Lets get serious.
Lets get serious.
We really seem to be loosing the plot here for street rally cars and have crossed the line into serious off roaders that can be driven on the street.
To add to my earlier comments on something like a Volvo, Saab etc. I'd also consider some stratigic seam welding and possibly at least a half cage or bar. If you want to roll over everything on the streets then not only do you need good suspension travel and good shocks, but I'd say as stiff as a shell as you can resonably get.
I really like this thread because - Michigan roads.
Examples
While the State legislator is still pissing about raising funding to fix the roads, at least around me the roads are getting much much better. Wealthy people piss and moan the most so they get things fixed first.
Soo-bah-rooooooooo nuff said
Love this!!!!
Kenny_McCormic wrote: In reply to CarKid1989: Strut/spring spacers won't make it take a bump any better, you need more travel and/or stiffer springs for that.
your mostly right, but the larger diameter tire you can fit with spacers will roll over bumps easier. not as good as gaining actual suspension travel but it helps
TAParker wrote:
The wheels are pretty, but for this application some 15" Compomotives would serve better.
Aspen wrote:TAParker wrote:The wheels are pretty, but for this application some 15" Compomotives would serve better.
Those wheels were takeoffs from a previous Subaru project car. Seriously, that wagon was great for normal use. It was roomy, comfortable, reliable and quick enough. You could also park it anywhere. Plus, since it wasn't a WRX, it wasn't total theft-bait.
No, it wasn't as radical as some of the other cars in this thread, but it just worked. I hated to sell it, but needed to free up some driveway space.
Adrian_Thompson wrote: I really like this thread because - Michigan roads. Examples
Oh my, that is ridiculous. I thought some of our roads here in Utah were bad. Looks like you could lose a balljoint or something over those roads.
In reply to David S. Wallens:
Nothing fancy. Just a workhorse. Nuff said.
92dxman wrote: In reply to David S. Wallens: Nothing fancy. Just a workhorse. Nuff said.
Yup. The air blew cold, too.
Appleseed wrote: Lets get serious. https://www.youtube.com/embed/Uoi95SBE2wM
Junk like that does NOT drive well on rough roads. They get downright scary.
I love solid axles but not in the front and not where the unsprung weight of the vehicle is maybe half the total vehicle weight...
Desmond wrote:Adrian_Thompson wrote: I really like this thread because - Michigan roads. ExamplesOh my, that is ridiculous. I thought some of our roads here in Utah were bad. Looks like you could lose a balljoint or something over those roads.
The W. 117th bridge over I-90 in Cleveland got so bad a couple winters ago that there was a chunk missing right right before one of the steel gaps. At least two vehicles ripped the R/F suspension completely out with that, and those were just the ones that I witnessed.
I have a nicer drive to work, but I still feel that driving on the surface streets here is harsher than any rallycross I've been to.
CarKid1989 wrote: I also keep thinking of strut spacers to do a lift. Similar to the truck 1-3 inch lift kits that jsut add spacers to achieve the height. That plus tires might help
My buddy had a bug eye impreza he did this with, machined the spacers himself then added some General Grabbers, similar to the white one a few pages back. It was pretty badass and a halfway decent offroader, but he complained it destroyed the handling. Sold it for a Crown Vic after driving it from NY state to Seattle.
I also saw an awesome Volvo 240 in this mold a few years back at the Carlisle show that even had a matching trailer, IIRC. Wish I had pics.
Adrian_Thompson wrote: We really seem to be loosing the plot here for street rally cars and have crossed the line into serious off roaders that can be driven on the street. To add to my earlier comments on something like a Volvo, Saab etc. I'd also consider some stratigic seam welding and possibly at least a half cage or bar. If you want to roll over everything on the streets then not only do you need good suspension travel and good shocks, but I'd say as stiff as a shell as you can resonably get. I really like this thread because - Michigan roads. Examples
I agree there seems to be a bit of scope creep going on. That's happened to me a time or two. 
Still on an O.E. type suspension, not a chassis swap:
What is wrong with just scoping the MOOG Catalog (it's like a Sears Wish Book for spring nerds) until you find something with maybe 1/2" more ride height, nothing crazy, and maybe 50% more rate than stock, again nothing crazy, (probably springs from a newer/more optioned version of yoru chassis will do) then putting those on the car, and make sure you're using sensibly sized wheels/tires, meaning something with a 65 aspect ratio and maybe 14-15" wheels? Also maintenance - what are the bushings like? A car with bad bushings will ride like crap because the suspension doesn't absorb motion so much as endure it.
