Did you move your leaf springs in? I’m going to do that to my 67 and trying figure what I will do about the gas tank. Buy a narrower one for big bucks or pay someone to cut and weld a regular one? What did you do?
Thank,
Rob
1st gen tci 4 link quater panel buckle woes...
41 - 59 of 59 Posts
Thank,
Rob
I’ve been following this thread for a while and I gotta admit, like everybody else, it makes me scratch my head as to what the root cause is. I get that, when mini tubing an early Nova, the frame rails are very thin in areas but just seems odd that some haven’t done mini tubs and still had issues. The fix that you guys have developed with the struts is quite impressive but I’m wondering if those that have experienced this buckling had subframe connectors installed before or after and, if so, what type of subframe connectors?...weld-in or bolt-in, did they go thru the floor like the DSE connectors or were they following the contour of the floor pan? My other question would be if anyone with the DSE Quadralink has experienced such issues? I do feel that the first gen Nova’s may be more susceptible due to the design of the rear quarter sail panel area differences.
When I mini tubbed my 68 Camaro and put a four link in it, the frame rails are very thin in areas on those cars as well, however, you don’t read of any such issues in the forums pertaining to quarters buckling on those cars. One would think that if it was a unibody issue related to how the body’s supported, that the issue would be common in Novas as well as Camaro’s, Mustang’s, Falcon’s and many others...especially given the number of these cars that receive these types of mods. As a comparison, when I did my 67 Nova, I did the Quadralink, mini tubs, torque boxes, DSE subframe connectors and since then, the car has been hanging on a rotisserie by the rear leaf spring mounts and front subframe mounts ever since (being rolled over and around the garage). You’d think that if it was gonna happen, that that’d be a good way to cause it.
There’s no doubt that the way the weight is transferred probably plays a role but I have a theory in my head that involves a lack of a coilover crossmember and the way in which the upper locating arms are attached to the body that could add to the woes many have seen. Not at all trying to turn this into a DSE advertisement, but I do feel that there’s some critical differences in the design of the Quadralink, specifically in the heavy duty crossmember that gets welded in place of a large section of the trunk floor in between the tubs as well as the inner frame rail supports that the coil overs attach to and the upper link mounts. I think those three areas take the majority of the “supporting role” (literally) out of the truck/floor pan and transfer it to areas that have specifically been reinforced to handle it. I think the subframe connectors probably play the smallest role in this exact issue, however, are definitely part of the whole package that brings much-needed rigidity to the body...but i don’t feel the brand or attachment method is a deal breaker. I’d be real curious to hear from anybody that used the TCI or CBR setup but also used the DSE coilover crossmember? I feel this one piece might hold the key to the puzzle and can be purchased separately from DSE. This is just my two cents.
When I mini tubbed my 68 Camaro and put a four link in it, the frame rails are very thin in areas on those cars as well, however, you don’t read of any such issues in the forums pertaining to quarters buckling on those cars. One would think that if it was a unibody issue related to how the body’s supported, that the issue would be common in Novas as well as Camaro’s, Mustang’s, Falcon’s and many others...especially given the number of these cars that receive these types of mods. As a comparison, when I did my 67 Nova, I did the Quadralink, mini tubs, torque boxes, DSE subframe connectors and since then, the car has been hanging on a rotisserie by the rear leaf spring mounts and front subframe mounts ever since (being rolled over and around the garage). You’d think that if it was gonna happen, that that’d be a good way to cause it.
There’s no doubt that the way the weight is transferred probably plays a role but I have a theory in my head that involves a lack of a coilover crossmember and the way in which the upper locating arms are attached to the body that could add to the woes many have seen. Not at all trying to turn this into a DSE advertisement, but I do feel that there’s some critical differences in the design of the Quadralink, specifically in the heavy duty crossmember that gets welded in place of a large section of the trunk floor in between the tubs as well as the inner frame rail supports that the coil overs attach to and the upper link mounts. I think those three areas take the majority of the “supporting role” (literally) out of the truck/floor pan and transfer it to areas that have specifically been reinforced to handle it. I think the subframe connectors probably play the smallest role in this exact issue, however, are definitely part of the whole package that brings much-needed rigidity to the body...but i don’t feel the brand or attachment method is a deal breaker. I’d be real curious to hear from anybody that used the TCI or CBR setup but also used the DSE coilover crossmember? I feel this one piece might hold the key to the puzzle and can be purchased separately from DSE. This is just my two cents.
Joined
·
1,196 Posts
I think that anytime you start hanging the rear suspension from the frame rails it's going to happen. This was the case with mine with the TCI 4 link installed. The car was supported at all 4 corners and the sub frame connectors installed from TCI. I pulled all that 4 link out and installed the CBR 4 Link and is a way nicer setup!
I put a Heidts IRS in my 66. It uses a substantial cross member above the rear. I also used the DSE mini tubs. I have not driven the car yet but is on all four wheels and I have no indication of buckling. One significant feature I added is frame stiffeners internal to the frame rails AND also to the inside of the frame rails to the old leaf spring pockets. The suspension includes subframe connectors. So far things look good. We'll see what happens when power gets applied.
