Torsion Bars - 318 to 440

[John Milner]

I just finished fixing up my '68 Charger.  I replaced everything in the front end other than the torsion bars.  The car was a factory 318 car and they are the original 318 bars.  I believe they measure .88.  I installed a 440 in the car.  The lower control arm bump stops are very close to hitting.  The car needs to come up in the front some.  I adjusted the front end up some and still have a little bit left on the adjustment bolt but am unsure if it is safe to go in more with the bolt.  There might be an inch left in the bolt adjustment before it runs out of threads.  Do you guys recommend going to heaver torsion bars or working with the adjustment a little more?  Thanks

[c00nhunterjoe]

The bolt is merely for ride height. It puts no more stress on the bar. The diameter sets the spring rate, not the height. There are a variety of choices depending on what you want to do with the car. Thicker bar means stiffer suspension. Soft comfy caddilac ride- go with a .920 or .960. Want to hug corners and lose fillings like a vette- go over 1.00.

[John Milner]

Great, I'll crank them up some and see if it will raise the front end some. I'm assuming that I'll have to check wheel alignment afterwards. I'd like the front end almost level with the back if I can safely do that. Thanks for the help.

[Kern Dog]

The bolt is merely for ride height. It puts no more stress on the bar. The diameter sets the spring rate, not the height. There are a variety of choices depending on what you want to do with the car. Thicker bar means stiffer suspension. Soft comfy caddilac ride- go with a .920 or .960. Want to hug corners and lose fillings like a vette- go over 1.00.

Usually I respect your opinions but you are wrong on this one. Lose fillings with bigger torsion bars? Maybe if you are a spun out tweeker with a shitty dental plan...
I had 1.0 bars with KYB shocks and while it rode firm, it was not enough to be a problem. I stepped up to 1.15s and Bilsteins and it rides only barely firmer. The better shocks allow a bit more movement over small bumps than the super stiff KYBs did.
Maybe for a straight line dude that only makes turns at parking lot speeds, a pencil thick torsion bar is fine. The 1.15s I have deliver a ride similar to our 2015 Challenger R/T with the Super Track Pack option group.
These cars can be made to handle quite well. Drag racing isn't the only way to go, man.

[myk]

The 1.1" Hotchkis torsion bars worked great; there was no sense that I was losing my fillings with those or any other chassis stiffening parts.  Well, maybe the Hotchkis/Fox shocks.  If anything, it's the goddamn roads that will make you lose your fillings...

[c00nhunterjoe]

The bolt is merely for ride height. It puts no more stress on the bar. The diameter sets the spring rate, not the height. There are a variety of choices depending on what you want to do with the car. Thicker bar means stiffer suspension. Soft comfy caddilac ride- go with a .920 or .960. Want to hug corners and lose fillings like a vette- go over 1.00.

Usually I respect your opinions but you are wrong on this one. Lose fillings with bigger torsion bars? Maybe if you are a spun out tweeker with a shitty dental plan...
I had 1.0 bars with KYB shocks and while it rode firm, it was not enough to be a problem. I stepped up to 1.15s and Bilsteins and it rides only barely firmer. The better shocks allow a bit more movement over small bumps than the super stiff KYBs did.
Maybe for a straight line dude that only makes turns at parking lot speeds, a pencil thick torsion bar is fine. The 1.15s I have deliver a ride similar to our 2015 Challenger R/T with the Super Track Pack option group.
These cars can be made to handle quite well. Drag racing isn't the only way to go, man.

You clearly missed the point. It was an example. Caddilac to brick. One end to the other. Fwiw, my straight line low 10 second car has .960 bars on it. I personally do not care for the .840 drag bars on a 2 ton b body. Dont forget I also like to take corners on the street. I have vehicles that go fast straight, and vehicles that go fast AND turn.

[c00nhunterjoe]

Also add that if you are going with 1.0 or larger, you really need further chassis stiffening to utilize them such as frame connectors and sway bars. Boxing the lower arms and reinforcing the anchor point would be advised as well.

