The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area The HiPo Shop subframe "reassurance"

Hey everyone, I have a 79 Camaro subframe that I am getting ready soon to splice into my original frame. I am going to get some help from a guy who has done a lot of subframe work and knows all the tricks to make sure that it is good and straight. I am looking to mount the subframe so that the subframe rails slide right inside of the original frame, this results in a real cool lowered stance. My buddy actually JUST finished doing one of these with a 79 subframe, and it looks real good. The front sheetmetal was mocked up, but not actually bolted in. I guess my question is, that being said, it looked to me like there could be a potential front wheel clearance issue when the sheetmetal was bolted in, like maybe you wouldnt get much more than about a half turn of the steering wheel before you might have a tire rubbing issue....I see people use Nova and Camaro subframes ALL THE TIME, but has anyone on this forum ever done this, and possibly have some feedback, be it good or bad. I would hate to go through all that work to create more work for myself. By the way, I have a 1950 3100

Thanks for all the help.

Scott

I used a 69 camaro sub under my 50.
I used the over-under techinech. Meaning I welded the entire subframe under the original 50 frame which was cut off at the firewall.
I placed 2in sq. tubing 6in long between the sub and the original to bring the ride height up so the bumper is 8in off the ground using stock springs.
If I want to I can lower it with either springs or spindles, but to me it's low enough.

Wilbur

The second gen camaro/firebird subframe is not suitable for your truck. You will have tire fender clearance issues unless you keep the ride height up at the stock height. I would not recommend using that subframe on an AD truck. If you just have to use a subframe then get a rear steer subframe from a first gen camaro or a Nova.

The best solution for IFS on the AD series trucks is an IFS kit. For the $1,400 you get a kit that is easy to install and ADDS value to your truck. It may cost more initally but you will benefit in the end.

Do what you want but having done a subframe on a 54 I know what I have been there and done that.

I agree with Houston54. IF you do get a subframe, you still have to rebuild it too. It adds up and taks a lot of time to clean it up and paint it. I'd go with a IFS kit too.

http://www.bunchobikes.com/truck.JPG

For this truck, I had to get narrow rims with with a really deep backside. I had plans for Fatman Fabrications narrowed A-arms, but never did get around to buying and installing them. I understand the truck is still in operation around Southern California somewhere!

Hi Scott,

I've got a 79 skylark subframe in my 50, been there for the past 19 yrs. Essentially this is the same as a 79 camaro. Mine rides low, without measuring I would say from the bottom edge of the running boards to the ground is about 6". I cut my subframe just behind the lower control arm rear mount. This is the area of the subframe before it starts to kickdown. The bottom edge of the subframe at the cut point is set even with the bottom edge of the trucks frame rail. I don't have any tire clearance issues, and I run p245 60 15's on 15x7's with 4" backspacing. It is tight, but it's also a big tire for the front. At the front you will not have to notch the radiator support for steering box clearance. My column is a mid seventies montecarlo tilt with the stock steering shaft from the skylark. I retained the factory joint at the top, had to replace the rag joint at the box with a borgeson. I was a little more creative in mounting my subframe than most. I slit the top and bottom of the frame rail just in front of the front cab mount. I then spread the frame rails to the same width as the outside of the subframe and welded it in. Of course I added plate to the inside of the subframe attachment points, reinforced the upper and lower rails where I slit them, and then I boxed the frame from the control arm mounting points back to the crossmember located about midway under the cab. I went this route instead of what you've described because I didn't want it to look like it was subframed. I must have been successful, 19 yrs. later it still drives great, and people ask where I got a frame for my truck instead of just subframing it. I decided to do the work myself after looking at half a dozen trucks done by local shop that specialized in this type of work. Scary. If you've already got the subframe, $1400.00 will rebuild it with a lot of mone left over.

John

thanks for all the info. If anyone else has feedback for me, by all means, keep it coming! I do already have a 79 Camaro subframe sitting in my shop. The guy who is planning to put it in for me basically "gave" it to me. He's a real good friend. He has done a ton of subframes, but this will only be his 2nd AD truck. I like the idea of being able to "slide" the subframe rails into the original AD rails, however, I really dont want headaches of tire clearance issues. I am going to wait and see how this first one he did turns out with sheetmetal on the front of the truck. The stance is really wicked, its right down in the weeds! Anyway, keep the good and bad coming at me!

My truck has a 72 Nova subframe with stock spring.This is rear steer.GM rally rims 205/65 tires.With two people the tires will rub when turning right into a driveway ramp.Click on my picture to see how low it is

With my 69 camaro sub,stock springs, I run 245/40/17's and don't rub at all. Altho my turning radius is a little short cause the tires hit the frame. Just a little. Hardly enough to notice.

