Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body #791598
09/03/10 11:16 AM
09/03/10 11:16 AM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 257
albemarle, NC
D
dusterbd13 Offline OP
enthusiast
dusterbd13  Offline OP
enthusiast
D

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 257
albemarle, NC
ok, ill open a can of worms here.....

I'm looking to get my 70 duster to handle a little better. its currently equipped with
.89 T-bars
rubber LCA bushings, poly upper
poly strut rod bushings
adjustable strut rods
73 steering linkage
1 1/8 sway bar
firm feel stage 3 power steering box
boxed LCA's
KYB shocks
17X8 wheels, tires with a 260 tread wear rating

rear is 340 springs
poly bushings
7/8 rear sway bar
1 inch lowering blocks
kyb shocks

the battery is moved over the axle centerline, front end has been lightened with fiberglass hood, aluminum heads, intake, water pump.

the car handles pretty decent right now.

where I'm trying to go:

my daily is a full on FSP prepped S10. tall ball joints, revised control arms, etc. incredible truck. think spec miata.

i would like to get my duster handling about the same. i think i can get there with a budget approach.

there is currently no noticeable body roll in either direction. i lose traction of the rear tires before body roll starts. so the sway bars are probably stiff enough.
it rides pretty good, and has no aggressive tendencies for squat on acceleration or brake dive. has a little bump steer, but tolerable.

my thoughts are going along the budget route of:
tube UCA's for alignment purposes. and tall upper ball joints.

based on the charts from mopar muscle, i think the tall AFCO ball joints would be a good investment to increase my negative camber gain. they are billed as being .200 taller than stock. the F/M/J spindles are about 1/4 taller than the a-body's, so...
(charts will not copy to the forum, so the link is
http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/t...dle_specs.html )

it looks like i would get the roll center benefits and negative camber gain, without the bump steer by going to the tall uppers. correct? maybe not quite as much, but with less expense and negative drawbacks.

on the upper control arm side, i have way too many questions and options.
what geometry benefits are there to be gained from one UCA over another? from what i understand of suspension design, the main purpose of the UCA is to control the spindle. the motion ratio controls the camber gain and caster change. that's about it. if I'm wrong, please tell me.

so, the options available are
CAP
RMS
Magnum force
SPC
Speedway
FFI
control freaks
XV
Hotchkis
just suspension

with prices ranging from 150-600. if there is no real benefit other than alignment specs, why spend more? if there is, is there a way to tell what the geometry improvements will be with one arm over another?

I'm really trying to figure this out before i spend money on the front suspension again, so help me out here.

michael


Michael Crawford CSP 1970 plymouth Duster back under construction: http://www.pro-touring.com/showthread.ph...ouring-makeover 1964 el camino beater shop truck 96403-project-drivabeater-2-0-64-el-camino-this-time
Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: dusterbd13] #791599
09/03/10 12:16 PM
09/03/10 12:16 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 30,947
Oregon
A
AndyF Offline
I Win
AndyF  Offline
I Win
A

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 30,947
Oregon
I'd recommend the FMJ knuckles and the Firm Feel upper control arms. The FFI upper arms are designed to work with the taller knuckles. The late FMJ knuckles are also lighter so that shaves some unsprung weight.

You'll also need some good brakes up front if you're really going to start pushing the car. And while you're at it, try some better shocks, I think you'll notice the difference.

