Moparts

Tubular UCA'S to much?

Posted By: moparcyco

Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/22/13 03:06 AM

I'm in the process of putting my 69 Bee back together.I welded up the K-frame and installed it with the stock BB torsion bars.Have sector support,11/16 tie rods firm feel stage 2 box,new pitman,rollerized idler.This car is going to be a driver,with that said I want it to ride well with decent handling but won't be racing this one much.So to my question will tubular uca's compliment my combo or are they a waste on a driver?Would offset bushings be better for this combo?car will get a good set of aftermarket sway bars also?Thanks guys
Posted By: Skeptic

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/22/13 03:42 AM

The best thing you could do is step up in the torsion bars. Read the Andy F article about t-bars, then some decent shocks. The offset bushings should get the alignment set for modern tires and handling. There are plenty of threads here about the options. HTH, Steve
Posted By: 72Swinger

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/22/13 03:43 AM

I think a set of FF uppers would be a great addition if you could get them with some moog rubber bushings especially. The ability to get a decent amount of caster is their benefit IMO. Poly bushings do increase harshness in the ride dept.
Posted By: moparcyco

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/22/13 04:23 AM

Quote:

The best thing you could do is step up in the torsion bars. Read the Andy F article about t-bars, then some decent shocks. The offset bushings should get the alignment set for modern tires and handling. There are plenty of threads here about the options. HTH, Steve



I thought very hard about upping the T-bars,but this is a long range cruiser ride is a must.The front end will be way lighter due to the fact that it will have a 5.7 versus a 383 battery in trunk aluminum radiator etc.The car will have bilsteins or fox depending on how much I can get them for.Just need the best tracking handling car for all road conditions it is my understanding from reading a lot of other posts a lighter spring with more sway bar is better for a street type car.Just want to spend my money wisely while I am assembling the front end.
Posted By: pro451bee

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/22/13 04:24 AM

I've had Magnum Force arms on my Bee for several years now.I would not put the old ones back on.A really great improvement in road feel and control.

Attached picture 7677371-S6300703#2.JPG
Posted By: moparcyco

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/22/13 04:33 AM

Quote:

I've had Magnum Force arms on my Bee for several years now.I would not put the old ones back on.A really great improvement in road feel and control.



cool!That what I was looking for wanted to know if they really improved how the car feels.Thanks
Posted By: Kern Dog

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/22/13 04:52 AM

I've considered buying some type of tubular UCAs for awhile, but other things have taken priority. Usually I wait until I stumble across a small windfall cash like when I have a good weekend selling parts.
I just had a good weekend selling parts.
Posted By: mopardude318

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/22/13 06:20 AM

I have the RMS tubular uppers on my 68 A-body. With the heim jointed ends, they really free up alot of movement and appears to ride smoother on the road. I also went with 1.0" torsion bars which are not harsh at all. Mopars are already under sprung from the factory. Bigger bars help tremendously. Add front and rear sway bars and you'll be lovin life!
Posted By: autoxcuda

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/22/13 06:39 AM

Quote:

I'm in the process of putting my 69 Bee back together.I welded up the K-frame and installed it with the stock BB torsion bars.Have sector support,11/16 tie rods firm feel stage 2 box,new pitman,rollerized idler.This car is going to be a driver,with that said I want it to ride well with decent handling but won't be racing this one much.So to my question will tubular uca's compliment my combo or are they a waste on a driver?Would offset bushings be better for this combo?car will get a good set of aftermarket sway bars also?Thanks guys



I'd go sway bars and or Bilstein RCD shocks before tubular uppers on a street driver.

I'd just put Moog offset 7103 bushings for more caster in your old UCA's.

Also IMHO, the cost of a Firm Feel power steering box and support collar would put you close dollar-wise to a Borgensen power steering box that I think you'd get more driving satisfaction out of.
Posted By: BergmanAutoCraft

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/22/13 01:38 PM

I prefer SPC double adjustable arms. They may alignment much easier and a much larger range of adjustment.
Posted By: Dan@Hotchkis

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/22/13 02:31 PM

Seems to me you would be happiest doing off set bushings and a good sway bar/shock package, as those will be your biggest bang for the buck. I would suggest our front and rear bars with Bilstien Shocks for the best street cruising.
Posted By: moparcyco

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/22/13 04:47 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I'm in the process of putting my 69 Bee back together.I welded up the K-frame and installed it with the stock BB torsion bars.Have sector support,11/16 tie rods firm feel stage 2 box,new pitman,rollerized idler.This car is going to be a driver,with that said I want it to ride well with decent handling but won't be racing this one much.So to my question will tubular uca's compliment my combo or are they a waste on a driver?Would offset bushings be better for this combo?car will get a good set of aftermarket sway bars also?Thanks guys





Also IMHO, the cost of a Firm Feel power steering box and support collar would put you close dollar-wise to a Borgensen power steering box that I think you'd get more driving satisfaction out of.



