AME CHASSIS LANDED TODAY

[NickP]

Now where did I put my claw hammer and prybar?

http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL1600/2283636/24510297/408965928.jpg

[chevynut]

Who is that for Nick? :)

Did you ever tell us what the new AME IRS price adder is? You had mentioned that you quoted a couple of chassis with them.

[NickP]

No - It aint cheap. I was surprised. Over $9000.

[MP&C]

Nice fresh metal! :cool:

[567chevys]

Looks good Nick ,
How was the cost of Freight from Washington to you ?

Sid

[NickP]

$1400

[NickP]

Nice fresh metal! :cool: It's so purty

[carls 56 (RIP 11/24/2021)]

exciting times ahead Nick.

[markm]

exciting times ahead Nick.

Can one be had qith a 12 bolt or Dana 60. I am sure my personal favorite for these cars is not available 57 Olds.

[Rick_L]

markm, somehow I don't see you doing this, but you could use the triangulated 4 bar suspension that comes on this package with other axles. Certainly can be done with the museum piece Pontiac/Olds axle you like - it would be virtually the same as a 9". The axle brackets for the top bars weld to axle tubes, but pretty close to the center section. Just looking at the photos in the download catalog, I think it would work on a 12 bolt too, although you might have to build a different bracket for the axle end of the top bar. A Dana 60 might be more difficult because the center section is so wide.

A 4 bar setup with a panhard bar could easily be done with any axle you mention.

And I'll bet AME would sell you the pieces to do any of this if you asked.

[NickP]

Can one be had qith a 12 bolt or Dana 60. I am sure my personal favorite for these cars is not available 57 Olds.

Well, I guess were one want to have it that way, AME could but the added cost would be far more than the gain. Triangulated four link doesn't lend itself well to the Dana or 12/10 Bolt style. Having said that a 57 Olds/Poncho could be done but again, cost outways the gain. These chassis are jiged up for their standard 9" and altering that process might be expensive. Should you be interested and want a price, I can do that for you but really doubt it will be possible.

[chevynut]

Triangulated four link doesn't lend itself well to the Dana or 12/10 Bolt style.

Nick, could you explain what you mean by that?

[NickP]

Upper bars are welded to the housing just above centerline on a 9". A Dana is a casting and regardless of the welders talent, I wouldn't care for it. The lower bars are welded to the axle tube - not an issue. This doesn't mean it's not possible, just something I wouldn't encourage.

[Rick_L]

I still think there's a possibility you could weld the bracket to the tube on a 12 bolt. A bit less optimistic on a Dana 60.

[NickP]

Could be Rick. However, were it a plausible option, seems AME would most likely offer it as an option but certainly, I'm no expert so I have no argument. I just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express.

[chevynut]

Upper bars are welded to the housing just above centerline on a 9". A Dana is a casting and regardless of the welders talent, I wouldn't care for it.

I guess I still don't understand the issue. The location of these bars looks compatible with a 12-bolt to me.

http://www.moserengineering.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/5e06319eda06f020e43594a9c230972d/f/i/file_25_1.jpg

http://artmorrison.com/images/55-57Chevy/final/Tri5-Detail-Rear-Clip.jpg

[MP&C]

Looks like the center housing (forging?) on the 12 bolt may be part of the interference. They likely don't want to weld to that.. Where the 9" is two pressed halves of steel welded together, you have more flexibility in locating the brackets closer to / attached to the center housing..

[NickP]

I am at somewhat of a disadvantage but then again I do have a chassis in-house. Pictured below is the real deal. The distance betweenthe arrows is 15" on the 9". Maintaining that distance allows the angle of the upper bars and the length of the upper bars to remain as designed by AME. It fits their jig.
Below that Laszlo, I have taken your submitted picture of the housing, drawn in arrows and sadly, have no idea of the distance. If it is in fact 15" or better yet, less than, then yes, one could use a 12 Bolt to do much the same. Having said that and as I pointed out above, this is not a substitute for their normal offering and would most likely be rejected by AME as an option. Does this mean they will not do it if it measures out ok - can't answer that. Would I want a 12 bolt, no, not my choice - I like a 9". Having said all of that, as I said above, should a buyer want something not on their list - I am more than happy to inquire.

That's my story and I'm stickin to it.

