Chevy Camaro Axle Issue
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 01. 2021
- We talk about Axle offset on 1960s GMs and Fix an axle issue on a 1968 Camaro
Episode 489
Autorestomod
Elephant in the room:
a lot of '60s GM cars had the axle offset in the chassis, often by as much as ½ inch! Average is ¼ inch.
From Coil Spring Cars to Leaf Sprung. And it was like that from at least the mid-60s to early ‘70s.
Why? Dunno. Driveline vibration? Design oversight?
So make sure when you are buying aftermarket wheels you check axle offset.
All 6-cylinder cars 1967, 1968, 1969 came with monol-eaf rear springs.
All 1967 models used mono-leaf design rear springs.
For 1968, only certain models with the 10 and 12-bolt rear end received multi-leaf springs. This included all SS models, the Z28, and the L30/M20 275 Horse 327 backed by the Muncie M20 4-speed. All other 1968 models used mono-leaf springs.
In 1969, all models with 12-bolt axles received multi-leaf springs and all models with 350ci engines (10- or 12-bolt) received multi-leaf springs. Vehicles with 307 and 327 engines received mono-leaf springs.
Generally, Z28's used 4-leaf springs and the other multi-leaf spring applications used 5-leaf springs. Spring selection was a function of weight and options - and this was fine-tuned in 1969. SS, LM1, L65, and COPO cars with 4-leaf springs are possible according to factory documentation and they have been observed on original SS, LM1, and L65 cars. Factory documentation indicates that all 68-69 Z28's should have 4-leaf springs. One Z28 (a 69) has been found with apparently original 5-leaf springs. The 5-leaf spring usage on a Z28 should not be considered normal and was probably a dealer installed option
(Cam) Measure chassis to axle.
(Jeff/Cam) Discuss correct spring perches and shock mounts for multi leaf applications
Discuss mono perches vs. multi leaf perches (Best practice) - Auta a dopravní prostředky
Gotta Love it when a plan comes together. Sweet-simple-cheap repair, completed before the back-end choose to dive in a different lane than the front-end. Well done guys, Great video!
Thanks!
Manufacturing tolerances, back in the days when everything was plus or minus about a foot. Ford and Chrysler had the same problem.
Ford bodies could be out 1/8 inch and that was OK.
Back in 1983 or so I had N50-15 tires (Remember those?) on my multi leaf spring 12 bolt 1968 Camaro. I remember checking that and there was a difference. I'll watch for that when I get new tires/wheels. Thanks for the reminder there!! And the video!!!
You are absolutely welcome
I put mine together and it’s just like that one, crooked, I must have missed the hole also, now I know how to do it right
great video guys!...from what I've heard from uncles and his friends on assembly lines in the past...it was more a mass production thing because you had to crank out so many.....
and you didn't have a driveline Mort ....the dude with the lathe and the micrometer he slept with to make sure thousands of driveshafts were dead on...
and another thing that did it was the abuse of those cars...bad roads, curbs, axle wind, Schlitz malt liquor, some greasy head punk in a charger 500 or that leisure suit neighbor with that weird green AMX who you have to put in his place at the stop light.....ya know normal road conditions!😁....well I'm glad y'all got him straight...
love and Starliners
Weird that EVERY one of them hit curbs....LOL
@@AutoRestoMod yeah after a night with the boys and that bass drum pound of a hangover the next morning ....they tend to sneak up on you
And we're still alive to tell about it 👍🙏
Nice info guys! I'll be sure to apply this to my '68 Camaro when the time comes. Cheers!
Cheers!
Great video y'all! learned a lot from it and appreciate all the insight.
Our pleasure!
Great information, thanks for this excellent video.
Glad it was helpful!
Thanks for the video, guys! I was wondering what to do about this flaw on my project '68 rs/ss. Here's the solution! Thumbs up, stay safe!
Glad it helped!
