Moparts
Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle
Posted By: SattyNoCar
Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 03:49 PM
Anyone see it yet? Opinions? Someone has finally taken the time to compare the taller later B-body spindle to the popular A-body piece used in brake upgrades. They mapped out the geometry changes through out the suspensions travel, looked for binding at full travel, etc, etc.
They found a few concerns, but for the most part debunked most of the myths floating around.
I won't go into great detail here, that's what the article is for, I'll just say that (as some here have said) the later B spindle will work fine despite being taller.
Hmmm....maybe now's the time I put my extra spindles on ebay?
Posted By: Anonymous
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 04:00 PM
Somebody did that years ago.
Mostly those of us running them for years.
But now since it's in print it must be gospel, except to those that have an ideological axe to grind against MM or tall spindles.
Thor
Posted By: prorunner1
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 04:02 PM
I just read it,what i got from it it may be beneficial to swap to newer spindles,i will read agian but it looks good to me.
frank
Posted By: SattyNoCar
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 04:53 PM
Quote:
Somebody did that years ago.
Mostly those of us running them for years.
But now since it's in print it must be gospel, except to those that have an ideological axe to grind against MM or tall spindles.
Thor
Great response. 
Is there an article out there already that mapped out the diffrences between the two spindles? Yes, a lot of people have said they used them with no problems, but has anyone before taken the time to prove they can be used without problem?
Funny how for all the bashing this subject gets, this post has gotten only two replies so far. Maybe time for a subject line change?
Posted By: SattyNoCar
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 06:23 PM
Posted By: Anonymous
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 06:25 PM
Ahhh, the Dulcich vs. E-booger (Mopar Muscle vs. Mopar Action) war over spindles continues.
Posted By: Anonymous
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 06:26 PM
Got search?
Been pointed out on this very site for a long time and links provided.
Thor
Posted By: abodyjoe
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 06:26 PM
bill reilly from
www.bigblockdart.com wrote that... i'm sure if anyone wanted more info about it he would be happy to answer the questions....
Posted By: abodyjoe
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 06:28 PM
Posted By: dezduster
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 06:44 PM
Well since we have crap for an alternative, I suppose they will work for average driving conditions. But what if you want big brakes for the G machine performance,not theme. I see it raises the roll center a bunch and this isnt the best thing for handling. So how does this effect say a slalom time or continuos G force? So much that was left out of this article. Normaly steve hits the nail on the head he may have bent it over this time
Posted By: Michael
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 06:51 PM
Has anyone seen the ad in MCG on page 99 for the disc brake conversion using your original spindles? I'm going to check it out.
Posted By: Hemi_Joel
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 07:06 PM
I was concerned about the raised roll center also.
Suppose you are in a drag car, with no sway bar and loose shocks and suspension. You hit a greasy spot at half track and get a little sideways. Will that higher roll center hinder your recovery? Will it cause the car to gyrate back and forth until you lose it? Or is it no big deal, won't make any big difference?
BTW, does any one know if software like they used can be downloaded free anywhere?
Posted By: abodyjoe
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 07:08 PM
if you guys have questions just go to the forums on
www.bigblockdart.com and ask bill himself.....
Posted By: 71charger
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 08:20 PM
We all seem to forget that the "Mopar Action Swap" was originally published in High Performance Mopar back in the 80s. The warning against the taller knuckles was added when he republished that article after Dulcich published his disk swap article, also in HPM. I had what has become known as the "Mopar Action Swap" photo-copied and ready to scrounge parts when Dulcich's article came out. Dulcich's seemed better written and the parts were easier and cheaper to come by so I used the taller knuckles. I've always been amazed at how it's been assumed that if it's published in MA it must be 100% right and no amount of real world examples or experience counts. Bigblockdart has had the info for a long time and somebody at Dodge-Charger.com did exactly what the new article in MM did but, as we know, if it's in MA, it's gospel.
Posted By: Anonymous
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 09:22 PM
taller spindles LOWER the roll center, assuming no other changes.
Thor
Posted By: AndyF
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/19/05 10:46 PM
Not necessarily, it depends on the geometry of the suspension. I'm pretty sure that on a stock Mopar front suspesion the taller knuckle will raise the roll center from below the ground to slightly above it. But it all depends on what your frame of reference is. Bill said something different in his article but I'm not sure he was talking about a factory stock suspension.
Posted By: HemiDave
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 12:00 AM
So F body spindles should be ok, too? That would also mean that Dippy and other spindles would work, too!!
