Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

I think Pete Suriano made them in his shop in Pottstown. Guarantee they are Day-2 vintage if Pete made them. The metal is 40 years old and the snubbers probably came from an A-frame bumper somewhere. HA!

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Well, if Pete made them Sammy, then he did a good job. But he may have made them for a Vega originally??? Too small for a Nova with some HP.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

I agree Jed, I like the bars that contact under the spring eye. Not sure if these old bars did, but they were one of the coolest sets of slapper bars- especially whith the wheel extension!

http://i710.photobucket.com/albums/w...Grumpybars.jpg

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Nope, not always.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

And they still work. I made some slapper bars too. Still on the car and working good. Day 2 parts foreveer. Paul

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pxtx</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I agree Jed, I like the bars that contact under the spring eye. Not sure if these old bars did, but they were one of the coolest sets of slapper bars- especially whith the wheel extension!
</div></div>

I don't think any of the old bars were ever under the spring eye. Competition Engineering was the first to push this idea back in the late 70's-the importance of having the bar under the spring eye-that was their selling point.

It does not really matter to be honest to me at least. Most of the &quot;Day 2&quot; cars are just for regular street driving and the occasional street burst/romp on old bias or even new radials no real harm is going to be done.

Now if you are on a sticky racetrack every weekend with slicks or soft drag radials and really pushing the horsepower there might be some concern.

These are more show than go anyway for the the majority of Day 2 cars.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

http://classracer.com/classforum/showthread.php?t=36423

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Here is my dad, Plowman's Nova circa 1971. Note his homemade slapper bars and how they were long enough to reach the spring eye then. I guess he was an innovator ahead of CE. The pic isn't great but look at Jed's bars for length and look at these.

http://i710.photobucket.com/albums/w...ns/67Deuce.jpg

I may be in the minority on this, but I do expect my Day 2 parts to perform well 1st and look good 2nd. I do like the challenge of making some of this old technology work as well as the modern stuff. I also street drive 4.88's anywhere with dual quads which isn't the norm these days either.

Thanks for the perspective Dave. I guess I've got to open my mind to this (new to me) idea of what is considered a Day 2 car these days. I might have to come up wiht another name for what I was thinking a Day 2 car was.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: whitetop</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pxtx</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I agree Jed, I like the bars that contact under the spring eye. Not sure if these old bars did, but they were one of the coolest sets of slapper bars- especially whith the wheel extension!
</div></div>

I don't think any of the old bars were ever under the spring eye. Competition Engineering was the first to push this idea back in the late 70's-the importance of having the bar under the spring eye-that was their selling point.

It does not really matter to be honest to me at least. Most of the &quot;Day 2&quot; cars are just for regular street driving and the occasional street burst/romp on old bias or even new radials no real harm is going to be done.

Now if you are on a sticky racetrack every weekend with slicks or soft drag radials and really pushing the horsepower there might be some concern.

These are more show than go anyway for the the majority of Day 2 cars. </div></div>

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pxtx</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I may be in the minority on this, but I do expect my Day 2 parts to perform well 1st and look good 2nd. I do like the challenge of making some of this old technology work as well as the modern stuff. I also street drive 4.88's anywhere with dual quads which isn't the norm these days either.

Thanks for the perspective Dave. I guess I've got to open my mind to this (new to me) idea of what is considered a Day 2 car these days. I might have to come up wiht another name for what I was thinking a Day 2 car was.

</div></div>

Paul, don't let me tell you how you should do your car. Everyone is different on this trend and that's fine.

I'm part of the school who take the old parts as is...that is how they were back in the day, design flaws and all. I was on JJournal one day and a guy with a 50's style rod was telling how his friend is building a hitech style rod and said he wanted it to ride just like a Lexus and of course everyone piped back ..&quot;Then he should just buy a Lexus&quot; in typical H.A.M.B.fashion with more.. let's say...salty language.

To me part of the thrill is experiencing how these cars drove back in the day, bias ply tires, braking, old style suspensions..all their little quirks. I guess I have the same thinking towards the speed equipment.

