Nova Clip In A Shoebox

Hi Guys

I might be missing something, but I cannot find a really definitave step-by-step thread on installing a '70 Nova rear steer clip in a '50 shoebox. And, (more important), how easy/difficult the process is and how well does the beast fit. I have this club coupe that my son and I sectioned last fall and it is now ready for power steering, upgraded suspension, etc.

I finally got the clip sandblasted today. It is naked as a new baby and ready for measuring/cutting/welding. Everyone is invited to comment, blast, offer advice, flame, or just watch. I'll try to do***ent critical measurements, etc.

FWIW: The sectioning process we went through is covered in a previous thread: Montana Shoebox Section Project.

 

That's the same one I used on my 51 Merc and it worked great until I got stupid and decided to change frames rather than fixing the cracks at the back of my frame that came from the pounding from broken leaf springs.

Measure the width of the subframe right behind the steering box and measure the width of the Ford's frame in about the same spot. On my Merc the subframe slipped right inside the Merc frame and the back end of the subframe reached the X member so that we could cut the ends at an angle to **** up to the X member making it a nice solid frame that deceived a lot of guys who looked under the hood at rod trots.

Those subframes were about 6-1/2 inches off the ground on a stock Camaro/Nova with stock diameter tires so you want to block the car up at the planned ride height and then block the subframe up with the bottom of the crossmember that distance off the shop floor to fit them together and end up with stock springs and spindles and a great riding lowered shoebox. On my Merc the bottom of the subframe rail was parallel with the bottom of the stock frame, that keeps everything lined up perfectly and makes it work. In other words do not build a rake into the subframe install as that will screw things up royally.

 

Have a friend who had bought a Ford coupe with this install and it was too wide in my opinion!

 

think there are narrowed A arms available out there if you need them. need exact matches to rims/tires that you will be running to get exact mock up

 

Yup! I have met you Russ, and I respect your work very much, but I have tried to help sort out that combo too many times to say "go For it". It's just too wide. Going to narrow arms is one solution, or narrowing the cross member it's self, but either compromises the roll center.

If I was doing this, I would look at a G.M. A/G clip from a mid sized car from '78 - '87. Much better geometry that was designed with radial tire in mind including an actual camber curve that the Nova clip was lacking. Best part is though, instead about 62" hub to hub, a A/G is only 58.5" hub to hub, which is just about dead on.

 

I tried this combo once and it just didn't work out. The rear steer box was right up under the toeboards.
Put in a clip from the 78-87 as mentioned in a couple of shoboxes and it worked out well.
Just don't get carried away with lowering it too much by raising the clip up too high in the frame. The motor and trans will end up very high into the floor.
I found it best to put the clip in almost straight in and lower the car with dropped spindles. Saves building a whole new floor around the transmission and cutting up into the firewall. And the driveshaft also goes up as well.... more work.

my 51 was done this way, straight in and only a 2" notch in the bottom of the firewall. Dropped spindles. Hope this helps.

 

Ok...im gonna say the dreaded s10.....
1. Narrower than the g body clip.
2. Straight frame rails ( the g body kicks out to support the body)
In fact...I helped a buddy put a full s10 frame , floor pan and all under a 50 ford....
Dave


Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!

 

The S10 clip is the way to go. It strong and has newer dynamic suspension with a excellent camber & caster trac cycle unlike the 70's nova's with its older static suspension that has an ok camber & caster trac cycle. Do not know if you are ever planning on adding bags but if you are they are made to be bagged.

The Ericksons / Extreme Kustoms 951 678-3520

 

I don't have any answers but I do have a question. why?i know a lot of people do it but only in rare instances have I gottin a good reason for doing it.like rusted thru frame and I have a xtra frame here.not being a smart*** but I am really wanting to know why some people are doing this.

 

Looks like some hack really boogered in those motor mounts on that clip. Yipe.

Carry on.

 

I don't know about a Nova clip swap, but that is one strange poll you have going here.

 

In my case on my 51 Merc the original front end was shot. Not only worn out but due to it being lowered with heated coils in the 50's (I bought it in 1963 and it had been customized long before that) there were a couple of cracks in the frame near the front crossmember. The car had a hard life before I got it and my wrecking it when I was 17 didn't help any. In 1984 dollars it would have cost about 400 bucks to rebuild the Merc front end back to stock and I still would have had to find coils to lower it and then repair the frame.

I took it on several road trips after I subframed it and it would track straight as an arrow hands off at 80 mph on the long straight roads crossing the western US and according to my dad I drove at around 80 for hours on end on that trip.

Other than that the availability and lower cost of parts, factory power steering, Factory disk brakes and for the baggers there are bag kits already made to pretty well bolt in the setup rather than engineering your own.

Here it looks like he might have a real clean sandblasted uncut subframe to sell to someone who needs it. Then he can get one that fits better.

One thing I didn't think of before is that the shoebox is quite a bit shorter between the center of the front axle line and the firewall than a Merc of the same year is.

 

Simply go to the JAMCO web site and add up the cost of lowering, power steering, and power disk brakes.

You can spend $2000 - $3000.

You can get the same with an S10 clip for around $400.

Simple math.

Rich

 

Isn't the steering box in the way of the stock rad saddle though with an s-10?
Not sure about the shoebox, but it is on some swaps. I would check that.
With the Malibu/ Cutl*** style the rad saddle just needs the left corner cut out and turned around and it clears, easy fix. Wish I had some pics. Just trying to help.

