Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 7 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Re: Tall vs. Short Spindles #17932
11/08/05 03:01 PM
11/08/05 03:01 PM
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,095
Bloomington, Illernoise
cptn60 Offline
super stock
cptn60  Offline
super stock

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,095
Bloomington, Illernoise
Quote:

Thing about bumpsteer is that you do not change spindle height to fix it. Regardless of what spindle you run, because spindle hieght doesn't cause bumpsteer, though it might accentuate it.

You fix bumpsteer by changing the location of the tie rodd pivot points, inner or outer depending on what you have for bumpsteer. Since the tie rod pivot points never change when you swap out the spindles I find it real hard to accept the claim that a taller spindle causes it.




Bingo!! It takes a texan


This space available for rent
Re: Tall vs. Short Spindles [Re: 69 Road Runner] #17933
11/08/05 04:20 PM
11/08/05 04:20 PM
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 403
Western Oregon
bull Offline
mopar
bull  Offline
mopar

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 403
Western Oregon
Quote:

Quote:

By the way, here's my parts list if anyone cares. Might be helpful to someone who's still looking for parts.

My “brake” down

2 Spindles: 1974 Dart (used) $90
2 Caliper adapters: 1977 Fury pin style (used) $36 incl. shipping
2 Rotors: 1977 Fury (new) $91.21
2 Calipers: 1973 Challenger (rebuilt) Loaded with new semi-metallic pads, pin fastener set, etc. $129.98
1 Disc Brake Master cylinder: 1973-1980s Dodge truck (rebuilt) $28.76 (This will be replaced by one that looks correct)
2 Hoses: 1980 St. Regis (new) $30.98
2 Oil seals: 1977 Fury (new) $3.49
2 Outer wheel bearings: 1977 Fury (new) $8.50
2 Inner wheel bearings: 1977 Fury (new) $11.18
1 Wilwood Proportioning Valve: $42.50
1 Wilwood Residual Pressure Valve: $16.46
Misc.: $15

Total: $504.06




Did you front or rear mount your calipers? I want to rear mount my calipers to clear the factory sway bar on my 69 Road Runner. If I can get the hoses at the parts store instead of ordering them, that would make things easier, particularly if they have to be returned.




I rear mounted them to avoid swaybar interferance. Just be careful with your brake hoses as Rick says above. Some people have had the hoses custom made but I seem to have found a good match with those St. Regis hoses, and they're only $30 and change per pair.


1968 Charger 383/2bbl/4spd (1 of 74) 1994 Dakota Sport 3.9L/AT/2WD 2003 Durango SLT 4.7L/AT/4X4 Yes, all Dodges and nothing else
Re: Tall vs. Short Spindles [Re: bull] #17934
11/08/05 04:23 PM
11/08/05 04:23 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,687
VA
69 Road Runner Offline
master
69 Road Runner  Offline
master

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,687
VA
Quote:

I rear mounted them to avoid swaybar interferance. Just be careful with your brake hoses as Rick says above. Some people have had the hoses custom made but I seem to have found a good match with those St. Regis hoses, and they're only $30 and change per pair.




Do you have any pictures?


69 Road Runner Vert
Re: Tall vs. Short Spindles [Re: 69 Road Runner] #17935
11/09/05 03:03 AM
11/09/05 03:03 AM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



adding more

say I change my 70 duster to the tall spindle w/ matching discs and bracket, caliper, etc. after changing the UCA to newer Large UBJ. Would this spindle at http://www.piratejack.net/spindle.html
fit if I wanted to restore my original suspension geometry?

Re: Tall vs. Short Spindles #17936
11/14/05 12:11 PM
11/14/05 12:11 PM
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 231
Michigan
N
NJK66 Offline OP
super street
NJK66  Offline OP
super street
N

Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 231
Michigan
Near as I can see it will. There will just be some geometry changes that if you read this whole posting, is what all the debate regarding the tall vs. short spindle is about. As near as I can see the front end will align to factory specifications. You gain a bit of positive caster which I understand is a plus but you raise the roll center of the vehice which I am not sure if this is good or bad. Depends on who you talk to. The taller spindle is 3/8 inch taller than the one you have on your car. I am going to try to use the stock upper control arms with the taller spindle but I am going to make sure I have ample travel of the upper control arm (potential bind). If I have any reservations regarding how my car feels or steers, I'm going to buy the Firm Feel UCA's.

BTW there is some really good info in this posting does anyone know how to get it in the tech archives?

Re: Tall vs. Short Spindles [Re: NJK66] #17937
02/19/07 08:05 PM
02/19/07 08:05 PM
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,982
Scranton, PA
Montclaire Offline
master
Montclaire  Offline
master

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,982
Scranton, PA
I'm bumping this for preservation, seeing how many posts I've seen on this lately. I don't want to get it going again, just put it out there for people to read. Lots of good info, on both sides of the issue. Archives? Please?


Re: Tall vs. Short Spindles [Re: NJK66] #17938
11/26/07 12:17 AM
11/26/07 12:17 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,016
Frederick, MD
7
71charger Offline
top fuel
71charger  Offline
top fuel
7

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,016
Frederick, MD
Bump, as it seems this wheel is being reinvented yet again.

https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/show...;gonew=1#UNREAD

Re: Tall vs. Short Spindles [Re: Rick_Ehrenberg] #17939
11/26/07 01:13 AM
11/26/07 01:13 AM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 819
Central Ohio
rtidd440 Offline
super street
rtidd440  Offline
super street

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 819
Central Ohio
I'm a little late to this party but I have a question for Rick. If using the taller spindles raises the ball joint end of the upper arm in relation to the pivot point of the arm, could you use the moog offset bushings to raise the rear of the arm 3/8 to compensate? If so would that make the geometry acceptable? I believe there would still be a difference in the roll center but would all else be ok?


Rob 70 Swinger 340 4spd FC7 4 sale 69 Charger auto Q5 14 Challenger SRT8 Core 6spd black Deposit on Hellcat
Re: Tall vs. Short Spindles [Re: rtidd440] #17940
11/26/07 02:23 AM
11/26/07 02:23 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,560
So Cal
autoxcuda Offline
Too Many Posts
autoxcuda  Offline
Too Many Posts

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,560
So Cal
Quote:

... If using the taller spindles raises the ball joint end of the upper arm in relation to the pivot point of the arm, could you use the moog offset bushings to raise the rear of the arm 3/8 to compensate? If so would that make the geometry acceptable? I believe there would still be a difference in the roll center but would all else be ok?




The factory alignment eccentrics themselves allow for 3/8" of movement up/down/in/out in the upper control arm inner pickup point. When you adjust your alignment the roll center is changing. Very few of these cars on the road will have the same exact roll centers.

If you installed the offset 7103 UCA bushings to move the UCA chassis pickup point up, the ball joint angle and a-arm angle will be closer to stock. But the roll center still will not be the same exact place as with the shorter spindle.

The newer ball joints take a little more angle than stock OE NOS. And the lower control arm will have to smash through the frame an INCH or TWO to make the ball joint start to lock up.

Page 7 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7






Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1