nova lower ?

[Seaman66]

I was told my car is a small metric with nova lowers.....how can i tell? and how do I know which spindles I have?? car came with a set of spindles too so i'm wondering what they are as well. Any specific markings/measurments on any of these things??

[chapa9]

I would say it would be a lot of wasted time and money for you to convert to a nova lower. If your new to mods stick with what the car is built on. The different spring mounting is why you run stiffer. I run a 950 in rf and I get plenty of roll ect on rf. DO NOT WORRY ABOUT WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE HAS!! Concern your self with your car. Work on getting the most out of your car.

[cavemod]

I was told my car is a small metric with nova lowers.....how can i tell? and how do I know which spindles I have?? car came with a set of spindles too so i'm wondering what they are as well. Any specific markings/measurments on any of these things??

The metric (late 70's early 80's cutlass regal etc)spindle measures 6 1/2 inches from the center of the lower ball joint hole to center of tie rod hole .I know for a fact the pinto is alot shorter distance along with no curve in the arm itself.As far as the big metric impala i dont have that dimension because i don't use them.All the chevelle based stub cars I've been around used the pinto style.I'm not sure if the overall heigth and arm length is different between the big and small metric spindles either but I know a guy who has used amc pacer javilin 2pc spindles on metric cars in the past also.I agree if you have metric lowers and spindles currently on then use them don't change unless your an engineer and or have a ton of knowledge about what does what when you change over or you might be giving up like people have in the past. I guess the guy who could answer this best is heavy duty or someone else who has a ton of experience with metric cars and what works and what doesn't.Or is this one of those top secret things that people don't discuss w/o a fee being paid???Bottoming out the rf IS NOT a good thing unless you like having a mid corner push been there done that. Many of the local racers tell me the only way to get rid of the push is go to the nova lower setup,but I also was running an 850 rf spring.Unfortunatly only me and racingjj are the only 2 metric a mods at the track I run at. .

[Extreme Race Cars]

Switching to Nova lowers is a huge improvement!!!! I use a '70-72 chevelle pitman and idler arm w/metric spindles and use the stock metric w/pinto spindles. I've used stock metric and mid '80s camaro drag links... not a lot of difference between the two performance wise. I used polyurethane bushings for years... now I use UB Machine Monoball bushings. Spring rates are usually 100 to 200 lbs less than metric. You will have to move your weight jack bolt and your upper control arm mounts. You could just make an upper control arm to work with your exsiting mounts but it would not have the ideal caster or camber gain numbers. Why make the switch? If your getting beat in the corners... thats why.

[TeamGRT12x]

There is a method to the madness with a soft RF spring and lots of gear, but it generally isn't suitable for weekly racing conditions. Just wanted to add to what Don said, do what makes your car fast, not what the guy beside you does. I went thru a discussion with a friend recently about what was working 3 years ago, and how well it probably works now but everyone follows suit when one car just blisters everyone with something different. Half the time, that guy just got lucky and the rest of the cars were off.

[dirttrackrocker]

A while back a post on this forum talked about motion ratios of the different lower control arms comparing the chevelle ,nova ,and metric lowers with the metric having the lowest percentage wise (23% if I recall corectly?).In other words the what the car actually feels .this is why they require the stiffer spring .Like I said before with an 850 in my rf i'm bottoming out on every track condition except smooth slick tracks.Heavyduty says 1000 on the rf with metric lowers which is what I'm changing to for the normal springtime tracks we see around here but will drop the rate some in the dog days of summer when the tracks have a tendency to dry out.He also state a 700 on a nove lower because there motion ratio is higher.While the shaw and harris (chevelle based) that I'veworked on in the past were running 600 or 650 in the rf because they have the highest motion ratio of the 3 mentioned control arms.The choice is yours modifications to the screwjack locations and other front end pickup points,wheel spacers,different offset wheels or wider rear end due to track width or heavier springs for the same result.I use metrics because I got a freind in the bone yard business who sells me a lower and spindle of a metric car for $25(whole front stub for $125). body roll is not an issue as long as every thing else is clearanced properly lower to frame wise shock and tierods are an issue also. this is why people convert to the nova lower to begin with to bring the tie rod away from the frame for clearance from what i've learned.When and if I make the switch I would say maybe a shorter idler and pitman arm??Maybe some one can enlighten us on whether they need changing also???

Motion ratios. Spring Rate at ball joint

Chevelle 36% x 650 = 234

Nova 30% x 775 = 232

Metric 23% x 1000 = 230