Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Body rake at the expense of positive caster #100132
08/05/08 11:11 AM
08/05/08 11:11 AM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,285
West Coast, USA
jbc426 Offline OP
master
jbc426  Offline OP
master

Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,285
West Coast, USA
I don't know about most people, but I like my muscle cars ride height set high enough in the air front and rear to survive the mangled roads out there, with the rear end about an inch to an inch-and-a-half higher than the front.

I don't like them slammed to the ground so much that you can't drive over a speed bump unless your doing 2 mph, pull into a driveway without almost stopping and being hit from behind, or not being able to drive down a gravel road. I also don't like the rear end too far up in the air and the nose down too low either. There is a balance between functionality and a positve body rake with the rear an inch or so higher than the front that just looks right.

The problem is that I can barely get any positive caster even with those tubular upper control arms that supposedly add in three or so degrees. Installing them has helped some, but I can't get anywhere near the 2, 3 or 4 degrees positive caster I want.

This has been an issue since back in the old days with my cars, which aren't famous for having a lot of positive caster adjustment available anyway. This has been something that's been largely untreatable until these upper control arms became available, but they are not the complete solution. What have you guys done about this issue?


1970 Plymouth 'Cuda #'s 440-6(block in storage)currently 493" 6 pack, Shaker, 5 speed Passon, 4.10's
1968 Plymouth Barracuda Convertible 408 Magnum EFI with 4 speed automatic overdrive, 3800 stall lock-up converter and 4.30's (closest thing to an automatic 5 speed going)
Re: Body rake at the expense of positive caster [Re: jbc426] #100133
08/05/08 01:07 PM
08/05/08 01:07 PM
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 21,318
Manitoba, Canada
DaytonaTurbo Offline
Too Many Posts
DaytonaTurbo  Offline
Too Many Posts

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 21,318
Manitoba, Canada
Quote:

What have you guys done about this issue?




Nothing, and quite frankly, my car handles just fine. But not like I auto-x it.

Re: Body rake at the expense of positive caster [Re: jbc426] #100134
08/05/08 01:40 PM
08/05/08 01:40 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,468
So Cal
autoxcuda Offline
Too Many Posts
autoxcuda  Offline
Too Many Posts

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,468
So Cal
how much rake does the car have. Show us a side shot picture?

What brand of tubular UCA's did you buy?

It doesn't look like much rake in that picture. But I can't really tell. Do you run poly strut rod bushings? You could shave 3/16" off the inner/rear one to get to factory thickness. You could also ad moog offest 7103 bushings to your tublar UCA's.

How good is your alignment shop? Are they really putting there mind into getting the most caster in your car. Some are lazy and some don't understand the concepts to get more caster (mostly both).

Re: Body rake at the expense of positive caster [Re: autoxcuda] #100135
08/06/08 04:13 AM
08/06/08 04:13 AM
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,545
Seattle, WA
3
375inStroke Offline
Special needs person
375inStroke  Offline
Special needs person
3

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,545
Seattle, WA
Is the front adjuster all the way out or the rear all the way in? You could get a longer front adjuster or shorten the rear of the arm? What camber are you set at? I assume that's what's limiting your caster.

Re: Body rake at the expense of positive caster [Re: autoxcuda] #100136
08/07/08 10:24 AM
08/07/08 10:24 AM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,285
West Coast, USA
jbc426 Offline OP
master
jbc426  Offline OP
master

Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,285
West Coast, USA
The upper control arms are from Just Suspension(consequently, the second set I bought for my 1970 came from Firm Feel-super nice set), I'm running stock strut rod bushings, the rear upper-control arm adjusting bolt is all the way in, and it is my camber that is limiting my positive caster. I bought a set of off-set bushings, but with the tubular arms, they looked extremely difficult to chage without damaging the arms. I didn't want to attempt it and needed to take the car on a trip, so I returned them.

The car shows no signs af any previous front-end damage. I've been to two shops. The first, I'll never go back to, the second gave me a nice print-out with all the specs. Caster is currently close to zero. I'm over in Reno at Hot August Nights right now. There are some great Mopars here although they're a small percentage of the whole.

I'll post a side shot in a few days when I get back to San Jose.

Re: Body rake at the expense of positive caster [Re: jbc426] #100137
08/07/08 11:08 AM
08/07/08 11:08 AM
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 9,312
SoCal
68HemiB Offline
master
68HemiB  Offline
master

Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 9,312
SoCal
If the rear adjusters are all the way in, then you are at the limit of positive caster with your current front-end, unless you:

a. are willing to go more positive on camber
b. change the front-to-rear rake
c. go for the offset bushings in the UCA's
d. do strut rod stuff (adjustable style or shaved bushings)

Here's another thread in a similar vein from the tech archives.

Life is full of compromises, and there are worse things in this world than to be burdened with a nice Barracuda with a bit of negative caster.


Down to just a blue car now.
Re: Body rake at the expense of positive caster [Re: jbc426] #100138
08/07/08 11:30 AM
08/07/08 11:30 AM
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 704
USA
R
rftroy Offline
super stock
rftroy  Offline
super stock
R

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 704
USA
Something else is wrong, don't blame the rake angle of the car.

With a 108" wheelbase, which the Barracuda has, raising the rear by 1" changes the caster by only 0.5 degrees negative. With the stock setup this makes no problem for adjustment.

Bob


AAR 4-speed 3.91, Tor-Red;
70 440 6 pack Roadrunner 4-speed 3.54, Plum Crazy;
68 Formula S conv 383 4-speed 3.23, Electric Blue;
69 Barracuda conv Slant 6 OD4 2.94, 71 B5 Blue;
78 Lil' Red Truck, Red;
70 Challenger S/E. 505 6 pack, Passon 5-speed, 3.55, B7 Blue
Re: Body rake at the expense of positive caster [Re: rftroy] #100139
08/07/08 11:48 AM
08/07/08 11:48 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,468
So Cal
autoxcuda Offline
Too Many Posts
autoxcuda  Offline
Too Many Posts

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,468
So Cal
Here's mine during the alignment process (not finished). With stock UCA's, 7103 bushings, and shaved rear strut bushings...

Re: Body rake at the expense of positive caster [Re: rftroy] #100140
08/07/08 12:21 PM
08/07/08 12:21 PM
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 9,312
SoCal
68HemiB Offline
master
68HemiB  Offline
master

Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 9,312
SoCal
Quote:

Something else is wrong, don't blame the rake angle of the car.

With a 108" wheelbase, which the Barracuda has, raising the rear by 1" changes the caster by only 0.5 degrees negative. With the stock setup this makes no problem for adjustment.




Arc tangents notwithstanding, and with all due respect, OP has stated that the rear eccentrics are all the way in.

In my humble experience (aligning thousands of cars for a living in a previous life), the geometry of the stock suspensions on these cars did not lend themselves to lots of positive caster. Combine that with some rake, and today's approach for going a bit negative on camber, and the search for positive caster gets even more difficult.

I stand by my first post with the four alternatives. And more importantly, there's nothing "wrong" with his car.


Down to just a blue car now.






Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1