Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums -
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - > Technical Camaro Topics > Suspension / Brakes / Chassis

Thread Tools
Old 09-08-2010, 10:23 PM   #18
"Camaro Joe"
camaro4mybday's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: long island ny
Posts: 2,351
Send a message via AIM to camaro4mybday
a question to pfadt um if your subframe bushings are solid wouldnt that mean a harder ride for the daily driver, wouldnt you want a little softness in them to keep things comfy?
camaro4mybday is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2010, 08:30 AM   #19
JusticePete's Avatar
Drives: Camaro Justice
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 17,601
The harder the sub-frame bushes the more noise there will be transmitted. That is why the OE bushes have NVH voids. All of us try to skin the same cat and not have the cat screech. Our inserts use the OE rubber for NVH management. The EP1201 are solid. but not as hard or dense as the EP1201HD which we consider full track ready.

None of the noise increases with Sub-Frame inserts or bushes are objectionable. They are incremental increases. None will make your ride rough because the sub-frame isn't really part of the suspension in the sense it was not designed to articulate when you traverse a bump. The sub-frame is supposed to be the platform for the moving components of the suspensions that make your car ride smooth or rough.
JusticePete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2010, 04:27 PM   #20
PfadtRacing's Avatar
Drives: 2010 Camaro, 2006 Z06
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 3,374
Originally Posted by camaro4mybday View Post
a question to pfadt um if your subframe bushings are solid wouldnt that mean a harder ride for the daily driver, wouldnt you want a little softness in them to keep things comfy?
camaro4mybday, I can not argue against the logic behind your question. But in reality there are a couple things going on in the rear suspension design that let us get away with a solid design.

We tested versions of rear subframe bushings in various poly/plastics and found only disadvantages in performance and no advantage in NVH levels in-cabin. The design of the rear subframe to chassis isolation allows for a lot of movement in the X (fore/aft) direction and some Y (side to side) direction for dynamic alignment changes. There is also movement as you can see, in the Z (vertical) direction (which is probably the weakest direction of the design), but it is not the primary use of that connection. Things that more directly affect the ride quality are in the Z direction, and are more like Springs and Struts etc, to soak up bumps and vertical suspension deflections. So the rear subframe bushings are not primarily used in that application, as they do not directly take those vertical loads.

It is for that reason, that we found by creating a MUCH stronger, and LIGHTER component, that solves the issue of rear subframe movement COMPLETELY, and not just partially, it was best to go with a solid mount. A solid mount in Aluminum, or a close to solid mount out of hard poly, had the same levles of NVH, from our testing. Only the non-solid versions we tested did not have the performance advantage of the solid mount.

So, with that said, the level of NVH added by the solid subframe mounts is very minimal at most, if any. Some customers say they notice no ride quality/noise difference whatsoever. Some say they just "feel" the rear end being tighter, shaper, more precise, and the noise level is minimal (some say there is slightly more differential noise). It is really a subjective concern, and depends on what your expectations are and how perceptible you are of noise etc.

The suspension arms and components that affect ride quality more directly are still isolated in rubber, in one way or another (poly etc), and this is why the Solid Subframe Bushings have less of an effect on noise, vibration and harshness, than say, a full control arm poly kit.

Things still stay nice and comfy on the street with the use of these bushings!
PfadtRacing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 05:44 PM   #21

Drives: 1st through 5th gen Camaros
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sante Fe Springs, CA
Posts: 458
Originally Posted by JohnZ View Post
Im looking to upgrade the suspension in my v6 camaro, but I am not seeing much of any parts. Does anyone manufacture a strut tower brace for the V6? Also, does anyone know if the Hotchkis sway bars and endlinks work on the V6, i want to make sure before I drop a grand on this stuff. When I searched this section, I could not find much info in regards to v6 upgrades specifically.

Hi JohnZ -

Whew, lots of info in this thread. You do ask in your post if the Hotchkis sway bars work on the V6 and the answer is yes. Give us a call anytime to talk to a tech.
Hotchkis is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
B&G Suspension is looking for a 2010 camaro V6 for Spring testing mike@b-gsuspension USA - California 15 06-09-2012 10:44 AM
Solo Performance V6 Mach-XL (Manual) and Mach-XLT (Auto) Exhaust Kits GOINGSOLO2 V6 Bolt-Ons & Tunes 13 07-13-2010 02:28 PM
Pedders suspension already for the Camaro Suspension / Brakes / Chassis 75 10-21-2009 08:25 PM
Suspension upgrades and body package coming soon Specter Werkes Cosmetics and Lighting Modification Discussions 1 10-08-2009 04:53 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:11 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.