-
Regretably the pictures are all links of links and have gone away. Here are some ones I found through google.
[url=http://tradezone.com/vette/suspension.html]Corvette Suspension Modifications[/url]
[url]http://images.motortrend.com/features/performance/112_0408_124z_Exclusive_Under_The_Skin_Of_The_2005_Chevrolet_Corvette_C6+2005_Chevrolet_Corvette_C6+Suspension_View.jpg[/url]
[url=http://www.corvetteactioncenter.com/specs/z06/z06exhaust.html]Z06 Corvette Titanium Exhaust System - Corvette Action Center[/url]
-
[QUOTE=culver;767055]Regretably the pictures are all links of links and have gone away. Here are some ones I found through google.
[url=http://tradezone.com/vette/suspension.html]Corvette Suspension Modifications[/url]
[url]http://images.motortrend.com/features/performance/112_0408_124z_Exclusive_Under_The_Skin_Of_The_2005_Chevrolet_Corvette_C6+2005_Chevrolet_Corvette_C6+Suspension_View.jpg[/url]
[url=http://www.corvetteactioncenter.com/specs/z06/z06exhaust.html]Z06 Corvette Titanium Exhaust System - Corvette Action Center[/url][/QUOTE]
interesting, i thought it had independent leafs, one for each wheel and logitudinal.
Just a question, could someone fit a Spring/Damper in the place fo that "damper" shown in the pictures? or isn't there enough space?
-
Yes but…
GM engineers have stated that using the leaf spring allowed them to run a lower profile shock tower. Aftermarket companies have coilovers that fit so it can be done but I would also assume that GM didn’t splurge on the leaf spring (it costs GM more to use these springs) if they didn’t consider the advantages to be real. Often things that can be done aftermarket can’t be done OEM due to restrictions on cost, longevity, safety etc.
As for the one spring working both wheels, that is part of the benefit of the spring. The C2 and C3 used coils in the front and a centrally mounted leaf spring in the rear. The central mount prevented the motion of one side from affecting the “effective spring rate” of the other side.
This scan came from a 1984 book about the C4.
[url]http://temp.corvetteforum.net/c4/gcrouse/Suspension/fiberglass_spring.gif[/url]
-
[QUOTE=culver;767063]Yes but…
GM engineers have stated that using the leaf spring allowed them to run a lower profile shock tower. Aftermarket companies have coilovers that fit so it can be done but I would also assume that GM didn’t splurge on the leaf spring (it costs GM more to use these springs) if they didn’t consider the advantages to be real. Often things that can be done aftermarket can’t be done OEM due to restrictions on cost, longevity, safety etc.
As for the one spring working both wheels, that is part of the benefit of the spring. The C2 and C3 used coils in the front and a centrally mounted leaf spring in the rear. The central mount prevented the motion of one side from affecting the “effective spring rate” of the other side.
This scan came from a 1984 book about the C4.
[url]http://temp.corvetteforum.net/c4/gcrouse/Suspension/fiberglass_spring.gif[/url][/QUOTE]
Very nice technology then, worderfull to see an old tchnology being perfected with new materials.
Thank you once again
-
[QUOTE=Slicks;766914]Honestly whats "lame" about them being pushrod? You do know that the LSx series are some of the lightest, and smallest V8s on the market right? To top the icing on the cake you can buy a LS2 crate engine for around $5,000...
I personally rather have a physically smaller, lighter, and cheaper engine making the same amount of power as a heavier, bigger, and more expensive engine with more marketing hype.[/QUOTE]
Pushrod technology is simply very old and outdated. It is not used in race cars because it is inferior to a DOHC setup. That is why LSx pushrods are lame.
-
[QUOTE=Kitdy;767070]Pushrod technology is simply very old and outdated. It is not used in race cars because it is inferior to a DOHC setup. That is why LSx pushrods are lame.[/QUOTE]
Hahhaaahhahahah what a noob.
Care to explain drag racing or the dominance of pushrod cars in drifting and in GT races (especially the corvette)?
-
[QUOTE=monaroCountry;767075]Hahhaaahhahahah what a noob.
Care to explain drag racing or the dominance of pushrod cars in drifting and in GT races (especially the corvette)?[/QUOTE]
they put bigger restrictors on the DOHC V12 Aston Martins....
-
[QUOTE=henk4;767076]they put bigger restrictors on the DOHC V12 Aston Martins....[/QUOTE]
Well the DOHC V12 Murcielago has less restrictions than the OHV V8 Corvette.
-
[QUOTE=ruim20;767069]Very nice technology then, worderfull to see an old tchnology being perfected with new materials.[/QUOTE]
If you like this see what the brits done to make vvt in the viper v10...ingenious!
[QUOTE=Kitdy;767070]Pushrod technology is simply very old and outdated. It is not used in race cars because it is inferior to a DOHC setup. That is why LSx pushrods are lame.[/QUOTE]
Well there is a greater inertia and mass in the valve train and there is less range of ultimate valve control. It is lighter and simpler however. No need for such extremism though:)
-
I'm pretty sure there are previous pushrod-OHC threads we can reread to see all the old arguments for and against.
Here's one...
[url]http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/technical-forums/12344-pushrod-ohc-15.html#post276347[/url]
-
[QUOTE=monaroCountry;767075]Hahhaaahhahahah what a noob.
Care to explain drag racing or the dominance of pushrod cars in drifting and in GT races (especially the corvette)?[/QUOTE]
Pushrods are probably used in technology because drag racing engines are primarily made in the States (where pushrods are popular for some reason in cars) and the technology is simpler and lighter - however as far as I know it ultimately produce less power.
If pushrods are so good, why aren't they used in most cars today?
-
[QUOTE=Kitdy;767144]
If pushrods are so good, why aren't they used in most cars today?[/QUOTE]
Fuel economy.
-
Actually I suspect it's largely a combination of many markets that have/had taxes or other factors which discouraged displacement and because most of the advantages of a pushrod motor are lost with you go from a V block to an in line block.
Again, all the pro and con arguments were hashed out in the old thread.
-
[QUOTE=The_Canuck;767145]Fuel economy.[/QUOTE]
Pushrods aren't actually bad for fuel economy. There basically isn't a causal relationship between one and the other.
-
[QUOTE=The_Canuck;767145]Fuel economy.[/QUOTE]
Ok, let's try again. Why don't race cars use pushrod technology if it's better?