Nick

http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL1600/2283636/5293467/408978131.jpg

http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL1600/2283636/5293467/408978114.jpg

[chevynut]

It looks closer on the driver's side than the passenger side. I assume the axles aren't the same length. Yes, it does look like it would interfere, especially on the driver's side. Thanks for clearing that up Nick.

That said, I know AME probably wouldn't mess with it, or charge an arm and a leg to do it. I was just curious if a guy could do it himself. I have been asked to do triangulated 4-link rears with a C4 front so that's why I was interested.

Now, what's the magic of having the upper links located exactly where they are on the AME rearend? Couldn't they be pushed outboard some? Can the angles be changed? Is there some critical geometric consideration for the upper links?

[chevynut]

I also noticed AME doesn't use heims on the ends of their rods. So how do they take into account the twisting of the rods when the rearend goes up on one side and down on the other? I'm sure they're urethane, but it doesn't seem like a good thing to me to twist them that much. The bushings don't seem very large, and they're not as soft as stock rubber on similar rear suspensions.

[NickP]

Laszlo, try to remember, I only stay at Holiday Inn Express so I just pick up a tidbit or two :) but I suspect and know it's all engineered to work or they wouldn't sell as many as they do. If you maintain the 30 degree off chassis center line angle and the upper bar length of 12-3/4", moving away from center will shorten the bar and I suspect limit the travel. I can tell you this for certain, installed according to instructions there is no bind and the limiting factor for up and down travel is only shocks and sway bar. Without them is moves easy. With your PE & ME background I suspect you understand the geometry better than I do.

As to "Heim Joint" or rod ends I never saw good road life on them even with the added seals dirt, dust and other road grime just eat them up. Were I to design one I would lean toward Johnny Joints, similar to what I am using on the Bronco but smaller. They're designed for off-road and muck.

Nick

[rkwhite61]

I'm jealous.

[chevynut]

I suspect and know it's all engineered to work or they wouldn't sell as many as they do.

Yes I'm sure it works well. Not denying that. I just wonder about the geometry, and if there is something critical to it. I know that viewed from the side you have to maintain the correct instant center to maintain the anti-dive properties and hook up well. I don't know much about the geometry looking at it from the top, and whether the angles are critical. The upper bar triangulation is only there to prevent side-to-side motion, otherwise it would just be a regular 4-link. The more parallel the top bars are to the frame, the more likely you'll get side-to-side motion.


I can tell you this for certain, installed according to instructions there is no bind and the limiting factor for up and down travel is only shocks and sway bar. Without them is moves easy.

Well, there HAS to be some binding or twisting if one side goes up and the other goes down. The bolt holes in the arms are parallel to the ground. When the rearend tilts, the bolts either have to tilt with it or stay flat to the ground. Either way you get some twisting of the bushing. I don't know how significant that is. It does seem like the "johnny joint" would be the way to go. That's also why Newman uses the spherical joints in the C4 rear. 4-links bind, and ladder bars bind. I don't see why this doesn't bind as well. You have the same things going on.

[chevynut]

Nick, is this frame for you or for a customer? I suspect it's for the tri5 you're currently building for your customer.

[Rick_L]

Cnut, seems like without a spherical bearing, the only way it's going to work is with a urethane bushing that can allow the twisting that you mentioned. If the springs and bars are stiff enough, it doesn't twist much.

[chevynut]

Thanks Rick, I was just thinking of how much it twists after I posted that. If the car rolls a lot, you get more twist. I guess swaybars help on street cars. On 4x4s you WANT a lot of articulation, so they need those johnny joints.

[NickP]

Nick, is this frame for you or for a customer? I suspect it's for the tri5 you're currently building for your customer.

Customer 57

[567chevys]

Hi Nick ,Since your a AME dealer , you should asked them why they build such a nice frame and then used a POS ID tag Also here is the car that Jon put that frame under , He is starting that 55 right now Thanks Sid

[MadMooks]

I spoke with a customer yesterday about a liftgate we are doing for him, after we got talking about his ride turns out hes getting the 1st chassis from Morrison with the new IRS setup. I believe its a 55 nomad. he mentioned how they want to call the car the "bruiser" , black/blue two tone. sounds like its going to be a pretty high end build. L99 crate engine, 6L80E, all that stuff. its hard listening to these guys talk about their cars sometimes haha. so jealous of this one!

[chevynut]

Mike, that sounds like a high-dollar build. But it's probably going to be really nice. Is he a "checkbook builder" or is he a hands-on guy? What's an L99? Did you mean LS-9?

