1969 Chevelle F41

[Stefano]

What did the F41 Suspension package consist of for 1969 Chevelle and did it change during the model year?

[JoeC]

I believe it is similar to 1970 F41. Sway bars, shocks, and springs. Only about 700 Chevelles got F41 in 69.

[Keith Tedford]

What diameter is the F41 front sway bar. Our F40 bar is 15/16" diameter, and is the same as that on our other car which has the standard suspension.

[ohhawk]

Data I have shows...

F40 was .937 inch unit
F41 was 1.125 inch unit

[Mr70]

Also rear boxed lower control arms.

[Chevy454]

The rear sway bar necessitated the use of the boxed arms...that is the easiest way to spot a '69 F41 car. Of course, everyone and their brother puts the pieces on non-F41 cars, so that changes everything.

I had a '69 L-78 with the F41, TH400, 4.10, Cortez Silver, blue interior with blue vinyl top, map light, buckets/console, and topped off with 2 buildsheets...unfortunately, I didn't learn how rare the car was until AFTER I sold it. I think an estimated 700+ cars in the Malibu/Chevelle/El Camino/Wagon line got the F41 option.

[T Billigen]

It's funny Chevy was not first with the F-41? My 65 442 had it as part of the 442 package including metalic brakes. It was about the only muscle car in 65 that would go fast, corner reasonably well, and be able to stop! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/3gears.gif

[Mr70]

1970 was when Chevrolet starting making the F41 a Standard part of the Chevelles Super Sport option group.

[JoeG]

T Billigen,
It's a shame how the Oldsmobile just got left behind--I always considered the 442 the best all around performance/ handling cars of the supercar-pack back when----They use to call it the "Gentleman's Supercar"---JoeG /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/flag.gif

[T Billigen]

I agree, the 66 tri-power was probably one of the hottest street cars. They would run circles around the GTOs. In 68 I ordered a W-30, it ran well but I did have some problems with it. I ended up trading it in on a 68 Camaro. This 396-375HP was by far the hottest car I ever owned! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/burnout.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/3gears.gif

[JoeC]

didn't the Z16 have F41?

[T Billigen]

Thats a good question? I don't know but I know they did not have positraction. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

[Chevy454]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know but I know they did not have positraction.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know, but whoever dropped the ball on that decision ought to be shot...

[JoeG]

Chevy 454,
Your right about the ball being dropped!!, The GTO had Chevy by the family jewels and a large percentage of performance cars were being sold by winning races on the street and local burger hangouts---Chevy just wanted to get HP out there quickly-[unfortunately chevy was caught sleeping]-----Found some info Z-16----- had a rear sway bar/ drilled unboxed rear control arm to accept sway bar-- had a specially modified control-arm to hold the Impala steering knuckle--- larger brakes[not F-41]--12 bolt rear/ not posi[ not a GTO balanced package]---[ mickey69396 ]has one on his site and it only states special suspension-brakes--JoeG /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[T Billigen]

I think the sway bar on the Z-16 was probably an after thought by Chevy because it was not an option on any other GM car except the Olds. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

[JoeG]

T Billigen,
It was an after thought thru test trials--introduced 2nd month of '65---Oldsmobile already had it listed on the 442 first---JoeG /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[T Billigen]

Thats interesting! I did not know that. I was an Olds guy at the time and did not pay much attention to the Chevys until they started kicking my butt! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/haha.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/haha.gif

[ohhawk]

Z16.......stiffer coils and shocks at all 4 corners, also a large 1.06 sway bar in front. Some mention of the frame being different and built more on the convertible box frame with 2 additional body mounts.

