Is "stance" important?

[ss427copo]

Sometimes the stance can make or break the look. I think it is integral for the correct muscle car era. Come on, show us yours!

[VintageMusclecar]

The only decent shot I've got right now--hope to change that soon though.

[XXXGoldL34M20]

Stance is important to get it right if you are going for the original height on a 1970 Chevelle SS. The back was always lower than the front [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/biggthumpup.gif[/img]

[XXXGoldL34M20]

Lets not froget about my Mopar, The 1970 Challenger had one of the lowest stances in stock original form for a factory muscle car.

[ZiggyL78]

I don't see it as being lower Dan.The rocker looks horizontal to the ground.If you make a print of your pic and draw a line through the centres of the wheels and the bottom of the rocker,you will find the lines are parallel.I think if you measure the front of the rocker and compare it to the back,they will be very close.
I always remember back in 70 that when my LS6 was loaded for the track that the back went down.2 slicks on steel wheels with a tool box and a 24 of &quot;50&quot; was too much for stock springs.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XXXBlackLs6M22</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Stance is important to get it right if you are going for the original height on a 1970 Chevelle SS. The back was always lower than the front [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/biggthumpup.gif[/img] </div></div>

[XXXGoldL34M20]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ZiggyL78</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't see it as being lower Dan.The rocker looks horizontal to the ground.If you make a print of your pic and draw a line through the centres of the wheels and the bottom of the rocker,you will find the lines are parallel.I think if you measure the front of the rocker and compare it to the back,they will be very close.
I always remember back in 70 that when my LS6 was loaded for the track that the back went down.2 slicks on steel wheels with a tool box and a 24 of &quot;50&quot; was too much for stock springs.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XXXBlackLs6M22</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Stance is important to get it right if you are going for the original height on a 1970 Chevelle SS. The back was always lower than the front [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/biggthumpup.gif[/img] </div></div> </div></div>

Ken my car is about 3/4&quot; lower in the back. If you take a close look at that photo you can clearly see the shadow line sitting on each tire is much lower on the back then the front. Thats how the 70 Chevelle came from the factory.

[m22mike]

Sam, git back to work [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/rolleyes.gif[/img]

[Jim Ferron]

Hey Eric, what do you think of mine?

[WILMASBOYL78]

This is a cool thread...thanks for the photos.

One of my all time favorite &quot;stance&quot; musclecars is Mark Hasset's BM Camaro...I have always liked the look of that car..and the L88 under the hood doesn't hurt either [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/beers.gif[/img]

wilma

[VintageMusclecar]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jim Ferron</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Hey Eric, what do you think of mine?

</div></div>

[img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/biggthumpup.gif[/img] [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/biggthumpup.gif[/img] [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/biggthumpup.gif[/img] [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/biggthumpup.gif[/img] [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/biggthumpup.gif[/img] [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/biggthumpup.gif[/img]