[urbanegorilla]

Hey, folks

This is probably a dumb question, but has anyone ever fitted an IRS into a B-body? I was noodling in the 'shop, and probably shouldn't have been drinking quite so much beer, because it sure looks as though you could make a C4 'vette IRS fit...

Comments?

Kevin

 

[94MI9C1]

You could probably make it work, but I am sure that you would cut into the back seat area and have to redo the floor and everything else back there, not sure it has been done as it would be ALOT of fab work to make it work and function correctly.

 

[Navy Lifer]

If anyone COULD do it, and do it as if it was a factory deal--here's my choice.

All it takes is determination and money-probably LOTS of it.

 

[Gene Beaird]

There _may_ be room under the car requiring minimal under-body work, but I wouldn't count on it. You'll have to probably widen the rear some, which will also be no minor undertaking. Here's an example of someone doing so with a 3rd Gen F-body. While the width was good, it took a LOT of body work:

http://www.thirdgen.org/techboard/suspension-chassis/565609-c4-corvette-rear-suspension.html

 

[KW Baraka]

......All it takes is determination and money-probably LOTS of it.

Yep......and in the end, maybe not worth it to most of us.

But hey.....if you go for it, keep us up on the progress!!

KW

 

[NO DUBS]

I think you should be the first. -Josh

 

[The Bolt-On Terror]

Durability-wise, it's a bad idea. The Dana 36, which came in the early C4's and still used in the later year auto C4's, will grenade with DR's or slicks even in a 12-sec Vette. It would stand no chance under a B-body. The Dana 44 which came in the later year manual trans cars is stronger, but still a step down from a durability/maintenance standpoint from what you have now. I think it would take a lot of "engineering" to realize any handling or ride benefits from it in a B-body. Spend your effort and money elsewhere!

 

[Navy Lifer]

But hey.....if you go for it, keep us up on the progress!!
KW

I think you should be the first. -Josh

Who? If you mean "me", you misread or misunderstand my previous reply. Sure, I'd love to do it, and even be "first" if not "only", but my point is "someday, someone may actually do this"... and I'd like to be around to see it when/if it DOES.

Durability-wise, it's a bad idea. Spend your effort and money elsewhere!

Pat, certainly it's a durability issue if the intent is to focus on drag racing. The B-body 4-link rear is simple yet hardly sophisticated, by today's standards, and even compared to the C4 design, from 1984, with roots all the way back to the 1963 Corvette Stingray (C2). Maybe if we looked at doing a C5/C6 transaxle setup--surely the ZR1 transaxle, built to handle 638 HP, has the durability for drag-strip abuse.

However, I am confident that a proper marriage of C4/5/6 powertrain, suspension & brakes with the B-body, a la Newman-style, would ultimately yield a far more satisfying vehicle to enjoy as a total package--not withstanding the shortcomings you are concerned about. I'll happily take the "touring car" approach, and will not miss the drag strip at all.

The Newman 55-57 Chevy sedan package is a prime example--the C4 bits look like they belong there. That car has 117" WB, but it doesn't weigh as much (as a B-body). I'm reminded of the "rat" '56 Chevy wagon that someone re-fitted with a complete 94-96 B-body frame and powertrain (I think the donor was a 9C1)--it was featured in Hot Rod, and made one of the Power Tour events, maybe 2006. My point is, if the B-body frame will fit the '56 wagon, how hard would it be to make the Newman 55-57 frame fit a B-body?

FWIW...Rick Williams, in Reno, has a long-term project to marry a B-chassis with a '57 (I think) body, but I don't know anything about it, as far as current status.

 

[383LSxIMPALA]

if i were to do a irs swap i would get it from the 04-06 gtos... some go 9 seconds with stock diffs and axles. and they weight 3900lbs...

 

[urbanegorilla]

Good input, all. I think I'll stick with what I have, for the moment. I'm going to do a T56/4.10 swap first.

Thanks!

Kevin

 

[96 Black]

......You'll have to probably widen the rear some, ........

You made me go look. It appears the track is only a little more than 1/4" different between ours and a C4. This mod always sounded neat to me too, even more after a few beers. But, I always end up realizing the same effort would be applied to much more cost-effective suspension and handling upgrades.

With a more current gen vette IRS to get the weight distribution of the rear mounted transmission, you could still be on to something.

 

[383LSxIMPALA]

good choice!!!

 

[1BAD9C1]

Buy a C4 or C5 Vette for the twisties.

And keep your solid axle B-body for cruising and straight line dragging, done That's what i've got planned.

 

[Lieutenant Dan Icecream]

This reminds me of Jay Leno's 66' Oldsmobile Toronado. LSX, twin turbo, C5 chassis/suspension...

) Idea/actually doing it)...

(cwm866' Olds Toronado)...

 

[CTX-SLPR]

Who? If you mean "me", you misread or misunderstand my previous reply. Sure, I'd love to do it, and even be "first" if not "only", but my point is "someday, someone may actually do this"... and I'd like to be around to see it when/if it DOES.



Pat, certainly it's a durability issue if the intent is to focus on drag racing. The B-body 4-link rear is simple yet hardly sophisticated, by today's standards, and even compared to the C4 design, from 1984, with roots all the way back to the 1963 Corvette Stingray (C2). Maybe if we looked at doing a C5/C6 transaxle setup--surely the ZR1 transaxle, built to handle 638 HP, has the durability for drag-strip abuse.

However, I am confident that a proper marriage of C4/5/6 powertrain, suspension & brakes with the B-body, a la Newman-style, would ultimately yield a far more satisfying vehicle to enjoy as a total package--not withstanding the shortcomings you are concerned about. I'll happily take the "touring car" approach, and will not miss the drag strip at all.

The Newman 55-57 Chevy sedan package is a prime example--the C4 bits look like they belong there. That car has 117" WB, but it doesn't weigh as much (as a B-body). I'm reminded of the "rat" '56 Chevy wagon that someone re-fitted with a complete 94-96 B-body frame and powertrain (I think the donor was a 9C1)--it was featured in Hot Rod, and made one of the Power Tour events, maybe 2006. My point is, if the B-body frame will fit the '56 wagon, how hard would it be to make the Newman 55-57 frame fit a B-body?

FWIW...Rick Williams, in Reno, has a long-term project to marry a B-chassis with a '57 (I think) body, but I don't know anything about it, as far as current status.

That's Chad Reynold's "Rusty" and it has more than just a 9C1 frame it has the entire floor structure from the 9C1 under the rusted upper shell. I think it would work from a dimensions standpoint but just using the Tri-Five chassis would require extensive rework. Honestly the C4 rear suspension has it's pluses and minuses, I'd rather put the money into the B-body Satchel rear suspension or convert to a 3 or 4 link than try and mess with the C4 IRS.

Other IRS options are the Ford MN112 IRS found in Thunderbirds and the MkVIII which is 8.8 based and pretty durable and the new Camaro. If you wanted to fabricate, a C5/6 setup with a Ford 8.8 IRS pumpkin in the middle would be an interesting and durable combination and the C5/6 rear suspension is almost totally subframe mounted, you'd just need the upper A-arm and shock points as suspension pieces. The C6 diff is significantly stronger than the C5 and the 2005 (one year only) still used the 4L65E instead of the 6L60E.

 

[Navy Lifer]

No idea what the feasibility of this option may be (the back seat will have a big box/enlarged tunnel, I assume)--but it should be durable.

Corvette IRS Record Shattered In St. Louis