Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 44

Thread: Pierce cars?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    305

    Default

    So again why do they use Meric Chassis for the mods? You'd think there would be an explanation to highlight their chassis. I'd really like to know why most imca use Chevelle and very few metric while there are many more metric in UMP land.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    3,165

    Default

    Metric frames are cheaper.You can run nova lowers. IMCA have always liked full size frames.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    305

    Default

    So the only reason pierce does this is to have a bigger profit margin?

  4. #24
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,814

    Default

    Go price there complete rollers to other chassis. LoT CHEAPER

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Bear Lake, MI
    Posts
    156

    Default

    ^^^Very true on pricing,you can get two pierces for the same price as one LG21,grt,rocket by rulhman etc.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    305

    Default

    So no answer as to why they use metrics except for the fact it's cheaper to produce? Hmmmmm not buying it. There has got to be more.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    717

    Default

    He likes the geometry, the ability to use the lower control arms he wants and and the availability. It's the only things that matter.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    NW Indiana
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    You meant that he liked someone else's latest design!

  9. #29
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,814

    Default

    Ump. Every chassis builder copied somebody's other car some were along the line, that's why there are so many out there or there called copy's,such as diamond used to work at pierce went on his own made a few changes,fevers and his late models. And etc

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    22

    Default Bring back the D

    Quote Originally Posted by bob75 View Post
    Ump. Every chassis builder copied somebody's other car some were along the line, that's why there are so many out there or there called copy's,such as diamond used to work at pierce went on his own made a few changes,fevers and his late models. And etc
    It don't make it right.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,348

    Default

    Why wouldn't you want to make as much profit as possible as long as you still put out a quality product ? They are selling them cheaper than other builders are according to above posts.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Oakwood IL
    Posts
    21

    Default

    I'd say pierce kinda paved the way to today's mods JMO he didn't invent the wheel jus made it a lot better when he started out

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    21

    Default

    There good cars for ump you get them in the imca they go no where.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by springer View Post
    There good cars for ump you get them in the imca they go no where.
    Exactly! But why?

  15. #35
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,014

    Default

    Different tires and motors, mostly though the different tires.

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    305

    Default

    So a stickier tire on ump cars is beneficial to metric chassis? A hard tire is better on a Chevelle? Also what are pierce cars running for front ends now? Nova, metric spindle or nova and pinto spindle. What do they set bump steer at and do they have inside bump out more? I see most Chevelle guys buying the 2" or 2.5" spacers for both sides. We don't have our cars like this but curious as to what they run for bump and why? Also any pierce or metric chassis guys here that run IMCA that do well? Or is this strictly USRA and UMP where they use bumps? Trying to find why I see less in IMCA that are competitive.

  17. #37

    Default

    Truth is you can cheat up a metric chassis to better suit the front end geometry that the builders are after and ump doesn't care...Chevelle geometry is better as an oem configuration versus metric, that is why you see more chevelle frames in imca...

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    305

    Default

    So where are they cheated up? I know UMP we have aftermarket lowers but what else is being moved?

  19. #39
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    717

    Default

    I too wanna know where these cars are being cheated up. I have the same schematic drawing as you see with the Chevelle front end that has all the same measurements marked accordingly and have never found a discrepancy.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    in a van down by the river
    Posts
    1,892

    Default

    it is not in the frames, it is in the bolt on parts were the stuff is being cheated up.
    2011-12 Pierce made a RF lower control arm based off a NOVA that was probably 2-3" longer than a Nova. He moved the RF spring bucket out a long way, and there was no weight jack bolt.
    UMP has a rule that the weight jack can be 1" off of original centerline. Since there was no jackbolt, I guess there was no rule for that.

    Pretty sure he does not built that deal anymore, unless he is putting a weight jack on it.
    2012 UMP was checking a lot of lower A arms at bigger shows.
    Not sure what he is doing now, just remember that deal.
    I think there should be lifeguards in the genepool.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.