Dave
Posted By: Polarabill
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 12:29 AM
I ran "F" body spindles on my 64 Polara for about 5 years without incident. Because of the controversy on this site and in the various magazines, when I rebuilt the front suspension, I switched to "A" body spindles. Personally, I could tell no difference in handleing that I could contribute to the spindles. I don't race it, but I do drive it fast and hard. Go with what you are comfortable with.
Posted By: FuryUs
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 12:40 AM
Someone here has used Dippy/5th Ave spindles on a C body.
Posted By: Anonymous
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 01:26 AM
e-mail me that article sat 73 , you been crying about being broke , then hit that job , hell you got more money then me now ,cause i can't afford the magizine. But i need to upgrade my 68 RR, with discs, don't want to pay too much you know.
jai@koyote.com 
Posted By: AdamR
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 01:57 AM
Ive got a set sitting in the garage Ive been thinking of using.
Posted By: DoctorDiff
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 02:35 AM
Around here, circle track guys prefer taller than stock spindles.
Posted By: 340duster340
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 04:20 AM
i am sure the taller spindles will work, but i preferr to stick with what the car was designed for. the engineer that designed the suspension probabley forgot more than most of us know and who knows what additionl stress may be added to the front structure of the car from the taller arm.
besides, i have a few sets and they are impossible to sell. everyone wants the a body spindles.
Posted By: Montclaire
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 04:30 AM
Once again, all somebody needs to do is make a revised upper control arm, very, very, VERY similar to the tubular and adjustable versions out there that compensates for the change in geometry and puts things back to stock specs. Not only will they make a profit and sell a whole bunch of them, and not only will we all be able to enjoy the splendor of $15 spindles from the pick-a-part, everyone will be happy and this will never be a point of argument again.
Posted By: DoctorDiff
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 04:39 AM
Firm Feel already makes that revised upper control arm.
Posted By: Montclaire
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 04:46 AM
Quote:
Firm Feel already makes that revised upper control arm.
Then they should start advertising it. Is it just adjustable, or purpose-made?
Posted By: farmboy70
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 04:51 AM
Magnum Force also makes them also, they advertise in Mopar Muscle.
Posted By: DoctorDiff
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 04:59 AM
The Firm Feel UCA is available for taller knuckles. Firm Feel advertises they can build them to your specs.
As far as I know, Magnum Force builds their UCA for standard knuckles.
Posted By: Montclaire
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 05:04 AM
Actually, both of you guys are somewhat incorrect. First, both advertise in Mopar Action, and I could find neither company advertised in recent issues of muscle. Second, while they do offer adjustable upper arms and will take custom orders, I'm talking about a bolt-in, ready to go UCA that requires absolutely no thinking. "Install this upper arm on your (fill in the blank) mopar with the tall spindles and you will have the same geometry as if you used your stock or 73-76 a-body pieces." That's what they need to market, and they might even already make it. But that kind of advertising is what's going to sell parts. Then everyone wins.
Posted By: Montclaire
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 05:06 AM
Quote:
The Firm Feel UCA is available for taller knuckles. Firm Feel advertises they can build them to your specs.
If they do, they're awful shy about it.
Posted By: DoctorDiff
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 05:10 AM
Firm Feel offers a bolt-in UCA designed for the tall knuckles. These are not advertised, however. AndyF has a set on his car.
Posted By: AndyF
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 06:49 AM
The Firm Feel UCA is designed to work with the taller knuckle. An article should be showing up in Mopar Muscle on this trick very shortly. Dick Ross needs to do some promoting of the UCA but it is available now if anyone wants it.
The late model knuckle is 1.5 lbs lighter than the A body knuckle which is another reason to use it. And it provides a tad bit more clearance for the big brake conversions. Here is a pic of the FFI control arm and a FMJ knuckle on my car. But you can't really see the knuckle since the brake rotor is in the way. The MM article will show all the tricks.
Posted By: rtidd440
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 07:46 AM
Quote:
Once again, all somebody needs to do is make a revised upper control arm, very, very, VERY similar to the tubular and adjustable versions out there that compensates for the change in geometry and puts things back to stock specs. Not only will they make a profit and sell a whole bunch of them, and not only will we all be able to enjoy the splendor of $15 spindles from the pick-a-part, everyone will be happy and this will never be a point of argument again.
I posted this question once before and thought it might be worth mentioning again. If you used the Moog problem solver bushings and set them to raise the rear of the upper control arm wouldnt that return the geometry to what the factory intended? It appears that all of the additional height is above the spindle so if you were to raise the rear of the upper arm an equal amount it should be just as good as the original setup. I would welcome any input if I'm in error. Math was never my best subject.
Posted By: patrick
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 01:36 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Somebody did that years ago.
Mostly those of us running them for years.