6175537-Bilstein.jpg (86 downloads)
Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: AndyF] #791600
09/03/10 12:31 PM
09/03/10 12:31 PM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 257
albemarle, NC
D
dusterbd13 Offline OP
enthusiast
dusterbd13  Offline OP
enthusiast
D

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 257
albemarle, NC
since you happen to be one of the go to guys, ill pick your bain for a minute on the brakes.

i already have a setup halfway done. using C5 corvette calipers, custm caliper adapters, and mustang cobra 13 inch rotors. i dont have the hubs yet. i see that you have done some setups like this, and was wondering where you came up with the hubs?

also, the numbers with the FMJ spindles in the bumpsteer catagory kind of worry me.
what different does FFI do to their UCA's to make them better for the FMJ spindles?

thanks
michael


Michael Crawford CSP 1970 plymouth Duster back under construction: http://www.pro-touring.com/showthread.ph...ouring-makeover 1964 el camino beater shop truck 96403-project-drivabeater-2-0-64-el-camino-this-time
Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: dusterbd13] #791601
09/03/10 01:42 PM
09/03/10 01:42 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 30,947
Oregon
A
AndyF Offline
I Win
AndyF  Offline
I Win
A

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 30,947
Oregon
There are various sources for hubs. I make my own but if you don't have that capability then I'd suggest calling Baer. Wilwood also has hubs but the Baer hub is what I'd start with if I was doing a custom kit.

The Baer hub is nice and light, it comes with seals and bearings installed and it uses the Mopar dimensions for the most part. It has a Ford dust cap which I don't like but other than that it is a really cool part and the price is cheap compared to what a set of custom hubs would cost you.

The FMJ knuckle with the FFI upper arm works. There might be other combinations that work just as well or better. I'm just telling you what I've seen work on cars that corner hard.

Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: AndyF] #791602
09/03/10 02:12 PM
09/03/10 02:12 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 757
Toronto, Ont, Canada
boydsdodge Offline
super stock
boydsdodge  Offline
super stock

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 757
Toronto, Ont, Canada

Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: dusterbd13] #791603
09/03/10 02:53 PM
09/03/10 02:53 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
autoxcuda Offline
Too Many Posts
autoxcuda  Offline
Too Many Posts

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
Quote:

based on the charts from mopar muscle, i think the tall AFCO ball joints would be a good investment to increase my negative camber gain. they are billed as being .200 taller than stock. the F/M/J spindles are about 1/4 taller than the a-body's, so...
(charts will not copy to the forum, so the link is
http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/t...dle_specs.html )

it looks like i would get the roll center benefits and negative camber gain, without the bump steer by going to the tall uppers. correct? maybe not quite as much, but with less expense and negative drawbacks.




I thought the FMJ knuckle is just taller in the part of the knuckle above the spindle center. So a taller UBJ is the same geometry and bump steer at a FMJ knuckle.*

But the FMJ knuckle is lighter than the 1/4" shorter A/E body knuckle.

*assuming the angle between the LBJ hole imaginary line and the spindle centerline to UBJ hole is the same.

Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: autoxcuda] #791604
09/03/10 03:11 PM
09/03/10 03:11 PM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 257
albemarle, NC
D
dusterbd13 Offline OP
enthusiast
dusterbd13  Offline OP
enthusiast
D

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 257
albemarle, NC
so, if theyre the same, why would the bumpsteer be affected? thats why im assuming the rest of the spindle is different as well.

and thanks for helping on both threads. well get some good info and testing out there for the other guys!! i was the guinea pig for all the s10 guys with mine, so why not do the same with the duster...

and how much lighter are we talking?

Michael


Michael Crawford CSP 1970 plymouth Duster back under construction: http://www.pro-touring.com/showthread.ph...ouring-makeover 1964 el camino beater shop truck 96403-project-drivabeater-2-0-64-el-camino-this-time
Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: dusterbd13] #791605
09/03/10 03:22 PM
09/03/10 03:22 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
T
TC@HP2 Offline
master
TC@HP2  Offline
master
T

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
Quote:


.89 T-bars
rubber LCA bushings, poly upper
poly strut rod bushings
adjustable strut rods
73 steering linkage
1 1/8 sway bar
firm feel stage 3 power steering box
boxed LCA's
KYB shocks
17X8 wheels, tires with a 260 tread wear rating

rear is 340 springs
poly bushings
7/8 rear sway bar
1 inch lowering blocks
kyb shocks




Combo change here if you want to swing it, as it will cost a few bucks. Get some real shocks, like Bilstein or Koni, then step up the t-bars to 1.1 or better, ditch the lowering blocks and move up to flattend springs in the 180# range. However, this isn't exactly a "budget" approach.