[Kern Dog]

The old habit of saying that big torsion bars will rattle your teeth is simply a lie. You wrote it as if you believe it.
Unless you have taken a ride in or driven a car with the big bars and decent shocks, you do not know. I'm no chassis expert, I just know what has worked for me. I did a 318 to 440 swap in 2001 and went from the skinny .88 bars to Mopar Performance 1.0 bars. I also went with KYB shocks at that time because I didn't think that Bilsteins were worth it since they were about 3 1/2 times the cost.
I do believe that as spring rates increase, other areas need to be improved or the gains from the spring rate can be lost due to flex in areas that didn't flex much before. Think of it this way: If you have a stock suspension and skinny tires, the tires will lose grip before the suspension really gets tested. Add in wider, sticky tires and since they hold the road better, the car may lean more in the turns.  This principle applies to a lot of things, really.

[c00nhunterjoe]

If i wrote it as a beleive, it would not have been a 1 sentence deal. You should know that about me. As i already said, i own, and have built many variations of drag to cornering queens. I could write a 10 paragraph response about the benefits and sacrifices of each combination. But that wasnt the point of my response, nor the origonal question on hand. You keep bringing up the cost of bilsteins... they are cheap. Order a set of santhuffs and get back to me about writing a check for bilsteins.

[c00nhunterjoe]

Furthermore kern, you cannot honestly sit there and tell me the comparison of ride between bone stock suspension, f70-14s on an .880 bar to a 1.18 bar, frame connectors, torque boxes, front and rear sway bars and 275/45/17s is not drastic. I used caddilac to lost fillings as an example, you used stock 69 charger to track pack 2015 challenger. Whats the difference in verbage here. Its the same thing- drastic.

[c00nhunterjoe]

Alright, rather then essentially bickering back and forth when we are actually saying the same thing AND agreeing on it, here is my method for choice of bars. The general rule for a torsion bar is 1/10 the axle weight gives you the ideal wheel rate. Advertised wheel rates vary just like torque converter stall speeds and advertised rpm of a camshaft. The actual rate is determined by bar thickness, overall bar length, vs used bar length, vs pivot length and everyone measures a little bit different to skew their bar rates to sound better then the next guy. Also have to factor in how each brand indexes them. But ignoring all of those items for arguement and length of reply sake, lets focus strictly on the advertised bar rate and assume, again for sake of theory only, that they are all the same.
    The ideal torsion bar rate for a high performance car is a simple calculation. It is 1/10th of the axle weight. Sway bar design and thickness affects it but rather then getting into physics, harmonics and more calculations  here, lets just go with it and forget sway bars for now. If you want to learn more about how the 1/10th variable came up, pick up some chassis books and do some reading. Good stuff. So to chose accordingly, you have to scale the car 1st to see your starting point. Everybody is different as small block to big block, iron vs aluminum heads, radiators, wheels tires and brakes. It all adds up and can make a huge difference. My charger scaled the front end at 1020/1080 lbs. I run no sway bars front or rear so i am calculating for all spring. So 1020+1080=2100 lbs. 2100 x .10= 210lb spring rate. In a daily street driven car, this equates in most brand torsion bars to a 1 inch bar. In MY application as a primarily strip car, and knowing i do not have sway bars nor am i planning on hugging corners on 205 front tires, the .960 bar i chose with a rate of 160 is ideal for street and strip. Again, if i put the ft sway bar back on, it affects the numbers. Regardless, the 205 tire would give long before the .960 bar spring rate.
   To the guys running 1.18  and larger bars- you are in the 340 lb and higher wheel rates with b body bars. Thats a front end weight of 3400 lbs,a 1.25 bar is roughly 400lbs at 4,000 lb front end weight... and we havnt factored in sway bar capacity yet either.
   In conclusion, i have not even scratched the surface of torsion bars or suspension technology and have already typed much more then most will care to read nor i really cared to type. It was much easier to just say "skinny bars float like a caddilac and thick bars will rattle your fillings" or as kern stated "stock 69 charger vs trak pack 2015 challenger". At any rate, thats the rough version of why i run a .960 bar on my car and how i determine what bars to put on any car i build.

[b5blue]

I just finished fixing up my '68 Charger.  I replaced everything in the front end other than the torsion bars.  The car was a factory 318 car and they are the original 318 bars.  I believe they measure .88.  I installed a 440 in the car.  The lower control arm bump stops are very close to hitting.  The car needs to come up in the front some.  I adjusted the front end up some and still have a little bit left on the adjustment bolt but am unsure if it is safe to go in more with the bolt.  There might be an inch left in the bolt adjustment before it runs out of threads.  Do you guys recommend going to heaver torsion bars or working with the adjustment a little more?  Thanks

Crank them up a bit more you will be okay for driving normal. I changed to Mopar HD bars and springs for better handling. (The guys are right and mean well but if your not racing and just drive it now and then it won't matter for now.)

