Welcome to Club Hot Rod!  The premier site for everything to do with Hot Rod, Customs, Low Riders, Rat Rods, and more. 

  •  » Members from all over the US and the world!
  •  » Help from all over the world for your questions
  •  » Build logs for you and all members
  •  » Blogs
  •  » Image Gallery
  •  » Many thousands of members and hundreds of thousands of posts! 

YES! I want to register an account for free right now!  p.s.: For registered members this ad will NOT show

 
Like Tree4Likes
  • 2 Post By techinspector1
  • 2 Post By Dave Severson

Thread: Improved Geometry for GM Triangulated 4-bar susenpension
          
   
   

Results 1 to 5 of 5

Threaded View

  1. #1
    Mutt's37Buick's Avatar
    Mutt's37Buick is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Westminster, CO
    Car Year, Make, Model: 37 Buick Roadmaster
    Posts
    131

    Improved Geometry for GM Triangulated 4-bar susenpension

     



    I have a GM triangulated 4-bar rear suspension from a 95 B-body that I plan to swap into my 1937 Buick (like the one in the picture).
    Still considering a torque arm set-up, but also looking at keeping with triangulated 4-bar for simplicity and lower cost.
    I already bought UMR Performance adjustable lower control arms with Roto-joints on the axle end.
    I have read that it is best to have all arms the same length.
    The standard upper control arms are much shorter, so I'm wondering if I should try to fit something longer for better ride, or performance.
    Suggestions and guidance would be welcome.
    Thanks
    Attached Images

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Links monetized by VigLink