02-20-2018, 02:26 PM | #15 |
Drives: 2015 1SS / RS NPP Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Dayton Ohio
Posts: 353
|
Saw the pics on FB Pete, quite like the look of them so far.
I went with DSE back when I did mine, and have zero regrets. The only increase I noticed was in how planted / solid the rear end felt afterward. There's no appreciable NVH increase that I've noticed. To give some sort of subjective feedback on the upgrade, it was noticeable. It wasn't as extreme as going from stock '15 SS suspension to 1LE, but a significant portion there of, definitely. The ride didn't become more harsh, that I noticed, but the rear of the car definitely became even more communicative. So far, 1LE suspension, solid sub-frame bushings, 3.91 gears in back, yeah, all fall under the , "should've come from the factory like this," heading. |
02-20-2018, 03:01 PM | #16 | |
Drives: Camaro Justice Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 20,174
|
Quote:
|
|
02-21-2018, 09:28 AM | #17 |
Drives: 2015 1SS / RS NPP Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Dayton Ohio
Posts: 353
|
In all fairness, based on my "should have come from the factory this way," what actually should have happened is I should have researched better and picked up a 1LE.
Oh well, getting to the destination the long way has been an education. Still a bit to go. |
03-04-2018, 06:44 PM | #18 | |
Drives: 2015 Camaro 1SS 6M Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: The Freeway
Posts: 238
|
Quote:
Galvanic or dissimilar metal corrosion is the form of corrosion you are trying to explain regarding dissimilar metals. Oxidation is the process of oxygen molecules binding to the outer surface creating oxidation, on steel we call this rust. I suggested anti seize because it often contains zinc, which will corrode before the base materials act as a sacrificial anode as you mentioned.
__________________
|
|
03-04-2018, 07:33 PM | #19 |
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS Camaro Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Chico, California
Posts: 187
|
Just imagine if I would paid attention 30 years ago during high school chemistry~lol. Things have changed greatly from that '67 Camaro I had so many years ago & I appreciate the info about the zinc & the anti-seize....a old dawg can still learn a new trick~lol. I was checking out the solid subframe bushings from LG Motorsports...they look exactly like a set of BMR's polyurethane bushing but solid aluminum. Is there any difference between those & the hour-glass shaped design? Much appreciated!
|
03-04-2018, 07:42 PM | #20 | |
Drives: cars Join Date: May 2011
Location: Oversneeze
Posts: 4,544
|
Quote:
|
|
03-04-2018, 08:20 PM | #21 |
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS Camaro Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Chico, California
Posts: 187
|
Synner...thanks for clarifying, didn't know the reason for the difference in design. Been researching & trying to sort out best way to stiffen up the chassis....inserts, polyurethane, derlin, aluminum, chassis brace.....can get a little overwhelming at times.
|
03-05-2018, 10:46 AM | #22 | |
Drives: Camaro Justice Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 20,174
|
Quote:
|
|
03-05-2018, 10:48 PM | #23 | |
Drives: 2015 Camaro 1SS 6M Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: The Freeway
Posts: 238
|
Quote:
Objectively speaking, with a chassis this good, it's more cost effective to start elsewhere. I want to do tension/radius rod bushings to start, then subframe inserts. As far as the rear options, I am considering subframe inserts primarily due to the simplicity of the install. I feel they would offer a significant improvement in stiffness, and are a good cost effective option. Cost including my time for install because I don't like people touching my cars. Have you gotten the car aligned yet? What are you trying to resolve or improve? Personally, I started with a square wheel setup and I am happy for now, I already have a 1LE/ZL1 rear swaybar to bolt in when I get time. I am all about maximum results for the least effort.
__________________
|
|
03-08-2018, 01:11 AM | #24 | |
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS Camaro Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Chico, California
Posts: 187
|
Quote:
Last edited by el Wulf; 03-08-2018 at 01:52 AM. |
|
03-08-2018, 01:05 PM | #25 |
Drives: Camaro Justice Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 20,174
|
OEM Z/28 upper outer bushings are better than any urethane product available. The front lower inner control arm bushings are better than anything other than a spherical. A split brake tension / radiuss arm urethane bushing is not as good as the steel jacketed OEM rubber bushings. |
03-09-2018, 08:54 PM | #26 |
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS Camaro Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Chico, California
Posts: 187
|
Z-28 5[QUOTE=JusticePete;10101114]
OEM Z/28 upper outer bushings are better than any urethane product available. The front lower inner control arm bushings are better than anything other than a spherical. A split brake tension / radiuss arm urethane bushing is not as good as the steel jacketed OEM rubber bushings. Not completely harded-headed....just learning~lol! The original plan was to eventually upgrade to the Z-28 components (radius arm, rear knuckle, rear uca bushing) along with the solid sf bushings & thought that changing out the radius arm & uca bushing (with polyurethane) along with the other bushing would be a good idea. But see your point...both in performance & cost-wise. Will take your advise & install the Z-28 front lca's arms & rear uca bushing now, then after the powertrain modifications, want to finalize the suspension upgrade with the Z-28 rear knuckles, Blistien B6 struts/shocks (after the 1LE's), & a set of both JPSS sway bars and solid sf bushings. Are these the correct Z-28 part numbers (anyone): Upper rear control arm bushings 23104906(R) 23104907(L) Front radius arm 23105018(R) 23105019(L) It's a no-go on the Granatelli MS lca's; I didn't know the company was referring to their trailing arms(lol)....already aquired a set of Spohn Performance trailing arms & toe links (adjustable & w/Del-Sphere rod ends from another forum member). Are the bushings on the Z-28 rear lca's (23484878) the same as on the Z-28 front inner control arm (better than anything other than spherical) & would you recommend "boxing" the arm with additional plate to further reinforce the arm. Last edited by el Wulf; 03-10-2018 at 06:53 PM. |
03-12-2018, 01:01 PM | #27 | |
Drives: Camaro Justice Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 20,174
|
[QUOTE=el Wulf;10102976]Z-28 5
Quote:
Urethane gets softer as it is heated. The heat from engine oil in the pan and the exhaust makes the inner front control arm bushing location a hot spot. There is no way a split urethane bushing offer more control than the OEM bushing pictured above. The radius / tension control arm use a steel jacketed rubber bushing from the factory. The rubber is bonded to the steel jacket and the ferule. There is nothing wrong with the factory bushing. The rubber snubber used in the factory bushing is soft. GM corrects that with the Z/28 nylon insert. JPSS has been using billet aluminum and delrin for years. The only way to get more control is to use a spherical. Sphericals are great on track cars, but most will not appreciate the noise in a daily driver / street driven Camaro. |
|
03-12-2018, 05:58 PM | #28 |
Drives: 2010 2SS/RS Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Clarksville Tennesse.
Posts: 6,064
|
I have the JPSS Delrin inserts and it was a immediate noticeable difference and a lot cheaper than a set of Z28 Radius Arms!!!
__________________
Orange Krush II
1LE Front sway bar, Splitter, shocks and struts, Z28 dual mode mufflers, Intake, UCA Bushings, and Toresen 3.91 Diff. 1 piece DSS Drive Shaft, ZL1/C7 Calipers, and 32mm JPSS Rear Bar. ASC race spec splitter and wicker. 6th Gen M017 Wheels. Stainless Works 1 7/8 LTs. DSE and PAFDT Suspension components. |
|
|
|
|