[c00nhunterjoe]

I just finished fixing up my '68 Charger.  I replaced everything in the front end other than the torsion bars.  The car was a factory 318 car and they are the original 318 bars.  I believe they measure .88.  I installed a 440 in the car.  The lower control arm bump stops are very close to hitting.  The car needs to come up in the front some.  I adjusted the front end up some and still have a little bit left on the adjustment bolt but am unsure if it is safe to go in more with the bolt.  There might be an inch left in the bolt adjustment before it runs out of threads.  Do you guys recommend going to heaver torsion bars or working with the adjustment a little more?  Thanks

Crank them up a bit more you will be okay for driving normal. I changed to Mopar HD bars and springs for better handling. (The guys are right and mean well but if your not racing and just drive it now and then it won't matter for now.)

Yeah, i had originally stated to just crank them up for the ride height, but in the long run, .880 bars are far from ideal, even for a small block. At roughly 100 lb spring rate, thats half the ideal spring weight for a driver. I would ditch them even on a cruiser. For interim yes, crank them up. But replace them. I dont think .960s are popular anymore, so from there, a 1.00 from firm feel would be my personal choice for the average big block weekend cruiser.

[Kern Dog]

you used stock 69 charger to track pack 2015 challenger. Whats the difference in verbage here. Its the same thing- drastic.

No, I compared my own 1970 Charger with 1.15 t bars to my Wife's 2015 Challenger. The point of that was to express that my car does not ride much stiffer than a commonly available newer car.

I was objecting to the assertion that bigger torsion bars are too stiff to the point of losing your teeth.
Also...20 years or so ago, I didn't see the benefit of the higher priced shocks. As many others do, I learned a few things along the way. I don't drag race and I don't own a dedicated road course car so I'm not familiar with the exotic "Sandthuff" brand shocks.

[c00nhunterjoe]

you used stock 69 charger to track pack 2015 challenger. Whats the difference in verbage here. Its the same thing- drastic.

No, I compared my own 1970 Charger with 1.15 t bars to my Wife's 2015 Challenger. The point of that was to express that my car does not ride much stiffer than a commonly available newer car.

Of all the factual information i put out in explanation to your responses against me, thats all you pull from it. Ok, do you have anything factual to add besides a vague opinion? Slapping a stiffer set of bars and shocks on a 50 year old car and saying it is now comparable to a modern muscle car suspension? You yourself said you dont know chassis' yet you continue to quote and argue after i posted reasons and facts about how actual people that build the cars choose the parts. I just dont get it. You bandaided 50 year old technology with super stiff bars. Period.

[Kern Dog]

you used stock 69 charger to track pack 2015 challenger. Whats the difference in verbage here. Its the same thing- drastic.

No, I compared my own 1970 Charger with 1.15 t bars to my Wife's 2015 Challenger. The point of that was to express that my car does not ride much stiffer than a commonly available newer car.

Of all the factual information i put out in explanation to your responses against me, thats all you pull from it. Ok, do you have anything factual to add besides a vague opinion? Slapping a stiffer set of bars and shocks on a 50 year old car and saying it is now comparable to a modern muscle car suspension? You yourself said you dont know chassis' yet you continue to quote and argue after i posted reasons and facts about how actual people that build the cars choose the parts. I just dont get it. You bandaided 50 year old technology with super stiff bars. Period.

Are you okay over there? You know, admitting that you are wrong is not nearly as bad as continuing to make the same mistake.
You incorrectly wrote several things. I called you out on them yet you are either too stubborn to admit it or are blind to your own limitations.
You stated that bigger torsion bars will knock your fillings out.
They don't.
You incorrectly wrote quoted me as stating that a stock 69 Charger suspension compared to a 2015 Challenger.
I never wrote that. I wrote about a 1970 model with bigger bars. I never wrote that the Charger outhandles the Challenger, I wrote of ride firmness.
In the above quote, you assume that I know nothing about suspension/chassis systems.
I never wrote that. I wrote that I am "No expert" which to me, means a professional. I know plenty, I just know that others that get paid to know, do know more than me.
I do think that we are both on a similar train of thought but you have made a few errors in what you thought I wrote.
Go back and read the replies again.
I didn't set out to argue with you.