A lot of the things I see in this thread are ridiculous. Those big Boggers or whatever ride like complete crap. Way too much unsprung weight, way too much rolling resistance, way too stiff in the carcass.
When it comes to things for the street, basically just look at what the 4x4 guys do and do the exact opposite. 90% of the things you see for them are for looks (no different than the slam-n-scrape stancebros) and the other 10% are for completely different criteria that are often contrary to the needs of bombing fast down rough roads.
Can someone explain to me why you would want stiffer springs? Seems to me you would want taller softish springs, taller to keep it from bottoming out and softer to absorb the hard hits without upsetting the chassis but with matched damper control to keep the wheels from bouncing all over the place. I would think less unsprung weight would be better.
I like stiffer springs because springs are a lot cheaper than really good dampers. A lot cheaper.
Most of what you feel on bad roads is the suspension bottoming out, which is near infinite spring rate, so you need to increase the rate a bit to keep from bottoming out so much. Not a ton, just a little bit. Lowered cars ride like garbage not because of the spring rate increase but because of the suspension travel decrease - when you only have 2" or so of up-travel, taking away 1.5" is a world-ender no matter what yoru rates are.
Yeah the WRC guys get away with really low spring rates (by my guesstimates, in the 150lb-in range) but they also have 13" of travel and dampers that cost probably 5 figures per corner and have the ability to sense the difference between a compression from a bump and compression from landing.
I plan to pick up a set of 195/75R14 BFG All Terrains for my 99 4cyl auto Camry
In the summer it's my camping rig/mountain bike hauler. The car sees a lot of crazy fire roads around Mt Saint Hellens in WA state. In the winter it hauls me and friends up snowboarding as well.
Skid plate design has begun out if some free diamond plate.
I May or may not try rubber spacers for extra rock/squirell/Snow clearance. And remove them after trips.
I picked up a set of 195 75r14 Tires on wheels off Cl for $100 to see if they fit without rubbing.
They do not rub at all, car handles the same on the street, and reservation dirt road washboard testing confirmed the ride is a bit softer.I also picked up a little ground clearance.
Build thread coming soon.
NickD wrote: Everyone is mentioning newer Subarus, how about the venerable EA82 chassis. I've owned one of these (Would love another) and they are easy to work on and pretty cheap. Also extremely tough and have genuine 4WD, not AWD. Later cars had fuel injection, the '85-'88s had twin-range transfer cases, there are plenty of lift kits available and guys have made some DIY suspension setups. There are also kits to put in EJ enignes in place of the old EA series engines.
Ha, that red one belongs to my friend Tom. It is quite rusty underneath. 
The EA82 is a great platform if you live in a dry non-rust belt climate. In the mid-2000's they were already getting scarce here and now they are virtually nonexistent. I love them and cut my teeth working on them, but there are just none left in decent shape outside of the PNW it seems. (Also, they are totally gutless and struggle to do 70MPH or get 18MPG under even the best circumstances)
ebonyandivory wrote: Not-so-easy button: [URL=http://s265.photobucket.com/user/derekrichardson/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_41.jpg.html][/URL] But easy button is Ford Ranger with bigger tires and decent shocks.
If you want to recreate this, this LTD donk might be a good start...might even be cheap without the wheels. 
In reply to The_Jed:
Any idea on how he got the car to sit so high?
In reply to Desmond:
That body style Mustang seems to have a pretty high ride height from the factory. If you hold a straight edge along the bottom of the door (of the blue car) it pretty much lines up with the center of the front hub. If you hold a straight edge along the bottom of the rocker panel it hits about 1.5" or so above the center of the rear axle.
This one is pretty close to the same in the front (tough to tell on the rear due to the side skirts):
Several manufacturers make rear control arms with adjustable spring perches(pretty expensive, though):
And weld-in adjustable rear upper perches:
Or Speedway makes coil springs in nearly any rate, diameter and length...I really should stop looking at all of that stuff or I'll wind up making some bad decisions.
I'm still not convinced you need more ride height, and if you do certainly no more than a inch at max. Many rally cross cars and even rally cars don't raise much of anything at all. I think tires and shocks are the most important aspect. Then look at chassis stiffness so it can accommodate the harsher inputs without becoming a rattle trap. This is a rally car for the street no a red neck mall crawler (would that be a trailer park crawler?)
This is where you need an AMC Eagle Wagon.
I'd also vote for a late 70's to 90 Impala or Caprice
You'll need to log in to post.
