3rd/4th gen Camaro suspension

Now, I don't have a Camaro. Far from it.

However, I've been looking at the major things I'd like to do to the Cobra... torque-arm rear suspension, T56 swap, SLA front suspension, all of which are big money swaps.

Now, being on the Ford side of the fence, I've never paid too much attention to the offerings from the General. I know 4th-gen Camaros had the T56, and I've recently come to understand that they've had a torque-arm rear since the mid-eighties or so. Then I just heard somewhat recently that they've got an SLA front suspension!

So, all of these things I want to do, am I to understand that they're factory on the F-body?!?

If this is the case, why do I have a Mustang?

Well, the Camaro has been referred to being slightly more difficult to maintain and tends to be a bit more fragile (at least the later generations are) Honestly, it really depends on whether you like the way they look.

build quality was better on the mustangs

ergo was better on the mustangs

often the mustangs were lighter

Weak rear ends are a bit of an achilles heel for them, go much beyond stock (or do alot of drag on stock) and they have a tendancy for breaking. (in fact my friend who is a camaro freak is getting sticker shocked about what it takes to get something strong under there)

I have never heard that later ones had SLA front.

i have heard for ESP autocross that the camaro can be made competitive for less money.

I don't know if I'd agree about the build quality being better or worse Mustang vs. Camaro, both cars seem to have improved as the years went by, although the Mustang was less flexible, especially compared to the 3rd generation Camaro. That was probably one of the biggest issues with that car, it was just really flexible. The 3rd gen Camaro also often came with a Borg-Warner rear axle that wasn't that tough and parts are expensive for anything attached to it.

My biggest complaint with the 3rd & 4th gen Camaro is the seating and how the occupant's legs are basically on the floor. I would completely agree with Apexcarver, the ergonomics of those cars is pretty dreadful, and it's why I won't consider one for myself. He's also correct, these are Mac-strut cars up front. However, I believe they have better geometry vs. Fox Mustangs as stock.

ergonomics better? No comprende hombre. Maybe foxbodies, but SN95s-04 are the most cramped cars I have been in..period. I love the legs on the floor feel, my knees are hitting every piece of chitty plastic, and legs never get kinked up. As far as riding in the back seat, at least in 4th gens, it is halfway comfortable, you can't see E36 M3, but the seats are pretty comfortable. Back seat of 94-04 mustangs are horrible, head hits headliner, legs bunched up against back of seat, they are more suited for a 5 year old than anyone else.

I have 3rd gen f-body Koni SA rear shocks on my 2000, 4th gens up front, Sam Strano recommends you go that way with the Koni SA shocks w/ his springs (which are great). Torque arms come with the car from the factory. The stock 10 bolt on 93+ aren't that bad as long as you don't do a burnout at every red light, donuts, etc. I know some guys that are running LS3 427s on stock 10 bolt, it's all in how you treat it.

Build quality? Pretty similar in my opinion. Someone just sounds jealous that their mustang doesn't have an LS1.

I think erognomics are going to be subjective. I know that the SN95 has the distance between the pedals and the steering wheel/shifter wrong; either I'm at the right distance for the pedals and can't reach the shifter, or I can shift, but my legs are all crammed in way too close to the pedals. And with the pedal layout, heel-toe is difficult at best (versus my Celica, which I heel-toe without thinking about it). Clutch pedal height relative to dead pedal height is pretty bad, too, IMO.

Buy a 2nd gen.

The weight's the same as a fourth gen.

You can add the T56

Add the torque arm or install a 4-link

SLA suspension up front.

It's easy to stiffen them up

Circle track parts are DIRT cheap for them (tubular control arms, $50.00 each)

Cars are reasonably cheap.

They have the strongest 10bolt installed.

Trans_Maro wrote: Buy a 2nd gen. The weight's the same as a fourth gen. You can add the T56 Add the torque arm or install a 4-link SLA suspension up front. It's easy to stiffen them up Circle track parts are DIRT cheap for them (tubular control arms, $50.00 each) Cars are reasonably cheap. They have the strongest 10bolt installed.

No thank you, in my part of the country, 2nd gen camaros are known as meth dealer cars, and are the ultimate in mullet-headed transportation.

Besides, if I'm going to go through all that, I'll just keep the Cobra and my all-aluminum motor.

"No thank you, in my part of the country, Camaros are known as meth dealer cars, and are the ultimate in mullet-headed transportation."

There, I fixed your post for you.

I'm not sure if you can, say, take a nice 1972 RS and say it's more of a "meth dealer's" car than a 1986 in any flavor. Or a 1996 for that matter. I will admit to believing that the best appearing Camaro's were built between 1970 and 1973. The Pontiac version I'll give more lee-way to but you get the idea.