Funny, I would bet most of the old speed equipment performs as well as the new stuff when dealing with apples versus apples. Carb versus carb etc. Car Craft did an intake comparison several years back and the old 70's $50 swap meet Edelbrock/Torker combo made nearly as much power as the new fangled high $$$ latest intake of the same design. Not as much of course but on the street is anyone really going to notice a 6 hp increase? I'm surprised they printed the results.

Much of the new speed equipment is just rehashed old designs. The Edelbrock Air gap intake is basically the old mid 70's Scorpion air gap style. I would bet most people could not tell the difference on the street between the two.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Guys, I would most likely use the ones I have, if they are somewhat old speedparts? I agree that it's going to be a romp around town kind of car and not an all out every weekend drag car. I was concerned about the length on these bars only because I can see a bow, in the opposite direction, in the leafspring. Heck, I have no idea how long those bars were on the car before I got it? And who knows how old the springs are?

Either way, I can understand the engineering concept of having the snubber under the spring perch.

I'm going to take the wheel off this week and take pictures so I have some idea of what brand they are. [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/hmmm.gif[/img]

You guys are the teachers on here, I am just a student. [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/scholar.gif[/img]

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

And some of the Stock eliminator guys still run the old slapper bars with pretty good success. Benny the Prof's BB nova runs 10.50's with the old slappers so that is good enough in my book.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

I run the old style of drag racing. Foot brake only. With lots of day-2 items on the car. Thats what makes it fun. We all ready ran a 1;49 60 foot time, at 129 MPH. And thats leaving the line at 1,700 RPM;s. Thanks BBBenny [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/3gears.gif[/img]

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

The Professor has spoken!!

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: [email protected]</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And some of the Stock eliminator guys still run the old slapper bars with pretty good success. Benny the Prof's BB nova runs 10.50's with the old slappers so that is good enough in my book. </div></div>

A guy in my hometown won his class record 5-6 years back on the IHRA circuit with a FAL orange fiberglass fan and a old Accel Dual point. Not sure if they are still on the car or not but the old stuff does work.

Those old Accel 31000 dual points were very well built and precise.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Lakewood still sells the long bar and the short bar for 69 Camaro. They just warn not to use the short bar for mono leaf.
In many of the original pics (1967-1970) the Motion cars and Yenkos used the short bars.
This may have been for better ground clearance as there were still a lot of dirt roads and drive ways back then where the long bars would bottom.
The slapper bars that hit the springs are not a great design either short or long. Most broken leaf springs I have seen brake at the front eye where the long bar hits and the short bar looks like it will arc the spring.
But I have seen old school cars with long bars and short bars that still have their original springs. I have an old set of Long bars where one is mangled from a high speed bottom out.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JoeC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The slapper bars that hit the springs are not a great design either short or long. Most broken leaf springs I have seen brake at the front eye where the long bar hits .... </div></div>

I've not seen this common failure. Do you have any pics?

Here is what I've seen:

Short bar:

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y95...1/IMG_0276.jpg

Bent Leaf
http://www.binderplanet.com/photopos...st-springs.jpg

Is this what you consider a long bar and the proper place to contact?

http://www.novaresource.org/ct/ct01.jpg

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Paul
That looks right under the spring eye to me....maybe not exactly centered but close enough.

What brand bars are they or they homemade/lengthened?

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

check out this cool old mickey thompson shifter http://i579.photobucket.com/albums/s...02849_ORIG.jpg http://i579.photobucket.com/albums/s...463_ORIG-1.jpg

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

That shifter is awesome!!

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

NICE Russell!

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

OK, so here are some pics of my slapper bars.

[img:center]http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/j...d/100_1625.jpg[/img]

As you can see in the above picture, the leaf is a little bent. It appears that they were mono's that someone added two extra leafs to. The tube measures 1 1/2&quot; square.