[fsc66]

This is a post from the Chevelle Tech site regrding 1969 F41 components. I know this is an old thread but I'm sure of interest to some:


1969 Chevelle RPO F41 “Special Performance – Front and Rear Suspension”

By NickeyChevelle

Forty-three years after its introduction the RPO F41 “Special Performance – Front and Rear Suspension” has achieved the status of legend among General Motors performance car enthusiasts, however when the package was first introduced by the Chevrolet Division in 1969 it was almost entirely overlooked by Chevelle SS396 buyers (with only 722 units equipped with the option -- a superb addition to the 1969 Chevelles’ RPO Z25 SS396 option at just $29.50). The reason behind this dismal sales total: no advertising. Chevrolet simply didn’t put the information out there. Even today there is scarcely any printed information available to the restorer as to what parts comprised the RPO F41 package. Not only are details difficult to pin down, but the specific parts and/or part numbers change for almost every model year and car model across the GM divisions. Nonetheless, a review of the available printed material indicates that, at least during the 1969 model year, the Chevelle’s F41 option consisted of the following “Heavy Duty” parts selected to enhance vehicle handling characteristics:

 Front Stabilizer Bar (Group Number: 7.241, P/N: 402544). 1.25 inches in diameter.
 Special Front Stabilizer Bar Bushings (P/N: 396420). Doubtless manufactured with 1.25 inch holes.
 Lower Front Control Arms (P/N: 3990509 LH, P/N: 3990510 RH). Sourced from the Concours Station Wagon.
 Front Coil Springs (Group Number: 7.412. P/N: 3952823 Code “AB”, P/N: 3952824 Code “AC”, P/N: 3952825 Code “AC”). Wound from heavy 0.679 inch diameter rod with a Deflection Spring Rate of 390 pounds (these springs were included in the RPO F40 suspension).
 Front Shock Absorbers (Group Number: 7.345. P/N: 3192824). Featured higher calibrated valving (these shocks were included in the RPO Z25 suspension and the RPO F40 suspension).
 Boxed Rear Lower Control Arms (P/N: 3937877). These arms were of a boxed construction to allow installation of a Rear Stabilizer Bar.
 Rear Stabilizer Bar (P/N: 394926). 0.875 inches in diameter.
 Rear Coil Springs (Group Number: 7.503. P/N: 3952833 Code “BT”). Wound from heavier 0.679 inch diameter rod with a Deflection Spring Rate of 160 pounds (these springs were included as part of the RPO F40 suspension).
 Rear Shock Absorbers (Group Number: 7.345). Featured higher calibration valving (these shocks were included as part of the RPO Z25 suspension and the RPO F40 suspension) (there is confusion over which shock was actually used in the RPO F41 package. Of three possible choices, P/N: 3197677 gets the most "votes").
 Rear Frame Stiffeners (P/N: 3918061 LH, P/N: 3918062 RH) (these stiffeners were included with the RPO Z25 suspension and the RPO F40 suspension).
 Reinforced Rear Upper Control Arm (Left side only. P/N: 478276) (this arm was included as part of the RPO Z25 suspension and the RPO F40 suspension).

[bluel78]

In the above article it says the F41 used front lower control arms from the Canadian Concous station wagon. Does anyone know the difference? What month was the F41 introduced?

[fsc66]

I am currently investigating the production date of F41 in 1969. Sept and Oct price books do not list F41. April 1969 price lists do list F41. Order sheets for June and July do not list F41, Dec 1968 order sheet does list F41. I asked Rick Nelson to check his 69 assembly manual and he advised it states released on 9/19/68. Does anyone have a 1969 chevelle order sheet with a rev date of Oct 1968? The Suspension options look like they are listed on the back.

Thanks,
Paul

[Kurt S]

however when the package was first introduced by the Chevrolet Division in 1969 it was almost entirely overlooked by Chevelle SS396 buyers...
F41 was available in 1967 (note: I don't know which carlines other than Camaro, but the writer say 'Chevrolet Division', which makes that statement incorrect).

[fsc66]

Attached are original Chevelle order forms from 7/68 front and back. The suspension options are listed on the back and you'll notice on the 7/68 form only F40 was listed. The 3rd pic is the back of a 12/68 form and you can see both F40 and F41 are listed. We need to find an order form dated 10/68 and 11/68 to see if one or both of these forms listed both F40 and F41 to determine when the F41 became available to order.
Thank you,

Paul