Thanks for the link. I dig it. I don't know why, but I prefer the low frame look vs. a z'd front frame, and it's simpler. I like the thought of just inclining the whole frame like tucks hemi powered roadster (i think we talked about that).
To look at it positively however, z'ing would raise the front roll center and shorten the moment arm between that roll center and the CG of the vehicle (mostly influenced by that hunk of beautiful olds iron). the nose high inclined frame wouldn't allow the spring perch to go as high as the "z" without wrecking that parallel frame rail/oil pan rail look we were talking about. Heck we wouldn't even see the oil pan rail if I z'd it, so then I'd want the valve covers and the frame parallel. But i suppose when z'ing i couldn't forget about those exhaust ports aiming downwards. hmmmm. . . style vs. function.
By the way, how do these old cars handle at their respective limit of cornering? are they pushy or loosey goosey or just too scary to bring to that limit? I'm just wondering with this roll moment stuff if i'm worrying too much about something that won't have much of an effect on handling. If I build a low frame without a suicide front spring perch and have a respectively high rear spring perch, it sounds like bad understeer on corner entry switching to no rear traction and oversteer on corner exit to me. J