[c00nhunterjoe]

The bolt is merely for ride height. It puts no more stress on the bar. The diameter sets the spring rate, not the height. There are a variety of choices depending on what you want to do with the car. Thicker bar means stiffer suspension. Soft comfy caddilac ride- go with a .920 or .960. Want to hug corners and lose fillings like a vette- go over 1.00.

Usually I respect your opinions but you are wrong on this one. Lose fillings with bigger torsion bars? Maybe if you are a spun out tweeker with a shitty dental plan...
I had 1.0 bars with KYB shocks and while it rode firm, it was not enough to be a problem. I stepped up to 1.15s and Bilsteins and it rides only barely firmer. The better shocks allow a bit more movement over small bumps than the super stiff KYBs did.
Maybe for a straight line dude that only makes turns at parking lot speeds, a pencil thick torsion bar is fine. The 1.15s I have deliver a ride similar to our 2015 Challenger R/T with the Super Track Pack option group.
These cars can be made to handle quite well. Drag racing isn't the only way to go, man.

Your 1st reply comes out of the gate swinging dude. Twice calling me out as only knowing drag race cars in the same reply,  and then you clearly state that going from a 175 lb bar to a 340 lb bare "barely" made a difference in your car. Thus why i said you bandaided the problem in YOUR car. While you never stated 69 vs 2015, the op has a stock suspension and you compare the upgraded bars to a modern car. I said caddilac to corvette as clearly seen in your quote from me. They ride harsh to me. A PROPERLY setup 69 b body chassis with a 340 lb torsion bar will ride harsh. That is a fact. Yours is not, it is bandaided by throwing bigger and bigger bars in it. Your own words prove that by nearly doubling spring rate and not noticing much difference. The chassis is absorbing the extra spring rate, which is not good. So quit splitting hairs. I have never had a problem admitting when im wrong. But i dont like being incorrectly called out as a drag race only person who doesnt know how to set up a suspension. Im not here to argue either, i have plenty of better things to do, but when im called out for  being vague in a reply not putting enough information out, then i put the information out, and then im still wrong.... well, i dont know what else you want.

[Kern Dog]

You seem to have a habit of misinterpreting what you read. Again, I don't think you're a bad guy but you are focusing on stuff that I did not write and missing what I did write.
I did not go directly from the stock bars to the 1.15s. Maybe that is the detail that is lost between us here. I went from the .88s to 1.0, then to 1.15s
Also, with the 1.15s I wrote that my car rides about the same as the 2015 Challenger. I never wrote about any other details other than the comparison in ride quality.
We are probably not all that far off on our thinking, I just see that you are misinterpreting the words I write.
To be clear, I don't think that my car rides too firm. There are no lost fillings, the car does not shudder or shake going over bumps. I have been in stiff riding cars and trucks so I do know what a harsh ride feels like.  I have frame connectors, torque boxes, a welded K member too so the chassis does not flex and move like a stock one does. To me, a more rigid platform is going to have fewer squeaks and rattles than a stock car does even with a stiffer suspension. If my car rode as harsh as I gather from your suggestions, I'd be spending time tightening screws and bolts after every long road trip. I've never had to do that....
For the OP, I would only suggest the big bars if he is going to supplement them with the chassis stiffening improvements. A stiffer set of torsion bars of my size may not be as effective on a stock platform due to losses in chassis flex. The common popular size seems to be either 1.0 or the 1.03 size.

