Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Caster/camber issues with aftermarket suspension #3083346
10/04/22 05:52 PM
10/04/22 05:52 PM
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,214
Out of the State of Confusion
blue_stocker Offline OP
pro stock
blue_stocker  Offline OP
pro stock

Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,214
Out of the State of Confusion
Those of you who have altered or radically changed your car's front suspension, in particular you who have changed to Mustang 2 after-market components:
realizing some of the advantageous of these components (more engine bay space for headers/lighter front weight distribution/R&P steering/etc), it makes me consider how fairly easily the T-bar, recip-box alignments/modifications are to keep caster/camber through front suspension travel in a drag race application. From what I have seen, utilizing M2 chassis/geometery does not have those advantages, or am I wrong?!? Seems to me when a well-prepared/set-up Chrysler Corp car leaves the line, the camber (if done properly) stays pretty 'square' to the ground, but I have noticed cars using the M2 components appear to have negative camber as the wheels/tires angle in at the bottom and out at the top when launching and in particular with the "wheels up". There's also the question of bump steer but that's a fairly easy problem to rectify. You folks that are using M2 or similar suspension components, please post your comments from your own/true/personal experiences, and any remedies you have to cure this. I know, this has been brought up in the past but it's always good to hear user's views after some time in use...thanks

Last edited by blue_stocker; 10/04/22 05:55 PM.

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
Thomas Jefferson
Re: Caster/camber issues with aftermarket suspension [Re: blue_stocker] #3083381
10/04/22 07:45 PM
10/04/22 07:45 PM
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,137
MI, usa
dvw Offline
master
dvw  Offline
master

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,137
MI, usa
The upper control arm is always shorter than the lower arm. The upper has a tighter radius of travel. If the upper control arm is level, or if the upper ball joint is lower than the upper arm pivot at ride height, the camber will go negative. As the front rises the suspension drops causing negative camber. If the upper ball joint is above the control arm pivot the sweep will gain camber, then lose it as it pivots down. If the sweep travel of th earm starts at the same distance above level as it falls at full jounce the camber will remain similar at drop and ride height. It's all a function of control arm length difference and the stationary angle of the arm. This in itself doesn't necessarily cause bump steer. That all depends if the lower control arm and the tie rod assembly move in the same arc.
Doug

Last edited by dvw; 10/04/22 07:49 PM.
Re: Caster/camber issues with aftermarket suspension [Re: blue_stocker] #3083382
10/04/22 07:50 PM
10/04/22 07:50 PM
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 12,925
aZLiViN
J
J_BODY Offline
I Live Here
J_BODY  Offline
I Live Here
J

Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 12,925
aZLiViN
Had tube K, coil overs, rack steering done close to 12 years ago. Love every aspect of it. Any videos or pictures I have the front alignment stays true and steady even on the landing. Mine was built at Comp Chassis in Phoenix and Mike used gm (chevelle) ball joints and an off the shelf gm style steering knuckle. A arms built in house. I also had custom headers built (REF Kingman AZ) to take advantage of the new found room.







Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1