Quote:

my thoughts are going along the budget route of:
tube UCA's for alignment purposes. and tall upper ball joints.

based on the charts from mopar muscle, i think the tall AFCO ball joints would be a good investment to increase my negative camber gain. they are billed as being .200 taller than stock. the F/M/J spindles are about 1/4 taller than the a-body's, so...
(charts will not copy to the forum, so the link is
http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/t...dle_specs.html )

it looks like i would get the roll center benefits and negative camber gain, without the bump steer by going to the tall uppers. correct? maybe not quite as much, but with less expense and negative drawbacks.




The FJM spindle is actually 3/8 taller than the A body spindle so your getting more height out of it than you think. Not sure about using the Afco ball joint on the street. They are a rebuildable race piece that require regular maintanence. If you don't mind that and are going to remove and inspect them annually, they may work for you. You will get a slight bit more bump steer at the extremes of travel from the tall spindle, but if you aren't getting the body roll, it won't be a impact. Similarly, lack of body roll will limit the camber gain you get from this change as well. If you're serious about this change up, a custom length upper arm may be in the cards to optimize the gain, but I'd verify what the tire wants with temps across the tread face before going with anything custom.

Quote:


on the upper control arm side, i have way too many questions and options.
what geometry benefits are there to be gained from one UCA over another? from what i understand of suspension design, the main purpose of the UCA is to control the spindle. the motion ratio controls the camber gain and caster change. that's about it. if I'm wrong, please tell me.

so, the options available are
CAP
RMS
Magnum force
SPC
Speedway
FFI
control freaks
XV
Hotchkis
just suspension

with prices ranging from 150-600. if there is no real benefit other than alignment specs, why spend more? if there is, is there a way to tell what the geometry improvements will be with one arm over another?

I'm really trying to figure this out before i spend money on the front suspension again, so help me out here.




Geometry gains can vary from subtle to serious, and from what I've seen of their marketing, no one on that list is giving away the secrets to their success ( or lack of). Short of buying one of everything and doing an analysis on it, I don't think anyone else can tell you the subtle differences between a bunch of those choices. The length of the arms, the angle of the mounts, and the angle of the ball joint are all geometrically important functions. Some of those are likely copies of stock geometry in a tubular form. Some have spent some time researching alternatives to the stock angles and have incorporated it in their construction. Which is best, I couldn't tell you. RMS and Hotchkis have spent considerable engineering time in their products. SPCs look like very heavy duty pieces with a wider range of adjustment than others. I don't know how you will get Speedways to work without some custom mounting work.

The upper control arm mounting angle controls anti-dive in the suspension, but short of changing the mounting positions, this is somewhat fixed with the mopar pick up points.

Aside from weight considerations, you can get similar, but not as much, caster/camber gain from the offset arm bushings for $60 compared to most tubular arms.

FJM spindles are a couple of pounds lighter each.

Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: dusterbd13] #791606
09/03/10 03:25 PM
09/03/10 03:25 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
autoxcuda Offline
Too Many Posts
autoxcuda  Offline
Too Many Posts

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
Quote:

so, if theyre the same, why would the bumpsteer be affected? thats why im assuming the rest of the spindle is different as well.




It could be that when the ball joint is moved up (tall or taller ball joint) that angle relationship changes and that moves the outer tie rod ball joint slightly up or down changing bump steer.

These are small changes and you'd really have to get everything plotted on 3-D suspension program to see all the effects.

I just think the taller UBJ is going to put you in the same situation as the FMJ knuckle. And I don't think that bumpsteer deal is a game changer.

Those FMJ knuckles AndyF has pictured are on the one of the fastest road course stock suspensioned steet driven Mopars in the country. The red 68 Valiant.

Just changing your caster has effect on bumpsteer.

