Quote: It looks like the control arm is on the wrong side of the car. The angle of the top of the ball joint should be level with the floor with the control arm attached to the factory mounts.
Quote: First time I've seen the pivot points on a control arm not be in a straight line with each other.
Its an optical illusion because of the camera angle in the shot. Actually, the upper arm pivots are in plane, they are just level instead of angled. This is anti-dive and it has been removed in this demonstration.
This appears to be a collection of parts from different vendors to address differing issues. There are Magnumforce double adjustable uppers mounting in the a plane similar to the Hotchkis design using a QA1 lower with a strut rod and the t-bar has been replaced by a coil over.
Once you start dropping the ride height of the car, the stock geometry starts to change. Not radically at first, but the lower you go, the more it changes. There becomes a point where you get low enough you need to revise some of the angles to restore its operation through its arcs. That's what we have here. Can't say if the builder figured it out on his own, had some help, ran it through a program or what. I can say that based on my experience, there is logic behind most of what is happening here. The camber curve change is a bit more nebulus as Mopar have decent camber gain already and unless you're getting a lot of body roll, you typically don't need to change it radically. Will it improve the handling, yes. Will it last 250,000 miles, I have no idea. But then again, these cars are not daily driver knocking down 20k miles a year anymore and they usually get regular inspection now that they didn't enjoy earlier in their lives. I wouldn't be as worried about the geometry of it all so much as having all the weight on that coil over going in to the inner fender. If it is properly supported on the engine side, then it may last.
