SCCAForums.com

just thought you might want to know about the mounts I'm going to use in the front.

this lets you run a longer shock and still have the benefits of a clevis mount.

You can run them on your stock shocks too

ghoffman;
This is the first and only truly correct mount for "pin top" shocks. They are CNC billet DuPont Delrin and stainless steel and will allow your shocks to have correct damping without the rubber and it still allows angular deflection of the shock as it goes through its' motion with virtually zero side load on the shock. Unlike some others, this is spherical on the top and bottom so it works with stock or coil-over shocks. Tested on Penske, Bilstein, Sachs (OE Corvette) shocks but will fit any shock with a 10mm upper pin top. The price is for an entire car set. Better performance, better shock life, totally quiet for street or track use. In stock for immediate delivery.
The gold colored plate not included.
http://hardbarusa.com/hardbar/product_info.php?cPath=21&products_id=141

Here's his answer

-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Hoffman
Subject: Re: responce on the SCCA post

I went through that many SW studies ago.  Without modifying the frame, it does not have enough angular travel.  Another guy sells a kit like that for $850, and it is terrible for NVH, and has no advantages over Delrin. 

nice, don't know why it's taken anyone this long to do it, same for a control arm bushing version

some classes don't allow metal spherical bearings and/or require the polymer/steel % ratio not to change in a replacement

.

ghoffman;
Well, we did some shock dyno runs today with the OE rubber mounts, some VBP poly and the Hardbar delrin.  This was performed at LEMD.com on Richard's Roherig dyno (Thank You!). It will take a while to complete this post and I will post all the dyno runs.  This video of the OE rubber is amazing and shows why the turn in is better with the Hardbar Delrin shock mounts.  Notice that we are testing the ENTIRE assembly, and actually are using the 3 hole "eyeball plate" the way it is in the car at the next higher assembly and not grabbing the shock pin top.  Bottom line: the Hardbar mounts are not any different than threading the pin top directly into dyno's load cell.  

Look at the rubber move!  BTW, these are Penske 8100's with B/C valving, bump and rebound adjusters in the middle.  
http://s67.photobucket.com/albums/h287/gshoffman/Corvette%20shocks/?action=view&current=rubbertest.flv
Hardbar Delrin
http://s67.photobucket.com/albums/h287/gshoffman/Corvette%20shocks/?action=view&current=HardbarDelrintest.flv

ghoffman;
 here are the dyno plots for each of the vids above.

Rubber


Poly (note: good curves, but it will make for very high shaft side loads)



Hardbar Delrin

Orthonormal:

I don't recall there being any such restriction in Stock for the shock bushings/bearings.  I've also been wondering when someone would start selling something like this.

Sorry I took us a bit off topic.  That comment was relevant to my belief that a similar type strategy could be applied to suspension arm bushings in ST and SP where heim/spherical bearings aren't allowed.  Stock, ST, and SP all allow heim/spherical bearings for shocks.

Most of the spherical bearing NVH results from wearing and becoming sloppy.  This is usually more due to using a bearing too small for the load or using a cheap bearing over a quality one since the quality one can cost 3x - 4x more.  The benefit to this delrin setup is you can tighten it up as it wears, otherwise it will get NVH too if not maintained.  A worn/noisy/vibrating spherical bearing has to be replaced in whole, no way around it.

Howdy,

TeamRX8:

Orthonormal:

I don't recall there being any such restriction in Stock for the shock bushings/bearings.  I've also been wondering when someone would start selling something like this.

Sorry I took us a bit off topic.  That comment was relevant to my belief that a similar type strategy could be applied to suspension arm bushings in ST and SP where heim/spherical bearings aren't allowed.  Stock, ST, and SP all allow heim/spherical bearings for shocks.

Most of the spherical bearing NVH results from wearing and becoming sloppy.  This is usually more due to using a bearing too small for the load or using a cheap bearing over a quality one since the quality one can cost 3x - 4x more.  The benefit to this delrin setup is you can tighten it up as it wears, otherwise it will get NVH too if not maintained.  A worn/noisy/vibrating spherical bearing has to be replaced in whole, no way around it.

Except that SP rules don't allow that... 15.8.C says in part:

Suspension bushings may be replaced with bushings of any materials (except metal) as long as they fit in the original location. Offset bushings may be used. In a replacement bushing the amount of metal relative to the amount of non-metallic material may not be increased. This does not authorize a change in type of bushing (for example ball and socket replacing a cylindrical bushing), or use of a bushing with an angled hole whose direction differs from that of the original bushing. If the Stock bushing accommodated multi-axis motion via compliance of the component material(s), the replacement bushing may not be changed to accommodate such motion via change in bushing type, for example to a spherical bearing or similar component involving internal moving parts.

Personally, I think that'd dumb.  I'd 100% prefer allowing spherical bearings for suspension bushings in SP.  I think that even more so if a stupid product like this, which exists only because some people are scared of spherical bearings, is deemed legal.

Mark 

marka:

Howdy,

 

TeamRX8:

Orthonormal:

I don't recall there being any such restriction in Stock for the shock bushings/bearings.  I've also been wondering when someone would start selling something like this.

Sorry I took us a bit off topic.  That comment was relevant to my belief that a similar type strategy could be applied to suspension arm bushings in ST and SP where heim/spherical bearings aren't allowed.  Stock, ST, and SP all allow heim/spherical bearings for shocks.

Most of the spherical bearing NVH results from wearing and becoming sloppy.  This is usually more due to using a bearing too small for the load or using a cheap bearing over a quality one since the quality one can cost 3x - 4x more.  The benefit to this delrin setup is you can tighten it up as it wears, otherwise it will get NVH too if not maintained.  A worn/noisy/vibrating spherical bearing has to be replaced in whole, no way around it.

 

Except that SP rules don't allow that... 15.8.C says in part:

Suspension bushings may be replaced with bushings of any materials (except metal) as long as they fit in the original location. Offset bushings may be used. In a replacement bushing the amount of metal relative to the amount of non-metallic material may not be increased. This does not authorize a change in type of bushing (for example ball and socket replacing a cylindrical bushing), or use of a bushing with an angled hole whose direction differs from that of the original bushing. If the Stock bushing accommodated multi-axis motion via compliance of the component material(s), the replacement bushing may not be changed to accommodate such motion via change in bushing type, for example to a spherical bearing or similar component involving internal moving parts.

 

Personally, I think that'd dumb.  I'd 100% prefer allowing spherical bearings for suspension bushings in SP.  I think that even more so if a stupid product like this, which exists only because some people are scared of spherical bearings, is deemed legal.

 

Mark 

Well if they aren't legal in SP they certainly must not be legal in stock.