Quote:

and how much lighter are we talking?

Michael




I think that is listed somewhere on bigblockdart.com AndyF might know off hand.

Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: dusterbd13] #791607
09/03/10 03:28 PM
09/03/10 03:28 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,122
Grand Haven, MI
patrick Offline
I Live Here
patrick  Offline
I Live Here

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,122
Grand Haven, MI
Quote:

since you happen to be one of the go to guys, ill pick your bain for a minute on the brakes.

i already have a setup halfway done. using C5 corvette calipers, custm caliper adapters, and mustang cobra 13 inch rotors. i dont have the hubs yet. i see that you have done some setups like this, and was wondering where you came up with the hubs?

also, the numbers with the FMJ spindles in the bumpsteer catagory kind of worry me.
what different does FFI do to their UCA's to make them better for the FMJ spindles?

thanks
michael




I think your shocks are really holding you back, personally.

do you have a limited slip? cone, clutch, or torsen style? that might help with some of your inside rear tire traction issues, either a really stiff clutch style, or a torsen style.

as far as tubular UCA's, if you're planning on doing a lot of street driving, I think I'd look for ones with suspension bushings instead of adjustible rod ends for durability...

for a hub on the cheap, how about taking a standard 10.87" rotor, and cutting the rotor face and most of the hat off, leaving the flange and hub?

Last edited by patrick; 09/03/10 03:32 PM.

1976 Spinnaker White Plymouth Duster, /6 A833OD
1986 Silver/Twilight Blue Chrysler 5th Ave HotRod **SOLD!***
2011 Toxic Orange Dodge Charger R/T
2017 Grand Cherokee Overland
2014 Jeep Cherokee Latitude (holy crap, my daughter is driving)
Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: patrick] #791608
09/03/10 03:34 PM
09/03/10 03:34 PM
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,024
In the twisties
R
RokketRide Offline
super gas
RokketRide  Offline
super gas
R

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,024
In the twisties
Quote:

for a hub on the cheap, how about taking a standard 10.87" rotor, and cutting the rotor face and most of the hat off, leaving the flange and hub?



That's what I would do, and have done. Wilwood hub would save a little weight and trouble, and at around $120 a piece not super cost prohibitive.

Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: TC@HP2] #791609
09/03/10 03:42 PM
09/03/10 03:42 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
autoxcuda Offline
Too Many Posts
autoxcuda  Offline
Too Many Posts

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
Quote:

... Not sure about using the Afco ball joint on the street. They are a rebuildable race piece that require regular maintanence. If you don't mind that and are going to remove and inspect them annually, they may work for you. ...




I've installed and had to maintain the Howe upper ball joints on the race car I work on. They are smooth and low friction. Very cool. But they definitly need maintaince and checking. More than once a season with 19 races. The allen key lash adjusters sometimes move and you have to reset them. But if you want to play with different pin heights... world of choices.

http://www.howeracing.com/c-510-howe-precision-ball-joints.aspx

Now there probably are other tall ball joints that aren't a "take apart" design. Those probably don't need the attention as the Howe's do. But I'd lube then a lot more often.

Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: dusterbd13] #791610
09/03/10 03:47 PM
09/03/10 03:47 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
T
TC@HP2 Offline
master
TC@HP2  Offline
master
T

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
Bumpsteer is impacted because the upper control arm thinks it is shorter as a result of the taller spindle. In compression, it pulls the top of the spindle in further, which, because of the anti-dive built in to it, causes the bottom of the spindle to twist as it travels up, shortening the effective length of the tie rod, which kicks out, create toe change.

But like autox says, we're talking about minor percents of a degree.

Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: autoxcuda] #791611
09/03/10 03:49 PM
09/03/10 03:49 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
autoxcuda Offline
Too Many Posts
autoxcuda  Offline
Too Many Posts

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
Like TC@HP2 said, shocks and torsion bars.


Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: dusterbd13] #791612
09/03/10 04:37 PM
09/03/10 04:37 PM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 257
albemarle, NC
D
dusterbd13 Offline OP
enthusiast
dusterbd13  Offline OP
enthusiast
D

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 257
albemarle, NC
so what im hearing is that im nitpicking with the bumpsteer of the FMJ spindles. it will not be that noticible, except over potholes while turning. much like my surrent setup. am i correct in this?

rear leaves are already on the short list. looking to go with the hotchkis, per autoxcuda's reccomendations in another thread.

limited slip is the clutch type. factory, rebuilt.

thanks for the tip on the speedways.

autoxcuda has also repeatedly mentioned to me about the offset UCA bushings, but i still dont know. may try them just to see.

ive done the cut down rotors before for my s10. wasnt any fun, but i can do it again. once and its done, right?

as far as the shocks, ive been thinking about that as well. really never liked the KYB's. was told i wouldnt like them before i bought them, but did anyway. should have known better.

on the t-bars, i really dont know if i want to go bigger. the ride is just right right now. if i wont notice any real difference over bumps/potholes/tar strips, i may do it.

the hotchkis arms are completely out of my budget. but the RMS arent.

keep the ideas and discussion coming. im loving this.

michael


Michael Crawford CSP 1970 plymouth Duster back under construction: http://www.pro-touring.com/showthread.ph...ouring-makeover 1964 el camino beater shop truck 96403-project-drivabeater-2-0-64-el-camino-this-time
Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: dusterbd13] #791613
09/03/10 04:41 PM
09/03/10 04:41 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 30,947
Oregon
A
AndyF Offline
I Win
AndyF  Offline
I Win
A

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 30,947
Oregon
Might try the Mopar oval track springs. Firm Feel carries the correct front hangers to work with the oval track springs on an A-body car. They sell that combo to a lot of folks.

Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: dusterbd13] #791614
09/04/10 03:22 AM
09/04/10 03:22 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
autoxcuda Offline
Too Many Posts
autoxcuda  Offline
Too Many Posts

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
Quote:

so what im hearing is that im nitpicking with the bumpsteer of the FMJ spindles. it will not be that noticible, except over potholes while turning. much like my surrent setup. am i correct in this?




Somewhat nitpicking.... but more that TC@HP and I feel you will be right back in the same bumpsteer situation as the FMJ knuckle if you add a taller UBJ pin to a A/E body knuckle.

Quote:

as far as the shocks, ive been thinking about that as well. really never liked the KYB's. was told i wouldnt like them before i bought them, but did anyway. should have known better.

on the t-bars, i really dont know if i want to go bigger. the ride is just right right now. if i wont notice any real difference over bumps/potholes/tar strips, i may do it.





I just went from .99" t-bar to 1.14" t-bars. That's a 60% increase in rate. But when I switched that I added Hotchkis Bilstein shocks. Result: The ride isn't much stiffer. Cruising down the highway I think it might be better.

The .99"/1.00" t-bar are about 40% stiffer than the .89" t-bars you have now. But you run them with KYB shocks. KYB's give you a harsh ride.

Spend $600 on 1" t-bars and Hotchkis Bilstein shock. What is your current alignment specs? If you can't get much caster/camber spend $40 on Moog 7103 bushings.

Next round of improvements/money go: frame connectors, rear leafs, tubular uppers.

Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: autoxcuda] #791615
09/04/10 09:04 AM
09/04/10 09:04 AM
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,664
IN
A
ahy Offline
master
ahy  Offline
master
A

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,664
IN
Quote:

Quote:

Spend $600 on 1" t-bars and Hotchkis Bilstein shock. What is your current alignment specs? If you can't get much caster/camber spend $40 on Moog 7103 bushings.

Next round of improvements/money go: frame connectors, rear leafs, tubular uppers.