[c00nhunterjoe]

You seem to have a habit of misinterpreting what you read. Again, I don't think you're a bad guy but you are focusing on stuff that I did not write and missing what I did write.
I did not go directly from the stock bars to the 1.15s. Maybe that is the detail that is lost between us here. I went from the .88s to 1.0, then to 1.15s
Also, with the 1.15s I wrote that my car rides about the same as the 2015 Challenger. I never wrote about any other details other than the comparison in ride quality.
We are probably not all that far off on our thinking, I just see that you are misinterpreting the words I write.
To be clear, I don't think that my car rides too firm. There are no lost fillings, the car does not shudder or shake going over bumps. I have been in stiff riding cars and trucks so I do know what a harsh ride feels like.  I have frame connectors, torque boxes, a welded K member too so the chassis does not flex and move like a stock one does. To me, a more rigid platform is going to have fewer squeaks and rattles than a stock car does even with a stiffer suspension. If my car rode as harsh as I gather from your suggestions, I'd be spending time tightening screws and bolts after every long road trip. I've never had to do that....
For the OP, I would only suggest the big bars if he is going to supplement them with the chassis stiffening improvements. A stiffer set of torsion bars of my size may not be as effective on a stock platform due to losses in chassis flex. The common popular size seems to be either 1.0 or the 1.03 size.

You wrote and i quoted, that you went from 1.0 to 1.15 and saw almost no differnce. I quoted your specific reply, in your own words. That jump nearly doubles the spring rate. There is no opinion there. It is fact. It is math. I agree, common size is 1.0. For stockish chassis that is a decent cruiser without spending alot on the rest of the car. Anything over that is over springing the car. That is fact. Period. Your car is is over sprung. Fact. You cannot argue it. I mean, you can, but you are wrong. Not me, you. You are wrong. Math doesnt lie. You claim the bilsteins are great. Did you do the research? Doubt it. Did you know that the bilsteins on your car are NOT rated for use with the spring rate you are running? Probably didnt know that. Dont beleive me? I dont really care. Pick up the phone and call them direct. The math doesnt lie. Their valve and piston size is only good to a 225 lb spring on a b body mopar. Yours are way above that. But you call me out as wrong. Do your research before you call me out as an idiot. I usually respect you and agree with your methods. And i will still buy you a beer if we meet up. But this is what i get paid to do for a living. Your car doesnt ride too firm because its not right. You could step up to a 1.25 bar and it would ride the same because you are beating the car to death instead of working the suspension as designed.

[Kern Dog]

You had to read a little deeper but I did write that I had KYB shocks when I had the 1.0 bars.
The car is not being "Beaten to death", man. Yeah, I live in California...the state that used to have great roads until certain politicians diverted our road and highway funds to help out illegal immigrants....I do know about rough roads. This car has wide, sticky 100 TW  tires that surely soak up a lot of the bumps.
Math doesn't lie...Sure. I've been a Carpenter since 1986 and I have seen structures from the 60s that should have fallen over with a stiff wind .....yet they remain standing despite lumber sizes far smaller than we use today.
I get your point for the most part. You are looking at this with math and science but have you ever actually driven or rode in a a car set up like mine?
You mention the Bilstein ratings but do you know the actual part number or code of the ones that I have? They do make more than ONE shock for these cars.
When I had the 1.0 bars with the KYB shocks, the car seemed to ride in a manner that I'd call harsh. In retrospect, it may have been the shocks to blame. When I changed to the 1.15 bars, I installed the Bilstein RCD shocks from Firm Feel at the same time. The Bilsteins are a better shock by a long shot. I have them in my 2007 Ram 1500 and the Wife's 2015 came standard with them.
It is possible that the Bilsteins gave me a skewed perspective of how the ride had changed. The 1.0 bars and KYBs sort of skipped over bumps in the road and gave the car some rattles. The 1.15s and Bilsteins gave a softer ride over bumps but less brake dive and less front end lift under throttle. Maybe the better shock took some of the bite out of the torsion bar size increase. I don't know the answer to that. I'd have to do a single change and record my findings.
I love the ride and handling of the car. It wasn't built to make anyone happy except me, as I'd expect others to do with their cars. I don't have the engineers report to explain why the car feels the way that it does, I just have what feels right to me.

How adept are you with the inner workings of a Smart phone ? I know very little of the guts of them, I just know how to use it and I know when it isn't working.  This same principle applies here
The setup of the car may be a mathematical error to you but it feels great from here.
Finally....
I wouldn't have pressed so hard but you refused to address a couple of errors that you made and it set me off. I try to be as correct as I can and I appreciate when others do as well.
No hard feelings...I respect your knowledge. I can't explain why my car feels right to me, it just does.

