Reilly Motorsports AlteKtion Kit

[SmashingPunkFan]

Hi guys,

I just wanted to share a video I made on me installing the Reilly Motorsports AlteKtion Kit and how easy it was on my 1970 Dodge Charger.

The newly available room for headers, oil pan, anything else you would want to do to your charger is well worth the the cost. Plus, it's super easy to install.

I also had to patch my existing frame rails because someone previously had jumped it. The damage to the rear K frame bolt holes is pretty obvious it came down hard!
All is new and good 👍

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask away 😁

[Kern Dog]

If you're happy with it, good for you.

[pipeliner]

Junk Ford Front End.

[Mike DC]

I don't own an RMS front end and there are things about it that I would do differently. 

But IMO it's not a junk product.  It has benefits and there are a lot of satisfied buyers. 


It's a Ford front end in the same way that an aftermarket Tremec 5spd is a Ford tranny.

[Kern Dog]

I have agreed with Rick Ehrenberg on many things. THIS topic is one of them.
There have been no recorded advantages of the RMS setup delivering any advantage in road racing or durability.
The control arms are weaker than what is used in a stock torsion bar system. The K member has less diagonal strength. The cantilevered outer tie rod connection is inferior. The loads for suspension are now concentrated at or forward of the front wheels as opposed to the stock design where the loads are spread out wider and further. These cars were designed to disperse the load through the frame rails, fender aprons, firewall and torsion bar crossmember and as such, the structures were built to handle the stresses that way. The RMS does the opposite. Think of it as how stable you are when standing while holding 100 lbs with your feet 24" apart. Now put your feet together and see how stable you feel with all your weight concentrated so close together.
It is curious how the RMS name was also used in the doomed ship known as the RMS Titanic!

[John_Kunkel]

I have agreed with Rick Ehrenberg on many things. THIS topic is one of them.
There have been no recorded advantages of the RMS setup delivering any advantage in road racing or durability.

Ever consider that those might not be the aim of the user? Things that some people consider essential are unimportant to others.

[Kern Dog]

Sure. Some people don't have the skills to clean, paint and rebuild a stock front suspension but they have a big wallet and like the clean and new yet structurally inferior RMS kit. All the refinishing is done for them, the hardware is clean and bagged too. There is no pressing in/out of the bushings, just installing the kit.
If you want to spend double the cost of rebuilding and upgrading a torsion bar suspension to have a bigger turning radius and more header clearance, feel free to take this route. Newer is not better in this case.
I have seen these in cars, I have known people with them. Heim joints fail if not serviced at much more frequent intervals and even then, don't last as long as OEM connections. If you have a failure when on a trip, good friggin luck finding anywhere with replacement parts. An OEM front end part can be found within a day in most cases.

[Kern Dog]

I understand that time marches on and some systems that may have been great 50 years ago are now obsolete or inferior to new stuff that is available.
The RMS setup addresses a problem that doesn't exist.
Sure, if you need frequent, easy access to your oil pan,  the RMS system will be great. On the other hand, if  you were smarter, you could actually learn how to properly build an engine and not need the wide open oil pan access the RMS kit offers.
You could buy $800 Dougs or $1000 TTI headers that were designed to fit around torsion bars or spend $6,000 on the RMS setup and buy the $400 generic headers. Financially you're way in the hole but if that is your convoluted form of logic, cheers to you.
There have been a few others that have tried the coil over replacement suspensions. Magnum Farce, RMS, Hemi Denny and a few others. QA-1 offered a tubular K member that retains torsion bars.
I see the appeal for those that are ignorant of the value of the OEM torsion bar system. You get a complete kit of shiny, new parts, instructions and new nuts and bolts.
The main problem is....these Ford Pinto based systems are only a legitimate upgrade for F O R D S that had really crappy original suspension and steering systems.
The Mopar torsion bar system was way ahead of it's time then and still is superior to other designs because it is lighter and stronger. The weight for the system is low in the chassis, further to the rear for better balance and spread out into components that serve other duties. The fender aprons are like plywood on a wall frame...they provide stiffness and shear resistance. The K member keeps the frame rails from parellelogramming. The torsion bar crossmember anchors the rearmost end of the torsion bars and provides support for the floor pan. Being unit-body, the car was stiffer and lighter than body on frame cars.

[John_Kunkel]

The RMS setup addresses a problem that doesn't exist.

Once again, you're making an assumption...that the aim is to solve a problem.

[Kern Dog]

Why would a company take a radically different design approach if they didn't feel that the original design was ripe for a change?
The Pinto suspension was an improvement over a straight axle. It was better than the weird coil spring sitting over an upper control arm too. It is not better than our torsion bars.
The GM double A arm with coil springs was a decent design. You don't see the RMS guys making a coil over setup for 67-81 Camaro/Firebird models, do you? If so, I haven't seen it.
They seemed to be directed toward the Mopar crowd for the "reasons" that I listed.
I do admit, they do look pretty. For car shows and light duty use, it may never get pushed to the point of failure. It does not look like it would stand up to daily driver use like a stock setup did.

[Mike DC]

             
The OEM Mopar front end has tight header room, vague steering that's physically heavy, and the suspension geometry has no caster & a high front roll center.  The RMS improves all that stuff. 

