01-03-2025, 02:34 PM | #1 |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: nor cal
Posts: 178
|
Qa1 vs ridetech
What’s up team, I’m starting the plan for my next build and want your input. I’m building a 66 suburban. I want it as low as possible but without notching the back floor. I’m thinking either RT or qa1, With there crossmembers . They are both pretty close in price, qa1 is coilovers while RT Is air( which will definitely get me lower,at the expense of some ride quality.
What says Y’all GO!! |
01-04-2025, 12:03 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,213
|
Re: Qa1 vs ridetech
I just had the same decision to make and went with the QA1. I chose QA1 for a few reasons
1: Have less parts/ points of failure that you can have with air ride. I think ride quality is similar with air ride if set up correctly. 2: I have seen some trucks on air that I don’t like the drive height but look good aired out. I want the same low stance all the time 3: Didn’t want to try and fit compressors and an air tank with everything else going on under my Suburban. 4: I like that the QA1 crossmember has the power steering rack built in and gives 2” of ground clearance bs the stock crossmember. I will say the QA1 crossmember was more difficult to install than I expected ( even with all front sheetmetal and the engine out). Unfortunately it will be about a year before it’s all together and driveable, so I can’t say how it looks/ drives. I will be installing the rear soon, just waiting on one part.
__________________
1951 Truck, LS1/4L60 1964 Suburban, current project 2014 Silverado daily driver 1953 Westerner "canned ham" trailer, rebuilt 1974 Prowler trailer, rebuilt |
01-04-2025, 12:32 PM | #3 |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Beautiful BC, Canada, eh?!
Posts: 2,278
|
Re: Qa1 vs ridetech
(Still having Ackerman Envy every time I look at that picture)
I did air ride because I wanted the challenge. I have lowering springs on a shelf for when the novelty wears off or the maintenance becomes too high. I would say air has the potential to be high maintenance, but so far I've only had to deal with one leaky PTC air fitting. I spent QUITE a bit of time conversing with Universal Air on how to calculate and design for air ride, plus a wack of online research, and ended up with a truck that handles like a sports sedan at 5" off the ground. If I didn't tell you it was on air, you wouldn't know otherwise. For a street vehicle, I'm a big fan of just old-school coil springs. They work fine, and are cheap. You don't have to do the full QA1 crossmember (or equivalent) setup; factory components and springs/spindles can go a long way and be dead-nuts reliable. There is something to be said about being 300miles north of butt-hole-nowhere and still being able to find parts at ANY autoparts store for your suspension. I recommend coilovers when you are getting into competition like autocross or track days and want to milk out every last tenth of a second. For a street car, in my opinion, they are a waste of money. Good shocks, however, are worth their weight in gold even on the street. But it really all comes down to what you want, and whatever way you chose to go will be the right way for this build.
__________________
1961 Apache: "Grabber Orange" Shortboxed, pancake, step-notch, air-ride, turbo, LS 1977 Silverado: Shortboxed & dropped, potato-potato V8 Pontiac Firefly (Chevy Sprint): The ultimate engine swap: 5.7L in a 1.0L bag Lotus Super 7 Replica: Scratch-built street-legal rollerskate Last edited by SkinnyG; 01-04-2025 at 02:11 PM. |
01-04-2025, 01:04 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,213
|
Re: Qa1 vs ridetech
I agree, I think the QA1 is overkill for my project. Unfortunately I have been all over the place trying to decide. I initially bought bags and and put them in with just schrader valves. Then installed drop springs and planned on getting high quality shocks.
I decided against air for the reasons listed above. I decided against the drop springs/ shocks only because none of the springs are designed for Suburbans. It’s likely that the 4” HD springs I have would have been fine but I have spent too much time thinking about this and not enough building it. Now that I have some time I’m trying to put it all together once. Since I’m waiting on my turn at the painter it’s the perfect time to get all of the suspension in.
__________________
1951 Truck, LS1/4L60 1964 Suburban, current project 2014 Silverado daily driver 1953 Westerner "canned ham" trailer, rebuilt 1974 Prowler trailer, rebuilt |
01-04-2025, 02:10 PM | #5 |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Beautiful BC, Canada, eh?!
Posts: 2,278
|
Re: Qa1 vs ridetech
Buy MOOG 6454 1-ton coils, and just keep trimming them little by little until you get the ride height you want (on my '77 I had 3" dropped spindles, and MOOG springs - I cut a full coil off for 2" more drop, then trimmed 2" at a time off the pig tail bit by bit to get the height I wanted).
I assure you, 1-ton coil springs don't ride that bad; but if you want to ride low, you HAVE to run stiffer springs.
__________________
1961 Apache: "Grabber Orange" Shortboxed, pancake, step-notch, air-ride, turbo, LS 1977 Silverado: Shortboxed & dropped, potato-potato V8 Pontiac Firefly (Chevy Sprint): The ultimate engine swap: 5.7L in a 1.0L bag Lotus Super 7 Replica: Scratch-built street-legal rollerskate |
Today, 06:13 PM | #6 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 114
|
Re: Qa1 vs ridetech
Quote:
I'm going coilovers (not sure which ones yet) on my truck because I do plan to autocross it. Although I like all of my vehicles to handle as well as they can, even on the street and my opinion is that once you have coilovers on the street you won't go back. Air ride isn't my thing although I have nothing against it. I have a modified 2019 MX-5 on a set of MCS coilovers so the truck won't outhandle it but that's not the point. I like having different vehicles and the truck will have a lot more power.
__________________
1965 GMC 910 Short Fleetside. |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|