[c00nhunterjoe]

I don't know of any state with good roads. Here in Md, a local guy started planting flowers in the pot holes to force the county to start fixing the potholes. Another area here started spray painting genitalia on the holes to get the same thing done. I doubt you are purposely hitting pot holes. That wasnt the point of the statement. The point was the chassis is getting beat to death because the car is over sprung. The frequency of the suspension is being transmitted through the car instead of absorbed by the suspension.
   The math and science is how the oe car manufacturers, nascar, drag racers, and indy cars design their setups. Yes, i have designed, built, tested, destroyed and driven all types of performance vehicles with the exception of motorcycles. I dont do 2 wheels. This includes cars, race cars of all sorts, boats, submarines, airplanes, helicopters and tanks as well. I designed the software and computer systems for battlefields so inner workings of smartphones is boring to me. I have a very interesting past to discuss if we ever meet up for beers.
   If you purchased off the shelf rcd shocks, they are wrong for a bar that heavy on your car. The same rcd shock fits 2 ton plus b bodies and 2800 lb a bodies. That in itself should say enough. I do not recall the exact number but i believe its 250 lb is their off the shelf limit. That doesnt mean it is not a good shock. It is. They are a nice middle ground for a weekend warrior in off the shelf form. What many people dont realize is you can have them custom valved for your specific application. If you had this done by bilstein through firmfeel, then i will stand corrected. But i doubt it was. Im sure you car does feel good. Anything you do to them is light years ahead of the factory setup. But you are leaving performance on the table. If you were to autocross your car, i would lay money that it would score higher with a smaller bar. Corners, g force, slalom,  everything. Either way, i will still buy us the 1st round. I have no hard feeling either. There is nothing wrong with semi-heated discussions at times. And like you said and I also tell everyone. The car is built for you, not me. If it makes you happy, in the end, that is the goal.

[Kern Dog]

For the sake of discussion and for a moment, taking the math out of the equation.....
IF you drove a car and had no prior knowledge of the suspension , what symptoms would suggest to you that it is "over-sprung" ?
Rattles? Excessive vibrations? Rear view mirror shaking when driving over bumps? The CD player skipping? Bouncy motions due to inadequately matched shocks?
To me, those describe my 75 3/4 ton Power Wagon and a '74 Dodge Camper 9000 that I had. None of those traits can be said about the Charger.
I'm not trying to prove you wrong. I am trying to understand.
I have seen a few things over the years that absolutely should NOT have worked yet they did. Strange things can happen. Sometimes the sun shines on a dog's ass, right ?
Also just for conversation....
Do you have an idea of why a 1.0 bar and KYB Gas-A-Just shocks seem to ride only a little bit softer than the 1.15 bars and Bilsteins?
My understanding was that the KYB is a digressive design that is initially stiff while softening up as they travel further. The initial stiffness artificially made the car feel heavily sprung in my opinion. When I called Bergman Auto Craft to order bars, they had 1.06, 1.12 and 1.15 bars. I was told that the 1.15 bars would work fine with the Bilstein RCD shocks that I had planned to buy. Since installation, I have no reason to feel different with the exception of what you have written. I'm curious by nature and I often wonder how and why things work.

[c00nhunterjoe]

Leaving the math out, the average street driver will not be able to tell the difference on the street. The car will mask the issues and in a unibody case like a mopar b body, the entire vehicle will absorb it. You could step up to 1.25 bars and probably not notice a change on the street.  Relate it to overcamming the engine. We see that all the time. You mask it by cranking the timing up, putting more gear in the car, etc, and 90% of them are happy with the sound and performance in the end, but we all know they left performance on the table with their choices. Is the engine going to blow up? No, is it going to run a long time- yes. Is it going to turn heads and make people say wow? Yes. Same principle. I dont know exactly what else is done to your car, but the more done to stiffen the chassis, the more noticeable it will become. I can tell simply by how the car reacts, but i come from a military R&D background. I got paid to test things. Hard to explain without the math honestly. The car owner would notice it more on a closed course track as i said previous and lap times would show it. How the car enters exits and follows through corners. How it reacts to loss of traction under suspension load. How it recovers from that same situation.
   The kyb and bilsteins have different designs and you pointed out the differences already. The bilsteins do work fine on a street driven car with a variety of bars. I covered that earlier. They are a good shock, but shocks in general are matched to the vehicle. Would you bolt the shocks from your power wagon on the charger? Probably not. But the a body shock is the same as a c body shock. There is a massive weight difference there yet the bilstein shock does its job well on the street. In a true performance atmosphere, the suspension flaws would show. Driving from your garage to walmart on saturday and hitting a few curvy roads along the way- not so much.
   What i see as failures on the street are usually chassis tears. The sheet metal literally rips. Ive seen control arms tear out of the frame, ive seen torque boxes cracked. Ive even seen cracked windshields. It is not just limited to mopars either.
  It all comes down to what we discussed earlier as well and you said it yourself- it feels good to me and im happy. I doubt you will put the car in a position to really see the issues and if you encounter them, unless you change everything, you would never see the difference. Bottom line again, it drives nice for you, roll with it.