[img:center]http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/j...d/100_1624.jpg[/img]

[img:center]http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/j...d/100_1623.jpg[/img]

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Yep, somebody made those up in their shop but you can tell they are old-probably late 60's early 70's. . I would blast em and paint em up.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

School me on how you know that they are home made? I would never know the difference. [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/dunno.gif[/img]

All that I know is, I have and open rear that would get posi in the garage, so I would guess the rear is either going or those things actually help plant the tires???

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nova Jed</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> School me on how you know that they are home made? I would never know the difference. [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/dunno.gif[/img]

All that I know is, I have and open rear that would get posi in the garage, so I would guess the rear is either going or those things actually help plant the tires??? </div></div>

I have never seen those in ads or any catalog but that does not mean they were not made by a company. I think the giveaway is the welds in the back are very cobbled/amaturish. Almost looks as if they welded them together piece by piece while on the car. I would bet they were made in someones metal shop class in HS.

The snubbers are probably Lakewood as well as the the spring clamp bolts or possibly Mr. Gasket

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Ha! With all the rust on them, I hadn't even noticed the ugly welds. I guess that's why I have never seen this style. They are back woods slappers. Cool! I think I'm just gonna run them like you said. Blast them and paint them. Adds some character. [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/scholar.gif[/img]

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Home made for sure. That is like &quot;home cookery&quot;,or home made Day 2 parts. I like it,so COOOL.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

those have a late 1960's look to them
maybe homemade maybe not
there were some small machine shops making traction bars and stick welding them like that in the 1960s

I have seen some home made bars that looked a lot worse with torch-cut plates and no front spring clamp

if you re-use them you may want to use the U-bolts instead of the stock short bolts

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Joe, I was considering using U-bolts for sure.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

How about those springs, they getting addressed too? It would be the right time to build your own Super Stock type springs.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Springs are getting changed out too!

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

I agreeing with pxtx,you can build your own Super Stock type springs.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

What are the back in the day Super Stocker Springs???

Chad


p.s.. Plowman's was only 15 minutes from where I grew up.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Stack them tight on the right-front. Stack them tight on the left-rear. There is a left and right rear spring. Smokey do I know you. I get it,you mean the dealership PLOWMAN'S. Could use a picture of the Dealership,if that's ok. Paul ps:I will try to get pictures of the rear springs.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Just picked this up the other day. I went to a friends to buy some gm BB parts and saw these, and bought them too. What time period, I maybe want to use on my 67 but I believe these are more 70-73. Everything is nos except air cleaner looks to have been install then removed.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Also picked this up too. This is a great book. It list some of the GM hi-performance parts available at the time. This one has a copy right date of 1971. I seen these before are the early version different?

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 67rs/ss</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> What time period, I maybe want to use on my 67 but I believe these are more 70-73. </div></div>

The gold stuff came out mid 1974. It's hayday was 75-77 and then Moroso came out with chrome then which took over. Good time period to be into cars...and the gold stuff really brings back memories. They were very popular back then everybody wanted to emulate the race cars and Moroso had the very first covers which were race weight.

The valve cover boxes are older packaging 80's or 90's but the vc bolts etc is 2000 on up packaging but none of this stuff is made by Moroso any longer.

The gold stuff is really coming back into popularity. As I said the 74-78 period was a great time to be into cars..they were cheap to buy and plentiful.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Here are a couple more items. Sorry for the blurry pic I thought is came out fine, its for a holley fuel filter.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nova Jed</div><div class="ubbcode-body">OK, so here are some pics of my slapper bars.

[img:center]http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/j...d/100_1625.jpg[/img]

As you can see in the above picture, the leaf is a little bent. It appears that they were mono's that someone added two extra leafs to. The tube measures 1 1/2&quot; square.

[img:center]http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/j...d/100_1624.jpg[/img]

[img:center]http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/j...d/100_1623.jpg[/img] </div></div> Traction bars by JED-I Performance.

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Here is mine

http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u.../watermark.jpg

7x15 magnesium in front 9.5 back Dragmaster

Re: Day 2 parts discussion
 

Tuff look Niclas! I like your cowl tach too. [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/biggthumpup.gif[/img]