The RMS setup also ditches the stock rubber bushings and converts the brakes to aftermarket.  Some people (not all) want that stuff too. 



Is the RMS front end as strong as the stocker?  Probably not, with the rubber bushings eliminated. 

But 'Bullitt' and 'Vanishing Point' didn't break the stock front end.  That's a high bar.

The RMS has a lot of satisfied customers.  Plenty of street miles, autocross, etc.  It's standard equipment on the 'Fast & Furious' Mopar stunt cars too.  It's not weak.

[Kern Dog]

The OEM Mopar front end has tight header room, vague steering that's physically heavy, and the suspension geometry has no caster & a high front roll center.  The RMS improves all that stuff. 
 

No caster. PFFFfffttt.
I got 4 degrees of caster with stock arms and stock UCA bushings, 6 degrees of caster with K 7103 offset bushings and over 8 degrees of caster with the QA 1 UCAs.
I also got 1 degree of negative camber. I have never driven a classic Mopar that handles better.
Vague steering? Try a Borgeson and you'll see a huge improvement. 12 lbs lighter, better feel and it fits like stock.
An OEM torsion bar suspension can be rebuilt, bigger torsion bars and sway bars added and you'd still come in for less than half the cost of an RMS.

You add in a Fast and Furious reference to support your argument? Really?
Those idiots all use Chevy engines in the stunt cars to commonize the fleet for faster repairs.
 They do more stunts with cartoons than for real.
Movie budgets can afford to order multiple RMS kits way ahead of time to be ready for inevitable failures that will occur during production of the movie.
Joe Blow from Idaho will not like sitting in a motel room for a week waiting for a control arm from RMS when it breaks when he tries to take his car on a long road trip.

[Mike DC]

No caster. PFFFfffttt.
I got 4 degrees of caster with stock arms and stock UCA bushings, 6 degrees of caster with K 7103 offset bushings and over 8 degrees of caster with the QA 1 UCAs.
I also got 1 degree of negative camber. I have never driven a classic Mopar that handles better.
Vague steering? Try a Borgeson and you'll see a huge improvement. 12 lbs lighter, better feel and it fits like stock.
An OEM torsion bar suspension can be rebuilt, bigger torsion bars and sway bars added and you'd still come in for less than half the cost of an RMS.

I never said RMS is the only option.  I'm just saying it has worth.     

You add in a Fast and Furious reference to support your argument? Really?
Those idiots all use Chevy engines in the stunt cars to commonize the fleet for faster repairs.
 They do more stunts with cartoons than for real.
Movie budgets can afford to order multiple RMS kits way ahead of time to be ready for inevitable failures that will occur during production of the movie.

When 'Dukes' or 'Knight Rider' did an episode with miniature stunts, do you think the real cars had it easy that week?  Nah, they still got run hard.   

I've heard (from somebody near the source) that the RMS front ends are holding up pretty well on 'Furious'.  The crew is salvaging RMS parts back off totaled car bodies and re-using them on later cars, just like the LS motors & other mechanicals. 

You can see RMS-equipped cars in the movies getting driven on rough pavement & off-road, catching air under the chassis, etc.  And it's safe to assume those driving shots were getting repeated several times each, unless a car was actually getting totaled in it.     

I'm just saying the RMS stuff isn't weak.  It's not gonna break from the way the typical classic car gets used these days. 

Joe Blow from Idaho will not like sitting in a motel room for a week waiting for a control arm from RMS when it breaks when he tries to take his car on a long road trip.

Would the situation be so much better if you broke a 50yo stock suspension part?  You'd still be waiting days or longer to get anything shipped to your door.  Good luck finding anything at the local pick-n-pull. 

[John_Kunkel]

You don't see the RMS guys making a coil over setup for 67-81 Camaro/Firebird models, do you? If so, I haven't seen it.

You need to get out more...maybe not RMS but your local Alston and others make them.

https://cachassisworks.com/p-3661-g-machine-clip-front-suspension.aspx

And Speedway makes several including a whole clip

https://www.speedwaymotors.com/G-Comp-Unser-Edition-1970-81-Camaro-Front-Suspension-Kit,233096.html?sku=350600&utm_matchtype={match_type}&msclkid=174b1b910f1a11dcb3977c97b7d5096c

Just about any old suspension system (front and rear) can be improved on but that doesn't mean there's a "problem" with the original.

[Kern Dog]

Oh, I agree in part.
The Mopar torsion bar suspension had "spring rates" that were way too soft. The steering feel is way too sloppy. They were a product of the times and the times have changed, at least they are different for many of us.
I've repeatedly mentioned stock based in reference to the torsion bar system. Bigger torsion bars, bigger anti-sway bars, better steering boxes, better alignment settings all take the factory setup and improve on it. This is a lot like taking a stock 2 barrel engine and rebuilding it with higher compression, a bigger cam, stiffer valve springs, better flowing heads, headers, a 4 barrel carburetor on an aluminum intake. The core design remains, you've just improved on it. No need to put a LS engine from a Chevy when you can make power with the stock based engine that has some modern parts added to it.