Questions for the "C1 Hybrid" guys

[wapaugh]

Hi Larry, John, Rich, etc... After spending the last year getting my mom's estate in a managable position, I am finally ready to start again on the 59. Last week I sold the old chassis and a bunch of parts that wouldn't be needed after the conversion. I am now ready to order the SRIII chassis, but before I call Mike I am hoping to get each of your opinions (and anyone else who might have one) on which way to proceed.

(Option A) I have found a C5 rolling chassis w/ all the suspension, LS-1 engine, 5-sp transaxle, torque tube, computer, harness, wheels & tires for about $10K. I think SRIII has a chassis made for this application and I assume that it is the same price as for the C4 setup - $5500. So for +/- $16K I could be ready to drop the body. OR.....

(Option B) I could order the finished Stage II chassis w/ C4 rear & C5 front suspension for $11.5K, and order an LS2 crate engine from Scoggin-Dickey. This option, by the time I buy a tranny, computer, harness, wheels & tires etc, would be more expensive (about $21K - if I'm lucky). But, I would have a superior engine (under warranty) and the suspension would be set up and ready to go.

Besides the obvious differences in cost, are there any advantages of going with one option over the other? Will I have to do any body (fender flares) modifications with option A? Will the shifter, mounted on the C5 torque tube require repositioning, or will it approximate the C1 shift hole? Are there any other issues I should consider in making a decision? Your input, as always, is appreciated.

Wes

 

[IH2LOSE]

Wes


I am not the best to comment on the C5 setup so I will leave that to Rich and John.

If I did not have such a fear of the computer controlled motors for sure I would have went the Ls motor set up with C5 suspention.

Good luck and call me when you get a chance Ill bring you up to speed on the steering column stuff

 

[vette rod]

I would go with option "A" it would make for a much more complete and better unit. Take the money you would save and put it in a nice set of wheels or something along those lines. Thats my two cents anyway.


www.pugesekmotorsports.com

 

[John Mcgraw]

Wes,
I looked at both when I built mine, and decided on the C4 chassis. It just looked like an easier retrofit. Mike now makes the chassis with C4 rear and C5 front suspension. Call him, and he will be glad to give you all the adnvantages and disadvantages of both style of chassis. I believe he still reccomends the C4 style chassis for most people. My new SRIII C2 chassis uses C5 front and C4 rear suspension. The computer-controlled engines are a snap to setup, and after your first one, you will wonder what all the fuss was about! Both chassis styles will allow 8.5" wheels and 245 rubber to be mounted without wheel well modifications or flares. If wider rear tires are desired, there are some bulged quarter panels available that will allow 10.5" wheels to be used, or you can tub the wheel wells and narrow the rearend. I don't like the rather Cobra look of these bulged fenders. The smaller wheels should help me protect my D36 rearend from excess torque damage, and it ought to be a real burnout king as well!

Regards, John McGraw

 

[wapaugh]

John,

It seems that Mike also makes a chassis that is strictly for C5 - front, rear and down the middle. This is the one that I don't know much about. I need to find out if the torque tube and transaxle are going to pose retro-fit problems, or requre modifications that I can't foresee.

I have tried to call SRIII, but they all must be at a show or some other function as I haven't been able to get anyone to answer the phone. I'll try them again early next week.

Like you, I really don't want to flare the fenders or tub the wells. I think 8.5" is plenty of wheel and makes for a nice look. I would be interested in hearing what your concerns were regarding the C5 set-up, and why you decided the C4 would be an easier fit.

Thanks to you (and both Larrys) for your insight(s).

 

[Islander]

The computer-controlled engines are a snap to setup, and after your first one, you will wonder what all the fuss was about!

John,

Are you taking pictures and notes as you go along? How much are you asking for the manual?? Did you go with the returnless gas line? Do you have a website with progress pics of your C2 project I can go peruse?

Anyways, I saw you looking around for a Dana 44 for your C2 a while ago but I guess you decided to go with a 36. I just bought a ZR-1, 3.54 geared D44 for my '66 off of e-bay, I'll see how that goes once it arrives.