Joined
·
998 Posts
though i custom made my own 4 link setup... i also reinforced the frame inside and out, with 1/4" plating... have dse frame connectors/tubs... the crossmember for the coilovers, is welded to the plated area, the crossmember for the upper arms is also welded to the a plated area... and the lower arms to dse the torque boxes/frame connectors.. the forward outer plating is also welded to the dse torque boxes/subframe connectors.... so its all tied together... back when i built the suspension, I noticed this thread and hoped this would strengthen things up a bit...
inside the frame before i boxed it back in...
![]()
on the outside of the frame, (basically the other side of that inside plating) another 1/4" plate, that over laps the inside plate... they are also plug welded to each other and to the crossmember for the coilovers...
![]()
![]()
inside the frame before i boxed it back in...
on the outside of the frame, (basically the other side of that inside plating) another 1/4" plate, that over laps the inside plate... they are also plug welded to each other and to the crossmember for the coilovers...
_IMG_E9366.JPG?width=590&height=370&fit=bounds)
Having heard about this on Steve's Nova site I made a cardboard template of the inner side of each rear frame rail and had ten gauge steel plates made. So far so good....
I never heard about the issue back when I did mine but felt the frame rails were pretty weak, so I reinforced the bottom and 1 side of each with plate like Pragmatist. I didn’t cut into the rails, split the tubs, added a filler and welded to frame rails, felt a 275 tire was plenty big enough. I’ve never had an issue.
![408002]()
![408003]()
![408004]()
Joined
·
4,853 Posts
The cause is pretty simple. The first gen unibody structure is a weak platform to begin with.. Adding power and better suspension to it only makes it more obvious.. A lower powered, stock suspension, skinny tired early ChevyII Nova doesn’t begin to find the limits of the chassis. The 66/67 might benefit from a different quarter panel design that integrates the sail panel into one piece with the quarter panels. Also, there are more curves in the exterior sheet metal so I figure the buckling doesn’t present in such an obvious manner as the flatter skinned 62-65 bodies. The later 67/68 F/X bodied vehicles are substantially stronger structures. The hardtop was dropped, the floors have more ribs and contours, and the front cowl and back seat package tray bulkhead are all significantly beefier then the 62-67 bodies.
Installing subframe connectors is a step in the right direction but if you are going to a rear suspension that redistributes the load to the center of the rear subframe you will have to address this load on the chassis as a whole.. The subframe connector and/or crossmember that locates off of the leaf spring mounts doesn’t go far enough to prevent the backhalf from fhexing and causing the buckling. The Competition Engineering Weld in subframe connectors with the rear subframe rails is a product that has been on the market for many years has the right idea to address this problem. This system ties the front subrails to the tail panel. I think that this product is going in the right direction and could be the basis for a solution to the problem. It’s not perfect but I think the buckling would be a non issue with something like this.. Take the stress off of the floor.
Installing subframe connectors is a step in the right direction but if you are going to a rear suspension that redistributes the load to the center of the rear subframe you will have to address this load on the chassis as a whole.. The subframe connector and/or crossmember that locates off of the leaf spring mounts doesn’t go far enough to prevent the backhalf from fhexing and causing the buckling. The Competition Engineering Weld in subframe connectors with the rear subframe rails is a product that has been on the market for many years has the right idea to address this problem. This system ties the front subrails to the tail panel. I think that this product is going in the right direction and could be the basis for a solution to the problem. It’s not perfect but I think the buckling would be a non issue with something like this.. Take the stress off of the floor.
Joined
·
33 Posts
I know this is an older thread, but wanted to contribute after installing my buckle bars.
I had some slight dimpling also, so these helped a bit. I may have put in a little too much heat while welding the tub button welds to the quarter panel flange. I also ordered the 3/16” frame plates from CBR and installed those on the inner frame rail for strength as some other have done. Appreciate all the ideas thrown around on this thread.
![Car Grille Automotive lighting Hood Vehicle]()
![Automotive tire Hood Road surface Automotive lighting Asphalt]()
![Hood Wood Grey Bumper Wall]()
![Grey Asphalt Gas Tints and shades Road surface]()
I had some slight dimpling also, so these helped a bit. I may have put in a little too much heat while welding the tub button welds to the quarter panel flange. I also ordered the 3/16” frame plates from CBR and installed those on the inner frame rail for strength as some other have done. Appreciate all the ideas thrown around on this thread.
Joined
·
780 Posts
Looks good
Joined
·
1,551 Posts
There’s another design worth fabricating and selling, looks great and could be bolt in all the way.
That looks great. You in Texas and want to help me with mine. LOL
Joined
·
33 Posts
Thanks guys, I’m pretty happy the way it turned out. I had to reach into the rear window access , back to the rear quarter to get those nuts on the crossbar mount — definitely a PITA but luckily my girly hands fit back there.
Thanks and yessir, the fuel cell has a welded aluminum frame mounted to it so I can recess it into the trunk.
Thanks, and 💯 agreed, a U bracket around that frame would work out well with a bolt in top flange.
Joined
·
780 Posts
Ptibbs , where in Texas are you
Joined
·
33 Posts
Im located in Southern CA, but I have lived in San Antonio for a while. Who knows, I may end up in TX again if CA keeps doing what they’re doing.
Joined
·
780 Posts
Ok I’m in Houston so was wanting to see your car in person. I don’t have any buckling issues but it’s not finished either so I’m thinking of supporting it as safe insurance
Joined
·
780 Posts
Ptibbs, can you list what components, part numbers, companies you used to build your trunk supports
41 - 59 of 59 Posts