But now since it's in print it must be gospel, except to those that have an ideological axe to grind against MM or tall spindles.
Thor
Great response. Is there an article out there already that mapped out the diffrences between the two spindles? Yes, a lot of people have said they used them with no problems, but has anyone before taken the time to prove they can be used without problem?
Funny how for all the bashing this subject gets, this post has gotten only two replies so far. Maybe time for a subject line change?
the article was written by Bill Reilley (sp) who does the alterKtion and I thought ran the Big Block Dart site...he knows his suspension stuff, there's a lot of good info in it, and thorough analysis. I'd trust it...
Posted By: patrick
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 01:48 PM
Quote:
Once again, all somebody needs to do is make a revised upper control arm, very, very, VERY similar to the tubular and adjustable versions out there that compensates for the change in geometry and puts things back to stock specs. Not only will they make a profit and sell a whole bunch of them, and not only will we all be able to enjoy the splendor of $15 spindles from the pick-a-part, everyone will be happy and this will never be a point of argument again.
Uhh, the guys over at firm feel already do.
Posted By: SattyNoCar
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 03:18 PM
Glad to see some responses!
As for the article having been known over at bigblockdart.com, why hasn't anyone mentioned it before? I can't say I've read ALL the spindle threads here, but the ones I read, there was never any mention of someone having proved the tall spindles will work. Its always turned into a pissing match with a bunch of guys just saying stuff like 'I've used them on my car for years'.
Posted By: Prostock
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 03:25 PM
Quote:
there was never any mention of someone having proved the tall spindles will work. Its always turned into a pissing match with a bunch of guys just saying stuff like 'I've used them on my car for years'.
What more proof could someone want?
Posted By: Nobody
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 03:39 PM
Quote:
As for the article having been known over at bigblockdart.com, why hasn't anyone mentioned it before? I can't say I've read ALL the spindle threads here, but the ones I read, there was never any mention of someone having proved the tall spindles will work.
If I am not mistaken the Mopar Muscle article was written with input from Firm Feel, I do not remember seeing any referance to bigblockdart.com - AlterKation or anyone else.
Posted By: Tomsecks
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 03:50 PM
Well it was written by Bill Reily who IS alterkation and bigblockdart.
Posted By: Anonymous
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 04:37 PM
Quote:
Glad to see some responses!
As for the article having been known over at bigblockdart.com, why hasn't anyone mentioned it before? I can't say I've read ALL the spindle threads here, but the ones I read, there was never any mention of someone having proved the tall spindles will work. Its always turned into a pissing match with a bunch of guys just saying stuff like 'I've used them on my car for years'.
Then you obviously have NOT read ALL the spindle threads because bigblockdart.com's artical has been mentioned repeatedly, sometimes even by Bill himself who has weighed in on the subject on occasion.
Someone want to explain to my how any UCA redesign that still uses the stock pivot locations is gonna do anything other than lighten your wallet? Cause it ain;t gonna change the roll center unless I am forgetting something.
Thor
Posted By: Nobody
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 04:39 PM
Quote:
Well it was written by Bill Reily who IS alterkation and bigblockdart.
Well then, I am mistaken 
Posted By: DoctorDiff
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/20/05 05:05 PM
The UCA is redesigned so the upper ball joint is plumb when used with taller knuckles.
Posted By: autoxcuda
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/21/05 02:55 AM
Quote:
.... I'm talking about a bolt-in, ready to go UCA that requires absolutely no thinking. "Install this upper arm on your (fill in the blank) mopar with the tall spindles and you will have the same geometry as if you used your stock or 73-76 a-body pieces." That's what they need to market, and they might even already make it. But that kind of advertising is what's going to sell parts. Then everyone wins.
That will not exist because an A-arm change ALONE will not do that.
The complete absolute infinitissimal 3-D geometry through it full range of motions will not have every geometrical result absolutely mirrored with a taller A-arm even if everything else is changed.
BUT changes can be made to make the handling and overall resulting behavior the same. Because there are so many input varibles in suspension design, there are many different paths to take to get to the same place.
Posted By: autoxcuda
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/21/05 02:56 AM
The guy TAcare?? from Colorado plotted this out and posted it here more than once.
Bill Reily spend the time to measure a car and put the numbers in an impressive computer display.
People that have experience in suspension design understand the small height change is not a big deal and will bring a slight camber gain. Why spend 15-30 hours of effort to prove a web arguement?
Quote:
Glad to see some responses!
As for the article having been known over at bigblockdart.com, why hasn't anyone mentioned it before? I can't say I've read ALL the spindle threads here, but the ones I read, there was never any mention of someone having proved the tall spindles will work. Its always turned into a pissing match with a bunch of guys just saying stuff like 'I've used them on my car for years'.