Cheers,

Islander

 

[richscorvettes]

Wes,

Been away at a Watkins Glen SCDA event and just saw your question.

There is quite a bit more involved in using the C5 rear suspension setup and it is likely to be a more expensive proposition as well. Based on the info from Mike the major body changes needed to use this setup include:

- Installing a new torque tube cover in place of the existing trans. tunnel from the shifter location all the way to the rear of the passenger compartment.
- Shortening the center glove box compartment.
- Modifying the rear wheel wells.
- Removing the spare tire well entirely and replacing with a flat panel.

Some other changes needed would be shortening the C5 torque tube and modifying the rear bellhousing area where it mates to the transmission. This is about an $900 mod. You will also have to notch the gas tank to clear the transmission or install a fuel cell in the trunk. Because of the wider torque tube cover you have to use narrower seats. You also must use the 6-speed as the clearance for an automatic requires much more space. There is also a cost difference between this frame and the C5 front/C4 rear frame of $500.

All in all, given the additional number of modifications and the additional labor involved, it would seem to yield little, if anything, in the way of a performance gain especially when considering the extra costs. As John mentioned it is a much easier retro-fit with the C5 front/C4 rear combination.

Hope that helps in making your choice.

Rich Lagasse

 

[John Mcgraw]

Rich pretty much echo's my opinion. The C5 chassis will have a lot more fabrication associated with it, will not perform any better, and in my opinion, does not look as good. I would however, reccomend the C5 front suspension on the other frame. It allows a lot more room between the engine and the frame rails then the C4 front suspension does!

Regards, John McGraw

 

[John Mcgraw]

Islander,

I have been taking quite a few pics, so If I can be of any help, don't hesitate to ask. Rich is at least 6 months ahead of me on his 63, so I am relying on him for help on the 65. Mike just shipped my chassis today, so I probably will not see it until the end of next week. I did find a real nice low mileage 96 model D44 rear with 3.54 gears and a nice 2003 front suspension.

Regards, John McGraw

 

[IH2LOSE]

As quoted from Rich

- Removing the spare tire well entirely and replacing with a flat panel.

Wes
If I had to do it all over (Because of the paint blister I may have to ) The first thing I would do is remove the entire spare tire tub.I cannot see any benifit to keeping it,except for the fact of having a smaller hole to repair.Its not deep enough to sink a battery into completely, and removing the spare tire tub would open the bottom up more to see the rear end and give us better room to tuck the exchaust up higher.Since I am now day dreaming of what I would do different I also would stick in a computer controlled small block LS motor.



This is a list of what you will have to be doing,besides the normall body restoration,Do you stil have my phone number call me when you get a chance.(if you dont have it drop me an email)



1-steering column,and the shafts and universals to the rack
2-shifter and linkage
3-clearanceing the front inner fender wells to mate up around the front suspention
4-cutting out around the spare tire tub
5-adapting the emergency brake cable to the new set up
6-new type of a gas pedal and cable to work the throttle
7-custom drive shaft
8-harness adapter to run new motor
9-custom exchaust
10-adding bumper mounts to the SR111 frame
EDIT
11-battery tray mount on frame or in trunk (John M)


Anybody else want to add to my list of what he has to do.

 

[John Mcgraw]

Larry,

I agree with the spare tire tub. If I had it to do over again, I would lose the tub entirely as well and jog the rear crossmember up to the floor of the trunk to allow me to tuck the pipes up better as well! this would have allowed me to tunnell the exhaust tips into the rear panel. Don't forget the fabrication of a battery tray. Why Mike does not put a battery tray on his chassis is beyond me.
On the subject of bumper mounts, I made my front license plate and bumperetts mount on a bracket under the frame kind of like the original setup, and attached it with nutserts in the frame tubes. If I had it to do again, I would just weld a stub to the front of the frame and install the brackets over the stub. It would get the brackets out from under the car and make one less thing to hit on speed bumps! Billy Dawson mounts his like this on the frames he makes, and it works well. I was just not willing to start welding on my finished chassis again.