 

Just trim a little from the bottom of the core support, works great.

If you want to see pics....


http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=506293

Rich

 

I read your whole story, I stand corrected. My s-10 experience was with a 37 Chevy.

 

My 51 ford drove like a dream with the 84 monte front clip...

I posted a thousand times on the Shoebox site, etc how nice it fit, how great it rode and how easy it was to installl......

VAAARRRROOOMMMMM....right over these guys heads....I quit trying to help....they put everything but what is cheap, fits correct....then you see their cars up for sale the minute they try and put tires on it and discover how wrong they are....

I have absolutely no sympathy for these guys.....at worse they get these shortened A frames and when it goes around in circles when they hit a bump....hey....then they complain.

 

B-Bop....you have my respect....finally one done correctly....and the stance is just perfect...not narrow like an s-10.

Nothing worse than seeing a vehicle that looks like farm tractor in the front with those two little wheels next to each other.........and if you use off set wheels to correct it....it is destroying the front bearings from the get go....but you cant tell yazooos nutin.....

My friend just cranked up his mustang for the first time today...and its one of the first ones made....used an old radiator that was in the car to save a dime....it boiled out all the prestone and destroyed his super nice engine compartment and the engine went to 240 degrees, never did get it broke in proper because of the radiator....when I asked before starting it....how is the radiator...did you reverse flush it at least...NO, as if I was the dumb one....well...hopefully no blown head gasket, etc but that newly built engine will not be the same.

 

Russ V, all I see is headaches....not even disc brakes?

Did you get any better advice from anyone with any knowhow?

I guess I am a little hard on you.....my 84 monte slipped right in mine, gave me power steering and brakes right from the begining....

What angle did the installer tell you to put the upper A frame support?

O well....good luck with it.....I like the body....looks great.

 

68 vette....your 84 monte clip is the same as s10...parts wise and geometry...
Except the center link...its shorter....spindles, a frames, tie rods etc all same as 84 monte..
Only 2 reasons to use the s10 clip imo....1..it slips right in to the stock frame...2...if you want to go really low, the tires tuck up into the fenders better...
Dave

Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!

 

dave....was not talking parts and geo....was talking "tread width"....S-10 is 4 inches narrower than a 80s G body clip....big difference in 54.5 inches and 58.5 inches....look closely at my 51 ford photo again...then imagine 2 more inches of gap in the tire and wheel.....NO thanks.

54.5 inches would even make the old 39 ford coupe I had look like a tractor....I think it had a 56 inch tread width.

Just look at how nice B bop's car looks....again....don't know why I bring up a super riding handling and looking car....vs whatever.

Again....running a conventional wheel....just do not like the narrow 2 wheel tractor look...sorry....more into having the car handle much better here in the mountains with hairpin curves than making it look like a tractor.., etc....pontiac did not have wide track stance for nothing....

 

Those Nova/Camaro REAR steer clips are just horrible, in every way imaginable. Yup go with the Metric front clip, light, decent to find parts for, more than sufficient disc brakes, and good track width.

 

I have seen too many Nova subframe swaps gone bad. They are too wide and don't handle well as the upper control arms go down to the outside causing geometry problems from the factory. The last 50 I did I used a Fatman stub frame. Welded right in fits stock core support and has good geometry.

If you build a car and put inferior parts on because you have them or they are cheap then you have lowered the end value of the car and you might not like the results and it will cause you to not want to drive the car as much.

Nova-Camaro too wide S-10 is too narrow (4"less than Nova) and hard to install engine in. And to the S-10 frame swappers: please stop ruining vintage cars with that horrible frame! Jim Ford (55willys)

 

55 Willys knows his stuff too..... what he said ^ ^ ^ ^

And Anderegg....and B-bops.....and probably most of the pro subframers....like Chesser in Atlanta.....Donald Jack in SC.....etc

 

I belive a shoebox factory IFS tract width was 56". The monte is 58 and the S10 is 56". Both will work better than any M11 imho. If i was building it for myself now or like in the past i would use the S10.

 

PM Pist-n Broke here on the HAMB and ask him some questions... he did a rear steer Nova or Camaro clip on his shoebox that came out really nice...

 

Not quite what you're looking for, but close:

My Shoebox ('51 Vic) has a front-steer disc brake Nova/Camaro clip in it that was narrowed 3" and stepped 4" at the firewall. Even narrowed, the front track was enough wider than stock that it was necessary to raise the front wheel openings 2" to recover a decent turning circle.

The work was done by Vince Asaro in the SF Bay area, and it turned out great. Since I didn't do the work, I can't give you detailed information about the install, but I do know what was done generally and can probably answer most questions.

The entire Chev suspension and steering is stock except for the narrowing, so the ride and handling are excellent. This is the car:

 

I have a '68 Camaro with factory disc brakes and my front wheels stick out further than my buddys '67 with drum brakes (both cars have 15x8 Ralley Wheels and 235 tires).
Not that anyone wants to take a step backwards, but drums could give you a bit more clearance.

 

I can't find the thread from earlier today about a shoebox/s10 swap, but he said there are two different track width s10 measurements for the front. I guess the 4x4 could be different, but 4x4 should not be in his thoughts. If there is two different widths, what are they and what years?

 

This came up when we were scrounging parts for my subframing job, and I held out for disc brakes. I think I was told that the discs add about 3/4" per side.