Posted By: Anonymous
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/21/05 03:01 AM
Quote:
The UCA is redesigned so the upper ball joint is plumb when used with taller knuckles.
I don't think I understand this. Unless you mean that the UCA ia a touch longer than stock so that the ball joint won't "overangle" as claimed by Ebooger. Of course no one has proven that to be a problem and I believe Dulcich did a little research into ball joint angles and pretty much concluded that wasn't an issue.
Thor
Posted By: autoxcuda
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/21/05 03:03 AM
Quote:
The UCA is redesigned so the upper ball joint is plumb when used with taller knuckles.
you mean the UCA ball joint socket is tilted slightly. So the range of angles the ball joint at factory suspension height is not changed.
But this is not absolutely necessary in reality. But if you were making an new A-arm you should include it and that's why Dick added it. It's a nice to have, but not a must have.
Those UBA ball joint can take a lot of angle. Most every circle track car runs very large angles on those very same K772 ball joints.
Posted By: Montclaire
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/21/05 03:08 AM
Quote:
I believe Dulcich did a little research into ball joint angles and pretty much concluded that wasn't an issue
Let's just be honest here. What you meant to say was, "some homeless dude wrote it down on a napkin and gave it to Dulcich, who then just reprinted it verbatim in MM without reading it." I'm not saying it's incorrect information. I'm just saying that I doubt Dulcich concluded anything.
Posted By: AndyF
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/21/05 06:04 AM
Correct. Dick tweaked the boss for the upper ball joint a tad when he designed these arms so that they duplicate the static ball joint angle at some presumed ride height. (probably a tad lower than stock if I know the way that Dick thinks)
It doesn't make the geometry the same as stock since the taller knuckle alters that, it is designed to keep the ball joint in a narrower window of angle travel.
Posted By: Anonymous
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/21/05 07:17 AM
Quote:
Correct. Dick tweaked the boss for the upper ball joint a tad when he designed these arms so that they duplicate the static ball joint angle at some presumed ride height. (probably a tad lower than stock if I know the way that Dick thinks)
It doesn't make the geometry the same as stock since the taller knuckle alters that, it is designed to keep the ball joint in a narrower window of angle travel.
would i be correct in assuming that these 'new' arms would 'be off' a little bit on A body spindles?
Posted By: dulcich
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/21/05 08:10 AM
If you want a drawing on a napkin, just have a look at your hero's original critique of the HPM story. If you are so curious, there is still near 10-degrees of travel IIRC in the BJ at max suspension jounce. I'm not sure what you are referring to about the homeless guy, unless you are offering your services.
Posted By: 71charger
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/21/05 09:17 PM
Ignore him. He's been championing that "Mopar Action" article for so long it must killing him to see hard numbers get published that show his hero at MA might just have been mistaken or, perhaps, caught up in a momentary and ill-considered wave of professional jealousy. Wasn't the much lauded, oft-quoted, "Mopar Action" article also published in Popular Hot Rodding or Hot Rod in the early 90s? If so was his warning about the taller spindles/knuckles in it then? Or was that added when it was published in Mopar Action?
Posted By: Pauls69
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/21/05 10:00 PM
i read the bigblock.com article & it was very refreshing to read some actual tests vs old wives tales. although parts of the article were a little out of my depth, the point was it's ok to run later model disk brakes ("B") on our old mopes.
what's more dangerous, some nuances that most drivers won't notice, or someone tooling around with 4 wheel drum brakes having to make a panic stop?
good work bigblockdart & MM!
Posted By: Montclaire
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/21/05 11:23 PM
Eberg's on vacation until the end of the month, I'm saving my opinion until I hear what he has to say on the subject.
Posted By: bbtrux
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/22/05 01:34 AM
Months later, is everyone tired of people consistently argueing a b.s. opinion just to feel right?
I wont browse another thread about this again until a tall-spindle mopar has a horrible,fiery crash as a result of upper ball joint breakage.
Posted By: Anonymous
Re: Spindle article in March '05 Mopar Muscle - 01/25/05 02:03 PM
Quote:
Let's just be honest here. What you meant to say was, "some homeless dude wrote it down on a napkin and gave it to Dulcich, who then just reprinted it verbatim in MM without reading it." I'm not saying it's incorrect information. I'm just saying that I doubt Dulcich concluded anything.
I said exactly what I meant to say. If you got issues use your own words and don't drag me into your problems.
You are one of the people I was referring to with the ideological axe to grind. Your information is less than useful and not based on any FACTS.
So go stroke your ego elsewhere and keep me out of it.
Thor