Regards, John McGraw

 

[John Mcgraw]

Wes,

Also look around a little for your engine and trans. I found some places that are selling the LS2 for as little as $5225 and the 4L65E trans for as little as $1840.
The only problem right now with the LS2 is that there is not a program available yet to reprogram the LS2 computer. Right now, the guys are using a LS1 computer and changing the harness to fit the LS1 computer. There were some changes that the LS1 box does not handle well, like the change of the knock sensors. The frequency of the LS2 knock sensors is different than the LS! because of where they are mounted, and the LS1 program does not read them very well. This should be a short-term issue since a version of LS2 Edit should be available within the next two months.

Regards, John McGraw

 

[richscorvettes]

Larry,

I agree with the spare tire tub. If I had it to do over again, I would lose the tub entirely as well and jog the rear crossmember up to the floor of the trunk to allow me to tuck the pipes up better as well! this would have allowed me to tunnell the exhaust tips into the rear panel. Regards, John McGraw

We ran into the same issue with the tire tub in getting enough clearance to allow us to run the exhaust out through the rear valance. I had thought about removing it entirely but decided on another approach. We sectioned four inches out of the tub which gave us enough clearance for the pipes and also cleared the rear tie rod mount. The remaining space in the spare tire tub wasn't wasted though as I able to make a sunken tool box flush with the floor. We also ran the exhaust pipes over the Batwing and had to make small "pockets" to gain enough clearance with the trunk floor. We made the pockets from pieces taken from the original front fender which was replaced as it had the right curve. While it was more involved it did solve the exhaust routing issue and we were able to retain some useable space. I hope we never need to use the tools but you never know...:L

Rich Lagasse

 

[wapaugh]

Guys,

This is exactly the sort of information I was looking for. I knew the C5 setup had to be more involved, but just didn't realize how much so. Glad I didn't buy the C5 chassis until I heard back from you.

I had already planned to scrap the spare tire tub, for all of the reasons you mentioned. I want the exhaust tucked up, and envision a notched out rear valence between the bumpers ala the late models. Good point, John, about having Mike make mods to the rear Xmember during fabrication.

Larry, I will be in touch soon as there are many things I would like to discuss.

Here we go boys!!!...if I can make contact w/ Mike on Monday, I'm finally ordering the chassis. It's time to get this show on the road. Thanks again to each of you for being so helpful and insightful. You know I'll be in touch.

Regards,

Wes

 

[Tyler Townsley]

Early ideas on a C1. This is a early aftermarket frame (the c4 stuff just bolts on no mods needed) and long out of production aftermarket body(No functioning doors). These are some of the ideas being tried out on the rear of a 57 style. Pretty sure he will go a different way on the spoiler as we have another idea(but I happen to like this one too). I am not sure the exhaust idea will stay as I am not crazy about the shape but the owner likes it and he is doing the fab work. The c4 drivetrain height is stock but the body is about 31 in high at this point. His ideas are evolving, its been an education watching him work. If he does not like what he has he gets out the saw and cut and changes it. He uses some bathroom SMC stuff that comes in 4x8 sheets(thin/flexible) to get a base form(thats what the flares are done in) and the SMC epoxy stuff that Eckler sells to bond it to the fiberglass. He used some marine plywood cut to shape bonded to the glass body for body stiffness and mounting supports to the frame.

Enjoy.

http://www.sirgalahad.org/tyler/misc/wayne_spoil1.jpg
http://www.sirgalahad.org/tyler/misc/wayne_spoil2.jpg
http://www.sirgalahad.org/tyler/misc/wayne_spoil3.jpg

Tyler

 

[vette rod]

If you want a unique machine you need to think outside the box or else all these cars will be the same. They are alot of work and it is worth the extra effort to make it just what you want. This also depends on your skill level to be creative and always be thinking 10 steps ahead and how each thing you do will affect another. Just something to keep in mind. www.pugesekmotorsports.com