Meth dealers don't drive Camaros they drive Cameros

ReverendDexter wrote: No thank you, in my part of the country, 2nd gen camaros are known as meth dealer cars, and are the *ultimate* in mullet-headed transportation. Besides, if I'm going to go through all that, I'll just keep the Cobra and my all-aluminum motor.

Where the hell can I hide meth in this thing? Not very practical.

Laugh all you want guys.

Check the prices of nice, 2nd gen anything lately.

Even the Esprit and Berlinetta (girly cars) are pulling in decent $$$ for resale right now.

In my town, dealers drive Escalades and 300's, they leave the guys with F-body cars on blocks the hell alone.

Oh, and try to buy a Trans-Am. They come stock with everything you need to add to the lesser cars.

Shawn

DirtyBird222 wrote: ergonomics better? No comprende hombre. Maybe foxbodies, but SN95s-04 are the most cramped cars I have been in..period. I love the legs on the floor feel, my knees are hitting every piece of chitty plastic, and legs never get kinked up. As far as riding in the back seat, at least in 4th gens, it is halfway comfortable, you can't see E36 M3, but the seats are pretty comfortable. Back seat of 94-04 mustangs are horrible, head hits headliner, legs bunched up against back of seat, they are more suited for a 5 year old than anyone else. I have 3rd gen f-body Koni SA rear shocks on my 2000, 4th gens up front, Sam Strano recommends you go that way with the Koni SA shocks w/ his springs (which are great). Torque arms come with the car from the factory. The stock 10 bolt on 93+ aren't that bad as long as you don't do a burnout at every red light, donuts, etc. I know some guys that are running LS3 427s on stock 10 bolt, it's all in how you treat it. Build quality? Pretty similar in my opinion. Someone just sounds jealous that their mustang doesn't have an LS1.

Uh oh...Trying not to sound jealous of the ol Mustangs?

Joey

Wow... didn't mean to ignite the Mustang vs. Camaro war.... hahaha.

ReverendDexter wrote: Wow... didn't mean to ignite the Mustang vs. Camaro war.... hahaha.

transformers did that. And it sucks that they made the mustang evil

neon4891 wrote:

ReverendDexter wrote: Wow... didn't mean to ignite the Mustang vs. Camaro war.... hahaha.

transformers did that. And it sucks that they made the mustang evil

Evil and not even a rememberable character, outside of being a Saleen. Of course, non of the Decepticons except for Megatron were very developed... a lot like the first X-men movie that way, and very unfortunate.

Wait, you guys like the Autobots? Evils is cool. Decepticons WTF!

Appleseed wrote: Decepticons WTF!

Haha, couldn't agree more.

What make was optimus prime? I think the rest of the auto bots where GM's

Peterbilt

Gimp wrote: Where the hell can I hide meth in this thing? Not very practical.

filling your rollcage with crystal meth to strengthen it is against SCCA rules man...

neon4891 wrote: What make was optimus prime? I think the rest of the auto bots where GM's

Only in the new, blasphemous movie.

Prime is supposed to be an International Transtar cabover but the movie fixed that.

Jazz is supposed to be a Porsche and Megatron is just all wrong.

Shawn

pres589 wrote: The 3rd gen Camaro also often came with a Borg-Warner rear axle that wasn't that tough and parts are expensive for anything attached to it.

Keep telling people the 9 bolt rear is weak, seriously, maybe then I can find some more spares, 9 bolts are way stronger than 10 bolts mate, and they were an 87 only option. Damn they are harder to find and the ring and pinion options are far fewer

Trans_Maro wrote: Jazz is supposed to be a Porsche and Megatron is just all wrong.

Well, how would they do Megatron? I agree the move version is about 8 kinds of nothing to do with the cartoon, but the cartoon version didn't make much sense, either.

Maybe following the Galvatron model would've worked, at least in that incarnation he was self-sufficient in non-robot mode.

But really, all the Decepticons in the new movie were a big bag of fail, just waiting to get taken out by Shia LeBouf and the GM gang.

aussiesmg wrote:

pres589 wrote: The 3rd gen Camaro also often came with a Borg-Warner rear axle that wasn't that tough and parts are expensive for anything attached to it.

Keep telling people the 9 bolt rear is weak, seriously, maybe then I can find some more spares, 9 bolts are way stronger than 10 bolts mate, and they were an 87 only option. Damn they are harder to find and the ring and pinion options are far fewer

7.75" ring gear and 28 spline axles does not sound "way stronger" than a 7.5" ring gear and 28 spline axles in the GM axle. Parts cost more, aftermarket or factory. I'm not feeling bad about my statement. They might live decently on the street but if the car is going to be abused there are better options out there.