Alignment opinions on this board vary, especially when it comes to negative camber and its application in a street-driven car. Where just about everybody seems to agree, however, is that an increase in CASTER is a desirable thing. The design of the upper control arm eccentrics make it so there is a trade-off between caster and camber - to increase caster into the desired range often means compromising one's goal for camber. UCA offset bushings, installed in the proper orientation, can help you get higher caster readings. Even so, you will still have caster/camber trade-offs because of the eccentrics are where they are.

So what does all that have to do with adjustable strut rods, you ask?

Replacing the fixed-position strut rods with adjustable ones grant the alignment mechanic a method to adjust caster without coming near the eccentrics. An adjustment of caster using the strut rod can be done with virtually no change to camber. An alignment mechanic who truly understands these cars will do back flips of joy when he takes a peek under a car so equipped, especially if the car's owner has come in with some suggested alignment settings he would like to see on his car.

Adjustable strut rods are indeed a good thing.

As an aside (and without appearing to endorse the engineering of a competitive brand), blue oval midsize cars of the same era shared some of the same front-end geometry of Mopars. Sure, they had a coil over the UCA instead of a T-bar, but they still shared two-point LCA's with a strut rod. The lack of a T-bar at the LCA pivot allowed them to place an eccentric at that point (to adjust camber), and an adjustable strut rod for caster.