The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network

The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network (http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/index.php)
-   The 1967 - 1972 Chevrolet & GMC Pickups Message Board (http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   72 control arms vs 73 (http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=781008)

EPS3 02-06-2019 03:34 PM

72 control arms vs 73
 
I'm considering using a front steering Chevy C10 cross member (or at least control arms) on my 1937 Buick Hot Rod.
From what I have read, the biggest difference from 72 to 73 control arms is the switch to rubber bushings.
72 control arms are less expensive, but would I be better off with 73 control arms?
Thanks

Mike C 02-06-2019 10:49 PM

Re: 72 control arms vs 73
 
Personally, I think the truck front end is too wide for a 30's car. You would be much better served with a Camaro or Nova subframe or an A body donor such as a Chevelle. Or even an S10 for that matter. And any of those tap you into the 4 3/4" bolt circle wheels which there are more choices.

jbarron 02-07-2019 09:12 AM

Re: 72 control arms vs 73
 
Why not just get a mustang II kit for it?
Probably look cleaner and the rack and pinon steering is easier to deal with.

EPS3 02-07-2019 11:37 AM

Re: 72 control arms vs 73
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike C (Post 8460462)
Personally, I think the truck front end is too wide for a 30's car. You would be much better served with a Camaro or Nova subframe or an A body donor such as a Chevelle. Or even an S10 for that matter. And any of those tap you into the 4 3/4" bolt circle wheels which there are more choices.

Thanks for the feedback. I'm still weighing the options. If I use a C10 cross member then I will have to narrow it. Have considered the Camaro sub frames but the 37 Buick uses the rails of chassis to locate the front fenders. The 37 rails are 32.5" wide in at firewall and 26.5" wide at the axle. The control arms are also angled rearwards (See picture). The Camaro sub frame has been used successfully for models a couple of years later but I have not seen or heard of a clean install for my year car. I also already have 5 on 5 wheels purchased for this project.
Do you think 72 C10 control arms would be 73 better and why?

EPS3 02-07-2019 11:54 AM

Re: 72 control arms vs 73
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jbarron (Post 8460646)
Why not just get a mustang II kit for it?
Probably look cleaner and the rack and pinon steering is easier to deal with.

Thanks for the feedback. A Mustang II front suspension is possible but the car already has IFS with spring pockets so would require cutting off those pockets.
I would like to adapt and keep those pockets if possible
I got a killer deal on a RetroRack (Australian company) to adapt rack and pinion.
Do you think 72 C10 control arms would be 73 better and why?

vics stuff 02-07-2019 12:20 PM

Re: 72 control arms vs 73
 
Stick with a mustang II suspension set up. You will be glad you did.
Vic

EPS3 02-07-2019 12:54 PM

Re: 72 control arms vs 73
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by EPS3 (Post 8460148)
I'm considering using a front steering Chevy C10 cross member (or at least control arms) on my 1937 Buick Hot Rod.
From what I have read, the biggest difference from 72 to 73 control arms is the switch to rubber bushings.
72 control arms are less expensive, but would I be better off with 73 control arms?
Thanks

Is there anyone here who will share opinion on my original question?

Barnfind46 02-07-2019 04:06 PM

Re: 72 control arms vs 73
 
I converted my '68 to later model front suspension to get disc brakes and have run the older control arms on other trucks. I have been happy with both. As long as all parts are in good condition they both work just as well. If you are concerned about deflection on the rubber bushings you can always go with urethane.

EPS3 02-07-2019 04:21 PM

Re: 72 control arms vs 73
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Barnfind46 (Post 8460897)
I converted my '68 to later model front suspension to get disc brakes and have run the older control arms on other trucks. I have been happy with both. As long as all parts are in good condition they both work just as well. If you are concerned about deflection on the rubber bushings you can always go with urethane.

Thanks very much for the information.
Do the older style arms need to be greased more often?
Do the arms with rubber bushings provide a smoother or less jarring ride?

Madkidd007 02-09-2019 01:08 PM

Re: 72 control arms vs 73
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by EPS3 (Post 8460906)
Thanks very much for the information.
Do the older style arms need to be greased more often?
Do the arms with rubber bushings provide a smoother or less jarring ride?

As long as you’re not trying to interchange a 1 ton arm with the bolt on setup they will swap out. Lowers I believe the bolt holding the shaft onto the crossmember got larger in diameter. Uppers are a direct bolt on. As far as greasing goes it’s no different than any other metal on metal wear item. Grease items when doing usual maintence and it shouldn’t matter.

EPS3 02-11-2019 11:37 AM

Re: 72 control arms vs 73
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Madkidd007 (Post 8462177)
As long as you’re not trying to interchange a 1 ton arm with the bolt on setup they will swap out. Lowers I believe the bolt holding the shaft onto the crossmember got larger in diameter. Uppers are a direct bolt on. As far as greasing goes it’s no different than any other metal on metal wear item. Grease items when doing usual maintence and it shouldn’t matter.

Thanks for this information.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:03 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1997-2013 67-72chevytrucks.com