The Bolt-Ons Improving the handling on a Chevelle doesn't get much easier than spending about an hour bolting on a set of shocks to complement the front and rear sway bars. Cox came up with a stainless 5/16-inch ARP stud with a large washer and nut inside the frame and a 3/8-hex 12-point stainless nut on the outside to secure the polyurethane bushing. This is an upgrade because just a bolt alone through the frame will often pull out due to the increased load on the threads. A stud, washer, and nut on the inside of the frame dramatically increases the load capacity. The original factory rear sway bar bolts on to the lower control arms. Cox upgraded to a pair of OPG stock style boxed lower arms. Another option would be to add a pair of Global West or Hotchkis tubular lower control arms. One advantage to the tubular arms is they are generally stiffer and do not allow the body to move laterally over the rear axle. This is especially important when fitting larger rear tires where clearance is minimal. This comparison is of the stock 7/8-inch front sway bar (top) and the hefty 1 1/4-inch replacement bar (middle). Addco makes a tubular 1 3/8-inch bar (bottom) that is roughly equivalent to the solid 1 1/8-inch bar. This comparison is of the stock 7/8-inch front sway bar (top) and the hefty 1 1/4-inch rep The new Addco 1-inch rear bar bolts to the lower control arms. Cox replaced the stock rear arms with a pair of OPG boxed arms because the originals were wasted. The new Addco 1-inch rear bar bolts to the lower control arms. Cox replaced the stock rear Bilstein mono-tube shocks use a much larger piston than twin-tube shocks, and combined with superior valve design, they are a major improvement over the stockers. Bilstein mono-tube shocks use a much larger piston than twin-tube shocks, and combined wit Here's a close-up view of how Cox used an ARP stainless steel stud to mount the monster Addco 1 1/4-inch sway bar to the Chevelle. Here's a close-up view of how Cox used an ARP stainless steel stud to mount the monster Ad Part of the test was evaluating the General Exclaim UHP Grabber tires. We mounted the 255 and 275/40R17s on a set of 17x8-inch front and 17x9 1/2-inch rear Center Line wheels. The tires were mounted and balanced by our friends at Flip's Tires in Van Nuys, California. Part of the test was evaluating the General Exclaim UHP Grabber tires. We mounted the 255 Using ramps, we were able to swap the parts on the front end relatively easily. The only downside was that we worked backward, which meant Cox had to reinstall the good parts after the test was over. Using ramps, we were able to swap the parts on the front end relatively easily. The only d The Test When it came time to do our testing, we humped it down to the ex-El Toro Marine Corps air station, using the huge concrete runway where F-4 Phantoms and A-4 Skyhawks used to take off during the '60s. Camaro Performers Editor Nick Licata and Steven Rupp helped us with the testing with Nick doing the driving. Our test procedure was to run the modified suspension with the 15-inch tires first, then try the 17s, then retain the 17s after converting to the old shocks and sway bar, and finally testing the old suspension with the 15-inch tires to evaluate the effects of the addition of the tires alone. DESCRIPTION 420-FOOT SLALOM SLALOM AVERAGE SPEED (MPH) BEST SPEED (MPH) AVERAGE (G-FORCE) BEST (G-FORCE) Test 1: old suspension, 15-inch tires 41.27 42.68 0.76 0.77 Test 2: old suspension, 17-inch tires 41.57 (+0.30) 44.62 (+1.94) 0.79 (+0.03) 0.81 (+0.04) Test 3: new suspension, 15-inch tires 42.31 (+1.04) 43.20 (+0.52) 0.79 (+0.03) 0.82 (+0.05) Test 4: new suspension, 17-inch tires 43.93 (+2.66) 44.62 (+1.94) 0.81 (+0.05) 0.83 (+0.06) Note: All improvements (in parenthesis) are measured against Test 1. « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | View Full Article By Jeff Smith Enjoyed this Post? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, or use your favorite social media to recommend us to friends and colleagues!