The 79 Skylark track width is not the same width as a 2nd gen camaro. It is more in line with a G body track width which is in the 58" range.

If you want to see a truck with a camaro subframe go to http://www.picturetrail.com/gallery/view?username=pu-man

This is a friend of mine over in Germany. He has had the tire/fender problem.

The solution is to spend more money on new control arms which after that you are then in the range of the IFS kit cost.

A straight subframe job is much cheaper than an IFS kit no doubt but it has to be the right subframe for the vehicle and the camaro is not the one for AD trucks.

You can look at my picture trail albums and see how I adapted a G body subframe but after the challenges getting it to work I would rather have used a kit.

A well installed kit will add value to your truck which may be important later.

...Your 79 Camaro sub is too wide for your truck, the rails may line up ok, but the tread width is too wide even if you set the truck up to stock heighth. Your options are to narrow the clip, use narrowed A-arms or cut your fender openings bigger. You'd be further ahead to use a 68-74 Nova (or clone) clip, or early Camaro (67-9...same as Nova), or78-87 Chevelle (or clone) clip.

I've used 64-72 Chevelle (or clone) clips sucessfully for years, but I use the drum brake clips as they are narrower.

If your friend wants to help do a clip on your truck, I suggest the 78-87 Chevelle (or clone) clip as they are very plentiful, narrow enuf with disc brakes and you mite find a lower mileage one that doesn't really need rebuilding.
Another point , I keep the top of the clip and truck frames even for a low , but not too low ride.
You can always cut a coil, use lowering coils or spindles if you want to go lower.
Just my 2 cents. Good luck with your truck project.

There are two ways to install the Camaro subframe that will give clearance for the tires. You can cut the crossmember and narrow it about 2" or you can buy narrowed "A" frames, which are available from Scotts in Ventura, Ca. Either way works fine and the Camaro sub frame makes for a good handling truck.

acme, it sounds like you and i think alike.....
i too like the g-body front end and, here's a tip, circle track racers like 'em to so there's plenty of "trick" stuff out there....


another idea i've had is a late model tacoma 2wd FE assy.
about the same width as a g-body but real similar to a MII in design....
trouble is that here in colorado everybody thinks they need a 4X4.....

thanks everyone for the help.

another thought...what happens if you put big block springs in the front end after it is welded in? Anyone ever tried that? Will that raise it up enough to make the difference?

The height of the springs are the same as the small block springs but have stiffer rate. They may cause the front end to be higher if you will not be placing a big block in it but then why would you want the springs if your are not?

I am just tossing around ideas that are coming to me. Its going to be a small block truck, so my thinking is, heavier spring, lets the truck ride a bit higher because even with the smallblock in, the heavier spring will not let the body settle quite as far, and my hope would be that it would buy me just enough height for that little bit of extra wheel clearance. I dunno, like I said, just tossing around ideas for myself, and giving us something to debate, and possibly helping out another guy who may be crossing the same bridges that I am

you seem to know your stuff Houston54

Acmegarage, how does the frame width on a 78-87 Chevelle compare to the original frame of the truck? Will it slide inside similar to the Camaro sub?

no, it won't.
the frame rails kick out (rather than straight back)just after the rear lower control arm.

Hi everyone, I visit this website quite often to read and learn a few things. I rarely post, but when I do it is accurate. In 1975 GM introduced a new mid-sized platform, I believe it was called the x-body, not the Citation, a previous platform. This platform was the base for the Nova, Buick Skylark, Olds Omega, and Cadillac Seville. Remember the Novallac? The Nova was advertised as the wide body Nova. This platform used a revised from 74 suspension including the subframe which increased in width allowing for a wider body also. I went out in the garage last night and measured the 79 sklark subframe width in my 50. At ride height, from wheel mounting flange to wheel mounting flange of the rotors it is 61.5". The same advertised width as a 79 Camaro. I agree a g body clip is narrower, I've installed one of these also, and it does open up your tire and wheel choices. But the 79 Camaro will work extremely well if you are careful in selecting your tire and wheel. The question asked by 50chevyscott was will it work in a 50. My answer was yes it will, I've got an example in my garage. Interesting enough this seem to be the forgotten subframe. Google subframe dimensions, and you will find several websites listing stock track widths for all the popular subframes and rear axles used in swaps. The 75-79 Nova, Skylark is no place to be found.

John

thanks John1

i am using a 77 nova sub in my 59 3600

My'51 has an '80 monte Carlo Sub....no problems yet but still have a ways to go before comletion...........