|
Post by Killerclown123 on Aug 26, 2011 0:32:34 GMT -5
keep in mind im working on a 1965...I think the years 65-69 are basically the same, I think in 68 they added a few things that make them better than previous years...anyone know what it is that makes the 68+ better ? 65 has a x-frame. In 67 they changed the frame style. Then in 68 they added more steel to the front frame. The extra steel is what you use to weld together to box in the frame. 68 to 72 almost same front frame.
|
|
joker14
Feature Winner
The more I see the less I have to believe.
Posts: 3,468
|
Post by joker14 on Aug 26, 2011 8:24:40 GMT -5
Tru dat! The biggest advantage with these cars is not where you can weld and plate and leaf and ect... but where you rules are very limited. These cars have many areas to work in and most rules let a little bolt here and a little weld here go so it makes them a way bigger fish in a little pond when your stuck with a weaker rule sheet.
Thats the key to building a good car, find the best car to fit the rule sheet. 73-76's are no slouch especially when you cant work on the front frame sections.
|
|
|
Post by caddytough on Aug 26, 2011 11:26:32 GMT -5
65 are not x frame cars there just boxed under the doors your thinking of the older caddies
|
|
c3pr
Future Icon
Posts: 63
|
Post by c3pr on Aug 26, 2011 11:53:48 GMT -5
keep in mind im working on a 1965...I think the years 65-69 are basically the same, I think in 68 they added a few things that make them better than previous years...anyone know what it is that makes the 68+ better ? 65 has a x-frame. In 67 they changed the frame style. Then in 68 they added more steel to the front frame. The extra steel is what you use to weld together to box in the frame. 68 to 72 almost same front frame. 65 is the new model year, mine is a full perimeter frame, X frame ended with 64, wasn't sure if frame was same or not on the 68's vs. 70's models
|
|
|
Post by big guy on Sept 9, 2011 18:36:10 GMT -5
not 100% positive but i think just the way the front frame is.. switches from the x to the y
|
|
WILSON'S INC.
Heat Winner
I am so sick of resto guys wasting good derby parts.
Posts: 779
|
Post by WILSON'S INC. on Sept 25, 2011 22:00:00 GMT -5
K my last question, i accidentally posted in the pics section, but it got answered so oh well. New question, so I had planned to run a 350 in all of my Cadillacs and save the mopar engines for the mopars, however looking at the location of the drag link on my 71-72's it almost looks like a 318-360 would fit better in there than a 350. Has anyone done this, it looks like the 350 would be sitting in my lap if i had to relocate it further back. So would a 318-360 fit better, or is it doable without a truck pan, as with a truck pan, i am looking at the same dilema
|
|
|
Post by fleshwound21 on Sept 26, 2011 7:30:37 GMT -5
I just ran a 71 with a 360. I used a truck pan. I had to cut some of the wiper cowl for the dp to fit but I had plenty of room with steering,starter ect. IMO the forward mount set up of a sbm makes it easier. My front ear sat right over the engine cradle. I will strongly recommend using a cradle with a pulley protector. The center frame piece of mine came straight up and wrapped around my pulley protector so without it you would probly end up with big problems.
|
|
|
Post by redneckoutlaw on Dec 6, 2011 20:42:59 GMT -5
i all new to this i got an 73 olds 88 an i have a 71 caddy front clip how good would that clip be? or should i just leave the olds clip on it? i have no clue this my first old iron car :/
|
|
-75x-
Heat Winner
Keepin' Em Strait... Since 08'
Posts: 863
|
Post by -75x- on Dec 7, 2011 13:34:45 GMT -5
personally... i like caddy clips... but both core supports are shit imo... a caddy clip with a 73-6 chevy core support would be the SH!T
|
|
Rehse17x
Heat Winner
"Here 4 U 2 Hate"
Posts: 518
|
Post by Rehse17x on Dec 7, 2011 20:04:21 GMT -5
72 caddy clips are the shit.. plenty of meat there to make strong. i wouldnt waste my time trying to put a impala clip on one... just like any front end goes.. one wrong hit and there all gonna be weakened
|
|
|
Post by drivingbigtoys on Dec 15, 2011 21:56:38 GMT -5
2 questions the 68 u guys keep talking bout a late production year? I went and looked at 3 and they all had the head lights stacked up and down and frame up front dipped down....
2nd question would it be worth it since your allowed to weld your a arm down to notch the frame underneath the arm (top side of spring pocket) to gain a couple inches of bumper height? I figure with what you would be welding back down you wouldn't be weakening that area much and you would be moving your top ball joint closer to the frame...
|
|
|
Post by crusher71 on Dec 16, 2011 2:59:38 GMT -5
FLIP THE STEERING LINKAGE 180 AND MOUNT IT UNDER THE PITMAN AND IDLER ARM, YOU WILL GAIN AROUND AN INCH AND A HALF DOING SO, BUT INNER TIE ROD ENDS DO COME CLOSE TO THE OIL PAN.... BITCH TO BUILD, BUT WORTH IT TO NOSE ALL NIGHT..
|
|
|
Post by 0cents on Dec 16, 2011 10:53:04 GMT -5
there was a guy on here who put chevy a arms, and maybe spindles on one, thing looked mean up high in front. cant remember the guys name, sry
|
|
|
Post by crusher71 on Dec 16, 2011 11:04:56 GMT -5
FLIP THE STEERING LINKAGE 180 AND MOUNT IT UNDER THE PITMAN AND IDLER ARM, YOU WILL GAIN AROUND AN INCH AND A HALF DOING SO, BUT INNER TIE ROD ENDS DO COME CLOSE TO THE OIL PAN.... BITCH TO BUILD, BUT WORTH IT TO NOSE ALL NIGHT.. I HAD A FEW PM`S ASKING HOW THIS WOULD GAIN BUMPER HEIGHT....LOL... I REFERENCED WHAT I DID TO GAIN OIL PAN CLEARANCE, AS THIS DOESNT DO ANYTHING FOR GAINING FRONT SUSPENSION HEIGHT, WHICH I AM SURE MOST FIGURED OUT BY NOW....
|
|
|
Post by mkvien on Dec 16, 2011 15:59:40 GMT -5
Are the lower control arm mounts the same as the other GMs of this vintage, or just the uppers?
|
|