[MadMooks]

funny you ask about the L99 , because at first when I heard it I wasn't sure what it was either. he definitely didn't say LS-9 . I googled it and looks like a 6.2L.


few other details about the car, paddle shift, custom leather, oh and lots of MadMooks parts! :)

Hot Rod Dynamics in NC is building the car for him, or at least that's my guess since his liftgate/parts are being shipped there.

[chevynut]

That's interesting. Your pic shows it as a "Camaro SS", "2010 L99 6.2L V8 VVT "

I didn't know the Camaro had a VVT engine. I thought VVT only came out recently in the new LT-1 Corvette engines.

If I was building a car of that caliber, IMO I would have gotten one of the LS-A or LS-9 engines, or even had a blown LS-7 built. He must be building a cruiser...lol.

[chevynut]

2010 "L99" 6.2L V-8 VVT ( L99 )
6.2L V-8 (L99) CAR ENGINE

Features and benefits

-New engine offering in the Camaro SS

-First Small Block Car engine with VVT

-Active Fuel Management ( automatic transmission models )

-SAE Certified Power & Torque

-High flow cylinder heads

-Higher flow intake manifold with acoustic shell

-Larger bore block with structural improvements

-Pistons ( high engine output design )

-High flow injectors

-Acoustic beauty cover


New engine offering in Camaro
The "L99" V-8 is now available in the Camaro SS. The L99 performance is SAE Certified at 400 hp @ 5900 rpm and 410 lb-ft. of torque @4300 rpm. The "L99" V-8 will be mated up with the Hydra-Matic 6L80 (MYC) six-speed automatic in this application.

High Flow Cylinder Heads
The intake port shape size and shape have been modified to increase flow. The higher flow intake ports are similar to the LS3 6.2L. Casting changes were made to increase the opening at the exhaust face to improve exhaust port flow. A new exhaust manifold opening is required to match the heads.

Enhanced valvetrain
The inlet rocker arm is offset 6 mm between the valve tip and rocker bolt/push rod to enable a more direct intake port. The intake valve diameter is 55.0 mm and the exhaust valve diameter is 40.4. Intake and exhaust lift art at 12.7mm. The valvetrain was modified to interface with a cam phaser to provide 30 degrees of cam phaser authority. AFM Lifters in cylinders 1,4,6, and 7 and the AFM control system enables V4 operation at engine operating conditions where V4 mode is more efficient.

Higher flow intake manifold with acoustic shell
Intake ports revised to match cylinder head. The composite intake manifold is manufactured with a lost core process to improve runner to runner variation and to reduce flow losses. Acoustic foam is sandwiched between the outside top of the intake manifold and an additional "skull cap" acoustic shell to reduce radiated engine noise. Structural enhancements have been added to the manifold bosses.

Larger bore block with structural improvements
Casting and machining in the bulkheads was revised to improve block structure and to improve bay to bay breathing. The enhanced cylinder block casting is shared with the the 6.2L truck applications, 6.2L LS3 applications, and 6.2L supercharged LSA and L99 applications.

Pistons
A larger diameter piston design features design enhancements for the higher engine output.

High Flow Injectors
High flow 5.0 g/s injectors were used from the LS7 engine.

Acoustic / Beauty Cover
The beauty cover has a revised appearance and acoustic treatment

Overview
For the 2010 Camaro, General Motors engineers objective was to provide greater fuel efficiency by introducing Active Fuel Management technology and VVT technology to the automatic transmission application of the Camaro SS performance engine.

The L99 balanced the use of performance design features of the LS3 while introducing proven fuel efficiency enhancements used on the high volume truck applications. The L99 used the LS3 base engine block, head, intake manifold design elements to increase flow efficiency. The L99 also meets the more stringent Bin4 emission standards and again avoids the gas guzzler tax. The small block tradition of more for less continues.


http://www.camaro5.com/forums/wiki.php?title=L99+engine+specifications

[NickP]

An update on the chassis - got it uncrated. I reduced the crate to 5, 55 gal drums worth of 6" pieces of lumber.

[JT56]

Nick it might get cold enough to have a fire!!!

[NickP]

True, but there is something different about wood after it's been processed into wood for construction versus a log - the both burn but the log has a much better smell. The last time I burned a batch of old pallets, the fire department thought they smelled a house on fire and showed up - embarrassing.