryco Psycho]

I generally set the caster to max so the front all the way out & the rear all the way in & then adjust for the camber & reduce the caster as little as possible 
 

[HP2]

This all sounds a bit "over the top" just to get an E-Body to handle as well as a pick-up truck!

I agree with Roppa440. I was able to get enough caster with the stock stuff. Before XV started selling their kits, rarely did anyone recommend any T-bars over .96 either.

Sure, you can make incremental improvements to make things better than stock. I'm sure that is the way to build engines too, right. First an intake and a carb, then a set of headers, then a cam. No? A killer engine is built with a goal in mind and the correct parts right out of the box to make things easier and better matched? Well, why not do the same with the suspension. If your going to dig into it, give your car legs to match its lungs. Its a muscle car, give it a muscle suspension to go along with its killer engine.

I also have to say that mopar handling has only become a widespread hot topic around the last 5 years or so. Prior to that, the very very few people who did build handling mopars regularly jumped into bars sizes around the 1.18 to 1.22 range without hesitation. Mopar even recommended sizes in this range as the baseline for performance handling in the old kit car program. The conservative classification of bars by mopar performance is 35 years old and has typically kept most buyers conservative because very, very, few people know what a wheel rate is and how it compares to other makes and how that relates to how rates have changed over the decade as the public has demanded better handling out of regular cars. While there are probably any number of people out there willing to buy the sport suspension option on their Mazda, not many know that the 500# spring rate that is stock in their daily driver translates to a 275# wheel rate which is almost directly comparable to a 1.12 torsion bar for a B/E body. However, since mopar classifies this bar as HD solo or road racing, a number of people will shy away from it as overkill and then be disappointed that their cool car doesn't give them the same pleasure of driving as their econo-box.

But that is just my opinion.