vb to be vc satin black brock

[vc commodore]

A direct replacement for an OEM part is a bit different, perfectly acceptable otherwise we would all be getting our K-mac or nolathane strut tops engineered. Your plates would have been made as a direct copy of the original unit not an adapter.

Point is, any changes to suspension that can effect its geometry require an engineer cert to be legal. Id dare say the ackerman angles and caster would also be up the s##t with this front end conversion.

The only change this particular conversion has changed is track.....

You can use a VR VS V8 K-frame in a VB onwards commodore....the only reason you can't use a V6 one, is because the engine mount is different...The rack mounting brackets pre VL are in a different position to VL onwards...easily solved by using the rack that matches the lower control arm....ie, VR rack has been used in this particular conversion...

Mounting of the lower control arms is identical....the difference between the 2 is, VR/VS have a longer lower control arm when compared pre VR....The radius rods are identical. (ie, you can use VB through to VS radius rods on any of those models) So this is where the track change has occurred....I don't have the track figures between the 2 seperate models, hence why I mentioned the track might be the issue...The only other change that would occur doing this is camber, as you have moved the lower balljoint further outwards from where it was originally positioned.....you haven't moved the caster angle backwards or forwards, because the control arm is still straight and bolted in the exact same position as the earlier control arm..

The next difference is the link pin....Easily solved by using the VR to VZ link pins....Pre-VN (I think), the link pins bolted through the lower control arm, because the strut didn't have the provision to bolt them there....Around the VN (I think), they put the mounting point for the link pins on the strut...

As I mentioned, we have a different interperation of the rules.....

 

[Darren_L]

I can see the appeal of the idea, a wider front track would improve the handling but trying to fit components not designed for the car isnt the best way to go about it, ive heard of people re-drilling the hole in the K-frame for the lower control arm mount to widen the front track as well.

redrilling the LCA mount point isn't done with widening the track in mind. In fact increasing the difference between front and rear track isn't ideal on a street based car. The main reason behind relocating the LCA mounting bolt in the k-frame is to re-establish the correct roll centre relationship between front and rear when lowering a Commodore and to achieve more -ve camber & the track change is negligible when retaining the early struts and LCA. Works on race cars like Commodore Cup cars, but obviously the camber is going to be a problem on a street car. And then you need to consider the strut tower centre to ball joint relationship on a VB-VP vs VR/VS. It's quite different

 

[VK SL 3800]

The only change this particular conversion has changed is track.....

You can use a VR VS V8 K-frame in a VB onwards commodore....the only reason you can't use a V6 one, is because the engine mount is different...The rack mounting brackets pre VL are in a different position to VL onwards...easily solved by using the rack that matches the lower control arm....ie, VR rack has been used in this particular conversion...

Mounting of the lower control arms is identical....the difference between the 2 is, VR/VS have a longer lower control arm when compared pre VR....The radius rods are identical. (ie, you can use VB through to VS radius rods on any of those models) So this is where the track change has occurred....I don't have the track figures between the 2 seperate models, hence why I mentioned the track might be the issue...The only other change that would occur doing this is camber, as you have moved the lower balljoint further outwards from where it was originally positioned.....you haven't moved the caster angle backwards or forwards, because the control arm is still straight and bolted in the exact same position as the earlier control arm..

The next difference is the link pin....Easily solved by using the VR to VZ link pins....Pre-VN (I think), the link pins bolted through the lower control arm, because the strut didn't have the provision to bolt them there....Around the VN (I think), they put the mounting point for the link pins on the strut...

As I mentioned, we have a different interperation of the rules.....

I cannot understand how you interpret the part of VSB-14 that stipulates that any Suspension Strut / Upright changes need to be engineered.

Here we have a VB commodore, It has a VS commodore strut and hacked up strut top. Neither of these parts are OEM on a VB commodore, are they not a non standard Suspension Strut and therefore requiring engineering? I would have thought the answer is fairly simple.

 

[383 hatch]

The only change this particular conversion has changed is track.....

You can use a VR VS V8 K-frame in a VB onwards commodore....the only reason you can't use a V6 one, is because the engine mount is different...The rack mounting brackets pre VL are in a different position to VL onwards...easily solved by using the rack that matches the lower control arm....ie, VR rack has been used in this particular conversion...

Mounting of the lower control arms is identical....the difference between the 2 is, VR/VS have a longer lower control arm when compared pre VR....The radius rods are identical. (ie, you can use VB through to VS radius rods on any of those models) So this is where the track change has occurred....I don't have the track figures between the 2 seperate models, hence why I mentioned the track might be the issue...The only other change that would occur doing this is camber, as you have moved the lower balljoint further outwards from where it was originally positioned.....you haven't moved the caster angle backwards or forwards, because the control arm is still straight and bolted in the exact same position as the earlier control arm..

The next difference is the link pin....Easily solved by using the VR to VZ link pins....Pre-VN (I think), the link pins bolted through the lower control arm, because the strut didn't have the provision to bolt them there....Around the VN (I think), they put the mounting point for the link pins on the strut...

As I mentioned, we have a different interperation of the rules.....

So a hacked up and re drilled strut mount plate is not a modification? Right..... I assume my Chev powered Torana won't be classed as modified either then? Awesome.

 

[Sandman]

Sweet the VZ's getting a LSX 454 then, I'm sure it says GM on it somewhere....

 

[Sabbath']

Sweet the VZ's getting a LSX 454 then, I'm sure it says GM on it somewhere....

Even if it doesn't, just laugh and tell the cop he must have a different interpretation of the rules to you.

 

[vc commodore]

So a hacked up and re drilled strut mount plate is not a modification? Right..... I assume my Chev powered Torana won't be classed as modified either then? Awesome.

And I also read on here, you can't get strut tops made either....

 

[ari666]

And I also read on here, you can't get strut tops made either....

id really appreciate the holden part number for those, if you have it.

 

[Young gun]

Yes it has dodge strut top! Yes I know it needs engineering! (Witch will mean some form of change) Yes im looking at my driving restrictions a little far left.
In my vb has a really short fat link pin from strut with nolithane bushed to a vr sway bar (some one mentioned it above)
The fuel line is still not legal and fills injectors with gunk. So car has stoped running
I found out why tail shaft is binding. I put the bolts in the wrong way around.

Once again what dose a vp front end consist of. More so the: knuckle, breaks, and strut? Please.

 

[VK SL 3800]

A VP front end is pretty well identical to a VB one.

The lower control arms are the same.
The struts are 99% the same except VP has the swaybar link to the strut like the VR/VS not the lower control arm.
Brakes in the base models are the same, as is the disc, caliper and wheel bearings. But they are fitted with a dust shield/air deflector behind the disc.
Some have said the strut tops differ slightly, i dont know but if there is a difference it would be a slightly different camber castor setting.
The k frames are basically identical, they just have the different engine mounts welded on and the Rack mount points are different to suit the later style racks. All of which are just prefab parts welded onto the same old k-frame.

Im not sure if the VP ackerman arm is a different length or not. It possibly is but not different enough to cause a problem.

MY VK has a complete VP front end, the Engineer who inspected it just said it was fine and met all his requirements.