[Kern Dog]

Thanks for the response. No beers for me, Court Order. (No it isn't)
I have another '70 Charger that I bought last year that I plan to set up as a lighter duty version of the red Charger. I've installed frame connectors and torque boxes already, slightly smaller in size. It will likely get the original 383 back in it. 3.23 diff compared to the 3.55 in Red. I might look into the 1.03 to 1.06 torsion bars and a smaller set of sway bars. Since I am a Doubting Thomas, I'll see for myself what the difference is like. 

[c00nhunterjoe]

Are you doing a fully welded subframe connector? As in, fully to the floor pans? Anything over 1.0 i reccomend boxing the lower control arms and welding reinforcements to the torsion bar mount in the frame. Aside from the factory weld breaking, the entire sheet metal frame will flex under load. Weigh the car before you buy bars.

[Kern Dog]

The frame connectors on the second car are 2x3 and welded flush to the bottom of the existing frame rails. No connection to the floor pans. I do plan to weld .090 thick plates to the LCAs, I may even spring for the US Cartool lower core support brace for both cars. I made my own torque boxes too.
With the red car, I noticed right away that the torque boxes and frame connectors reduced shakes and flex on rough roads. The car felt as if it just soaked them up instead of skipping and bouncing over them.

[Kern Dog]

The XH Charger:

[c00nhunterjoe]

Nice. Welding them to the floor pans will make a dramatic improvement as well if thats an option. I would fully weld the k frame and reinforce the steering box area before i did the core support. If you are not replacing the floor pans which would allow access to the anchor pass thru, at least add some reinforcement to the outside of the t bar anchor point on the frame.

[c00nhunterjoe]

Its hard to tell from that angle, but are the supports circled welded to the frame connectors?

[Kern Dog]

Sorry that it took me so long to respond.
I was banned for a week or so. Somehow, I just tried to log on a few minutes ago and it went through like before.
To answer your question, No.
The connectors are 3x3 .120 wall. I welded strips above the connectors to follow the contour of the floor pans because I wanted them to have no gaps above, completely for cosmetic reasons.
I did reinforce the LCA pin mounts in the K member, welded in gussets around the steering box mounts, seam welded the entire K member, add3d plates to the bottoms of the LCAs too. I am tempted to add in the US Cartool lower radiator brace.

[c00nhunterjoe]

Nice upgrades

[c00nhunterjoe]

While bored out of my mind on quarantine, i threw the tahoe up on the lift today to give some further perspective into the discussion. This is a full size, full frame truck with the same design front suspension as our b bodies. The tahoe runs a 1.15" bar that has an effective length of 48 inches and a swing length of 13 inches. I will not bore you with the formula used to calculate wheel rate of a bar but the truck uses a 248lb bar. That is a vehicle designed to both haul 7 people and tow 6500 lbs and weighs 5100 lbs.

[Kern Dog]

Thank you.
I was not school trained in what I know or have done. I've read magazines, books, taken in advice from people online, etc. I've built several cars that run well and perform admirably.
I don't know the math on these things, I just know what feels right to me. I don't begrudge someone that is properly trained, I just know that in areas such as Construction Engineering,  as a Carpenter I  often find errors in design that the "Smart guys" make and that I have to correct. More often than not, the Engineers do have it right.

[c00nhunterjoe]

In my experiences, having a degree hung on the wall does not necessarily make you smart.

[c00nhunterjoe]

https://swayaway.com/tech-room/torsion-bar-wheel-rate-calculator/

Here is a site with alot of good reading. Gives alot of the formulas for calculations as well as more details into how chassis and suspension component flex affects the spring rates.