High tech backyard tech there with a claw 🔨 😆 great work and info guys keep the vids a coming
Sometimes desperate situations call for desperate claws...Thanks for the kind words.
love your camaro videos, keep them coming. how about late 70's to early 80's camaro videos?
We are going to be moving the '70 SS we have back up into the que here soon.
Thanks for a great episode, Please show Camaro panel alignment, I have been waiting for you to get back to working on a Camaro. This would help me a lot.
Will do! We have two available now. The red '70 and the Black '68. We will be doing all kinds of cool stuff on both.
Good job. 😁👍
I would be very interested in having you guys film a convertible top install.
We'll work on it Clay.
I sometimes use a string and plum bob and plot all the reference points on the floor all the way to the front subframe to make sure the subframe and differential lines up properly.
Good idea!
Now the axle is located by a rubber pin ,yea that’s going to stay put. Get rid of the aluminum spacers that didn’t come on the car and you won’t need the rubber spacer.
We will be addressing the issue this coming week.
Thanks for the great video. It’s nice to see coverage of a factory issue on GM stuff. I guess they aren’t perfect, like some GM guys want us to believe 😉
They are all perfectly imperfect. They have "soul".
you prolly dont care but does anyone know of a method to get back into an Instagram account?
I was stupid lost my login password. I appreciate any help you can offer me
@Maximus Samir Instablaster :)
@Felix Victor I really appreciate your reply. I got to the site through google and I'm waiting for the hacking stuff atm.
Looks like it's gonna take a while so I will reply here later with my results.
@Felix Victor It did the trick and I finally got access to my account again. I'm so happy:D
Thank you so much, you really help me out :D
Some corrections. 67 - mono leaf. Same side axle shock mount. Later in rear radius rod added on some hi-performance.
Thank you for that input I do appreciate it
Jicky way of mounting that lower shock end!
I saw this two years ago on Road Kill Garage and the Crusher Camaro. At the time I thought it was just the fact they put a a aftermarket 9” in it. I didn’t know GM did that and I use to own a 67! Weird and in my opinion stupid! Good info Jeff!
Thanks!
So when Chevy copied the Mustang they didn't get everything right.
HAHAHAHHAHA
My friends 59 El Camino was 3/4"" maybe more. So much so as Jeff said one big meat would fit on side not the other. So we cut it down.
That's one way to solve a problem!
Don't you just love working behind folks that leave stuff like what you found wrong. Nuther good vid Cuz.
Keeps us employed!
Do a convertible top on 67 - 69 Camaro. My brother in-law has been driving his without a top for 6 years. Needs a top and all the adjustments done.
We're going to work on it.
That was a mono leaf car. The bottom shock mount plates were different for mono leaf and multi leaf cars. Someone put those metal spacers are in there to make up the difference.
Yes.
Panel alignment video would be great!
Right on! We'll do that.
@@AutoRestoMod YES!!!! would come in handy putting the clip on my 76 f250. (yes Jeff its me w the 351c) lol
Thanks guys - even if it wasn’t a Ford it’s still good info. Will need to remember the axle offset issue for trivia night 😉
Yes.
Wish my 67 Camaro alignment issues were this easy. I am open to suggestions. Pretty sure its body/ frame damage. Has always sat about 5/8" higher on passenger side since I got in '98. Over 10 years ago switched to multi leafs in the rear end and they are still in the pocket and didn't change the lean. Stopped driving it for the last 7 years and has been in storage and started working on it the last few months. The front end suspension and control arm bushings were completely shot so replacing that now, and have already replaced the body mounts. Pretty sure its body damage; it does seem at least the front end driver side frame was straightened. And there is some buckling in the driver side floor pans......hey but at least there is really no rust on the car.
Do the body check we showed. It may point out the possible problems. Also, leaf springs can have variances too. Now if the car was like that before the multi leafs and after...I would look to the chassis.
@@AutoRestoMod
Thanks for the reply. Yeah it’s always has sat that way. Nothing really stuck out but noticed the rear left shackle on leaf is defiantly angled farther back. Working on front end suspension now and definitely the body alignment hole on body is farther back on left vs right. Not sure that will fix the lean it but need to get the body and subframe aligned.
