If the centerline of the ball joint setup you mention was in line with the plane of the LCA pivot you'd remove the conflict.

You covered a lot pertinent ground, but you have not mentioned that a rigid pivot strut rod, induces a small arc in the LCA as it moves up and down. The OEM allows for this by using rubber I suspect. Almost all other LCA bushings, I suspect even the delrin bushing will allow that small motion. If that arc was resisted, you would have bind. Granted the induced arc is minor, but then those who are making this upgrade "think" they are reducing unwanted movement in the first place. I suspect the LCA might even flex in this new arc induced by a rigid strut rod mounting, since the LCA main strength is vertical by its greater height cross section. Of course those that add the lower rein forcing plate would reduce this flex, and therefore drift closer to bind, not a wanted outcome. All this means to me going full circle, not sure why bother with the upgrade if the installed rubber bushings are in good shape and tight, for anything short of Nascar
use.

For discussion sake, is there consensus the strut's biggest and most important loading is when under braking?

The strut will always have an intersecting arc to the LCA in a stock Mopar setup. As such, there will always be a "conflict." Modern suspensions get around this by having 2 mounting points for the LCA. (thus not needing a strut arm)

T/Anks to all who've replied... FWIW... my LCA bushings are ~30 years old, as well.. and still appearing a-ok .. RUBBER. (~30 yrs ago poly lca bushings weren't avlbl... so.. I simply replaced the complete lcas which came with new factory lca rubber bushings.)

As to pulling the lcas a bit forward, using the adjustable struts, I can better understand that's probably not desirable as it'll disturb the lca bushings -- poly potentially to where out more quickly... but rubber can withstand and flex, hence longer life.

I'm unfamiliar with the RMS struts... I'll look them up.

I've recently had my kframe welded, and also the lca plates added. Engine bay is being repainted very soon.... been sanding, prepping, etc (show-quality!).

Despite the factory struts w/rubber bshgs, factory lcas and rubber lca bshgs, the car has always been tight and great handling (SCCA competition AX, and recent HSAX/HPDE, and street/hwy)... the overall suspension setup I have works great: 1.24 TBs, 225/5 flexaform mono leafs, 1.25 F, 1.0 r sway bars, Red Koni Ds, balance corner weight.. 52% f, 48%r. SO... with the engine out for a rebuild, the front end is being gone through.

Yes, but if you went the balljoint route you'd be smart to relocate the thing to remove the conflict, hence my comment about the line (shouldn't of said plane) of the LCA pivot point intersecting the center of the ball joint.

So, I've been playing with this in my head and some scrap paper now.

Provided that the center of the heim/ball joint is in line with the LCA pivot and t-bar there will be no bind. Ever. The strut actually moves in a conical motion, so the arc is the same as the lca. Therefore there is no intersecting arc. It is the same arc. However if that pivot is not in line, there will be a conflicting arc. Obviously the larger the arc, the less influence it has. Much like a longer panhard bar will shift the rear end less than a shorter panhard bar.

I was going to explain the intersecting arcs and in doing the geometry, discovered this for myself. I feel smart and stupid at the same time. If anyone already knew this, kudos to you.

This also assumes LCA and Strut have same pivot length?

However the Hotchkis units are quite different in construction. The most advantageous part of the Hotchkis design in that the Strut rod engages the LCA the same way the factory unit does, by resting on a machined shoulder. The other units bolt in from the rear which means that the engagement is the clamping force of the faster and the face of the rod which could allow movement of the threaded section. I've seen folks who install Heims onto the threaded section of of a fastener and over time and cycles, the threads will "waller" out the hole. No good, especially if that fastener shears or backs out...you have nothing holding your strut rod to the LCA.

Wonder how the Nichels stock car arrangement would compare.
They welded a sleeve into the k-member, screwed in what looked like a typical Mopar ball joint, and joined it to a shortened two piece strut rod, with a threaded collar. A tie rod type adjustment was used to change the length as needed.

Wonder how the Nichels stock car arrangement would compare.
They welded a sleeve into the k-member, screwed in what looked like a typical Mopar ball joint, and joined it to a shortened two piece strut rod, with a threaded collar. A tie rod type adjustment was used to change the length as needed.