I'd agree the "next step" gain will be in getting the alignment where you want it. Where are you now and where do you want to get to? As a suggested starting point 3/4 degree negative camber and 5 degrees positive caster and factory toe has worked well for me on a "fast street" E. The car will track and bite well on the corners without serious uneven tire wear in normal driving. You will likley need the offset upper control arm bushings or tubular upper control arms to get there. I've had good results with the FF tubular pieces. Also adjustment of your strut rods will be important; keep the LCA's pulled forward but not to the point where they bind up.

You also mentioned the rear breaking loose; is this under power or coasting? More rubber in the rear, flat springs w/o blocks and perhaps a suregrip diff could make a big difference. The factory TA cars had more rubber in the rear likley for this reason.

Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: autoxcuda] #791616
09/04/10 11:26 PM
09/04/10 11:26 PM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 257
albemarle, NC
D
dusterbd13 Offline OP
enthusiast
dusterbd13  Offline OP
enthusiast
D

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 257
albemarle, NC
current alignment specs are 0,0,0. well, were when ihad it alined a few years ago.

im ordering my 7103's, and grabbing the FMJ spindles. when thats in, ill see what alignment o can get.

car already has subframe connectors.

ill then look between the FFI road race springs (heard that the circle track springs are the same. is this true?) and the hotchkis. obviously, money will play a large role in this. ill then save my pennies for the bilsteins, and see if i need tube uppers.

this sound like a logical, fiscillay sound plan?

michael


Michael Crawford CSP 1970 plymouth Duster back under construction: http://www.pro-touring.com/showthread.ph...ouring-makeover 1964 el camino beater shop truck 96403-project-drivabeater-2-0-64-el-camino-this-time
Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: dusterbd13] #791617
09/05/10 10:05 AM
09/05/10 10:05 AM
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,664
IN
A
ahy Offline
master
ahy  Offline
master
A

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,664
IN
Sounds good. Appreciate updates as it unfolds.

Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: dusterbd13] #791618
09/05/10 12:42 PM
09/05/10 12:42 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
autoxcuda Offline
Too Many Posts
autoxcuda  Offline
Too Many Posts

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
Quote:

current alignment specs are 0,0,0. well, were when ihad it alined a few years ago.

im ordering my 7103's, and grabbing the FMJ spindles. when thats in, ill see what alignment o can get.

car already has subframe connectors.

ill then look between the FFI road race springs (heard that the circle track springs are the same. is this true?) and the hotchkis. obviously, money will play a large role in this. ill then save my pennies for the bilsteins, and see if i need tube uppers.

this sound like a logical, fiscillay sound plan?

michael




Sounds cost effective.

I'd get the shocks before the rear springs. And if you plan on upping the T-bars, do that before the rear springs too.

Re: front suspension geometry upgrades- a-body [Re: ahy] #791619
05/07/11 10:57 PM
05/07/11 10:57 PM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 257
albemarle, NC
D
dusterbd13 Offline OP
enthusiast
dusterbd13  Offline OP
enthusiast
D

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 257
albemarle, NC
well, i did some of the first step of this.

the offset bushings, alignement, and FMJ spindles are all in.

i did cheat for alignmnet purposes, though. i used 1/4 inch of hardened steel washers between the LBJ and spindle to build in some more negative camber.

with ,y moog offset bushings, shims, and ride height, i was able to get -1 camber, +4 caster, and 0 toe. the car has no additional noticible bumpsteer, even in compression while cornering. initial bit is greatly improved, front end understeer drastically reducved, and steering feel is increased. havent had it back out on track yet to push it hard, but have gotten abvout 800 street miles (some were very aggressive on the blue ridge parkway) and its working much better so far.

afetr i get some more track time to evaluate its limits, ill see whats next.

i said id update with evaluations and progress as i go.

Michael


Michael Crawford CSP 1970 plymouth Duster back under construction: http://www.pro-touring.com/showthread.ph...ouring-makeover 1964 el camino beater shop truck 96403-project-drivabeater-2-0-64-el-camino-this-time
Page 1 of 2 1 2






Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1