That's why some cars drive in a slant, the axle or body damage.
Did you put the parking brake cable back in the holder? Did you check the torq on the other side too?
I struggle a lot with how much to show on the show and not have an hour long video that 85% of the folks will say "ugh, it's an hour long" and bypass it. We checked the other side off camera, I assumed that everyone would assume that we would do "due diligence" and check it all out and check the torque. And no we didn't put the cable back in the holder...mainly because the front cable is missing and the owner is gathering parts to get it back in there.
Nice.
Thanks! Loved your show!
The truth about the offset on the chevy axle....in a poem...Rose's are red, violets are blue, chevy offset the axle to screw with you....
HAHAHAHAHAHAH
Have a look at the 1996 Impala LT1, it had the same rear wheel problem from the factory for some reason. They were all this way. Wonder why.
18:43 why aren’t you using a torque wrench? Also I would have checked the other rear leafs to make sure it’s not buggered.
Lordy...
The other leaf was fine. I struggle with just how much to include as far is detail on these videos. If I jot and tiddle the shoot it would have been 40 minutes. Any more, no one will take that kind of time. We should have been clearer on the torque, we tighten it as Cam showed, then on final, torque to spec.
Some serious issues with this one Jeff, my first thumbs down. Correct me if I am wrong. I don't know who came up with those janky ass spacers, but the pad will never be compressed. The u-bolts are torqued to the spacers and there is an obvious gap. Also, the fact that the shock bushings are completely trashed due to being pulled an extra inch down to reach is a major red flag to me. I was thinking maybe this is all due to going with a stacked versus mono leaf, but that would be exactly opposite because the mono would be thinner than the stacked. There should be no reason for a spacer with the stacked leaves. He will never get that tight enough to hold the axle and as he drives it will start to push back and forth, chewing the isolator to pieces. Also, the should be pads on top of the spring, between the spring and axle mount. I don't know if the guy thought the new bolts were too long and made the spacers to compensate, but if that was the case they should be under the spring perch.
One more thing. Those spacers are made of aluminum and there is already a ton of corrosion going on from the different metals in contact. Not a good combo for the spring bolts.
Agree with all of this. I have a similar setup on my 67 Camaro. Leave the spacers and pads out. that bottom locator bolt should come through the hole in the plate, with the pad there it will not go down far enough.
Thanks for the thumbs! This is a kit from Detroit Speed--I have never known them to build half ass anything. There is a thick plate that we didn't remove that is on top of the springs. Cam talked about this plate and jiggled it in the episode. The one thing that was missing was the lower pad which the owner didn't install when the suspension went back together when he installed the kit. I didn't go over the difference between the mono-leaf spring perch and the multi leaf spring perch; I should have because the kit from Detorit mimics that original offset of a multi-leaf. We reinstalled the pad and the suspension tightened back up. The shock mount was totally my bad. I have little experience with the Camaro and was not aware that there was a problem there, you should know by now Robert, I try and cover things I know are problems. Cam didn't catch it either.
We may revisit this. As of right now we are unable to get back on this car due to issues beyond our control.
@@AutoRestoMod Some additional info for you: The original mono leafs had a locating pin on the TOP of the spring. This pin went thru a hole on the perch. The problem is that the pin was not in the middle of the spring or perch ( like on the multileafs) it was offset. The mono perch does not have a center locating hole. You cannot drill a center hole because it is too close to the axle tube. This is where that top spacer comes into play. It has a hole in the center to accept the locating bolt on the new multileaf spring. Leave that where it is.
I would take out the pad AND aluminum spacers. Let there be a gap between the perch and the plate. This will allow the centering bolt to extend through the plate and clamp down on the spring pack.
One issue you may run into is that you are using mono plates as well. They are relatively flimsy and may crack under stress. I suggest getting DSE plates (this is what I am running). They are much thicker and heavy duty.
Ouch on wheel spacing
Yes.
It’s probably the center pin on the spring perch
It was a couple of things. The whole thing was shifted forward.
How to fix the problem. Take the Chevy and replace it with a Ford. Problem fixed. :) Just joking. These old Camaros are good looking cars. Another great video.
LOL I love the colors on this one. The Camaro guys call it "Tuxedo".
Why not address the issue of the non-stock, unnecessary, aluminum blocks that caused the problem in the first place?
The address is coming. The blocks are needed IF it is a mono-leaf rear axle. This one is not. I went off of what the books say (convertible 327=single leaf) and not what my eyes should have seen. When you miss something it is just you, and if you are unlucky, your buddies, when we miss something thousands see it.
@@AutoRestoMod you guys dont know shit,,,,kinda like the roadkill jerkies
Haha I realized that they didn't center the diffs AFTER I bought new wheels n tires. Good times. Do you see anything wrong with not running isolators between the spring and shock plate or diff perch and spring? I have a bunch of friends who swear it's fine and don't run any or just one 🍻
I don't know what kind of car you're working on, but I have experience with early Cougars, which came with rubber isolators in the leaf spring to rear axle mounts. They're great for ride quality and noise control, but for racing and high performance use, they're typically removed in order to more positively locate the axle and and eliminate the small amount of deflection that the isolators allow. On a Cougar its a simple process of switching to Mustang axle mounting hardware, since axles and spring widths were the same, but Mustangs (except for Grandes) didn't come with the isolator bushings. There's no easy way to get things to fit right using the Cougar U-bolts and lower plate without isolators. So yes, its perfectly fine to run a rear axle that bolts directly to the springs without isolator bushings, but depending on the vehicle it may be necessary to change or modify some of the other mounting hardware to get everything to work correctly.
@@DragPakMerc 👍👍👍 I'm working on Novas and Chevelle's mostly. I guess I was mostly worried about the metal to metal contact on a street car. The amount of squish that comes from the isolators when I torque the u bolts makes me think it's not the best or most useful thing to run 🍻
Fairlanes however...
We plan to address this in an upcoming video in February.
Chevy trucks in the fifty’s were the same way. Step side fender fits on one side and not on the other.
Wow. So from the '50s to at least the 90s...
Could be those spacers-not stock from what ive seen
I have a 67 impala and mine does not have this issue mine seems to be even on both sides!
Cool!
All that deadener is probably hiding rust.
And using that hole is dangerous, use the front spring eye as a measure point.
That shock bolt is NOT a proper GM one.
Those GM insulators cause grief, IF you can do without it is better, but more road noise.
And one presumes the other side was checked as well.
Thanks for the info.
More 1st Gen f body please!
On it!
Maybe those spacers could have been machined down a bit ?
Don't think so. The plates are from a Detroit Speed kit.
Lots of weird stuff with these cars, canisters full of mercury on all 4 corners, out of phase driveshaft u joints, ect.
LOL I forgot about the canisters!
Never once checked pin in hole,👎
What happened to your ceiling?
HAHAHA that is Pats shop, not ours. And it is a long story.
No torque spec?
Not going to go into it as the specs are different on different cars. The method Cam used is honestly pretty good. I Do recommend finding your spec and doing the final torque to it after the break in miles. www.autoandtrucksprings.com/recommended-u-bolt-torque
German torque = Good n tight.
Ja!
Guttentite
Lock nuts?
Nope. Lock washers. Then tighten again to torque spec. They will stay put.
Real nicely done vid. Comment below ;)
Thanks for that!
Some one get Cam a towel 😉
HAHAHAHAHA
Claw hammer ? Y’all don’t have ballpeens. ? Lol
When in Rome baby...
The easiest fix is just buy a Ford.
But...he doesn't want a Ford...😬😆
So the rubber is locating the rear end???? lols, that's not how you fix that issue. Dumb video.
OK!