I already had the box amd sector support for the car in my sig pic,but decided on the borgeson box for it instead as it will be my weekend warrior.Thanks for all the replies
Posted By: moparAL

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/26/13 07:34 AM

I like others have put off this purchase. I have have a question. All the upper arms that I have seen other than the OEM and FF upper arms have no provision with working with the upper control arm bumper. This may be a stupid question, but how important is this feature?
Posted By: Mattax

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/26/13 12:35 PM

When the suspension is in full droop, like when you catch some air on a backroad.

Attached picture 7683185-inair.jpg
Posted By: Dan@Hotchkis

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/26/13 09:16 PM

Quote:

I like others have put off this purchase. I have have a question. All the upper arms that I have seen other than the OEM and FF upper arms have no provision with working with the upper control arm bumper. This may be a stupid question, but how important is this feature?



Our control arm uses upper and lower bump stops.
Posted By: VincentVega

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/27/13 01:51 AM

Quote:

I like others have put off this purchase. I have have a question. All the upper arms that I have seen other than the OEM and FF upper arms have no provision with working with the upper control arm bumper. This may be a stupid question, but how important is this feature?



It's important. Don't leave home without them
Posted By: 72Swinger

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/27/13 02:09 AM

It's not a big deal at all with swaybar links and torsion bars that are unwound at suspension droop. The droop you see when you jack up your car isn't the same as what it will see when its working in the real world. When I jack the front of my car off the ground my torsion bar adjusters are loose as a goose. When a car is airborne the weight of the wheel and tire is not in play, only the travel of the spring to force it away from the car.
Posted By: pro451bee

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 04/27/13 11:11 PM

Mine works perfectly with the factory rebound bumper,well I did upgraded to poly .

Attached picture 7684650-S6300702#2.JPG
Posted By: moparAL

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/13/13 05:52 PM

The question was Tubular UCA too much, ok. The least expensive of what looks to be a decent UCA is the Dillinger Chassie piece. They make them for A,B,& E bodies. Poly Prothane urethane bushings and 5 degrees of positive caster built in. Gusseted at the ball joint. Also power coated multiple colors. Starting at $230.00. May be worth looking at.

Attached picture 7704279-dillingere&buppercontrolarms.jpg
Posted By: Keith Black®

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/14/13 01:01 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I like others have put off this purchase. I have have a question. All the upper arms that I have seen other than the OEM and FF upper arms have no provision with working with the upper control arm bumper. This may be a stupid question, but how important is this feature?



Our control arm uses upper and lower bump stops.



The Hotchkis UCA's are slick. I'm looking to replace my FF UCA's with these.
Posted By: DynoDave

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/14/13 01:31 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I like others have put off this purchase. I have have a question. All the upper arms that I have seen other than the OEM and FF upper arms have no provision with working with the upper control arm bumper. This may be a stupid question, but how important is this feature?



Our control arm uses upper and lower bump stops.



The Hotchkis UCA's are slick. I'm looking to replace my FF UCA's with these.



DarrenB,

Not questioning your thinking...but want to learn more about these arms.

If you already have FF arms, what is it about the Hotchkis pieces that is so appealing that you would want to change them?
Posted By: ScottSmith_Harms

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/14/13 02:09 PM

Some UCA's require notching away sheet metal to install them for clearance (Hotchkis). This is the one reason I won't run them on my car, I only want to add completely reversable upgrades to my car.....
Posted By: Dan@Hotchkis

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/14/13 02:14 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I like others have put off this purchase. I have have a question. All the upper arms that I have seen other than the OEM and FF upper arms have no provision with working with the upper control arm bumper. This may be a stupid question, but how important is this feature?



Our control arm uses upper and lower bump stops.



The Hotchkis UCA's are slick. I'm looking to replace my FF UCA's with these.



DarrenB,

Not questioning your thinking...but want to learn more about these arms.

If you already have FF arms, what is it about the Hotchkis pieces that is so appealing that you would want to change them?



Our control arms not only shift the ball joint location like most of the other arms on the market, our re-located pick up point also improves camber and bump curves drastically. That with both the heim joints allows for a fully adjustable setup.
Posted By: Dan@Hotchkis

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/14/13 02:20 PM

Quote:

Some UCA's require notching away sheet metal to install them for clearance (Hotchkis). This is the one reason I won't run them on my car, I only want to add completely reversable upgrades to my car.....



The material removed is minimal; non-structural and not visible once the car is assembled.
Posted By: ScottSmith_Harms

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/14/13 05:13 PM

Would it be visible of the stock arms were put back on?
Posted By: Dan@Hotchkis

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/14/13 05:42 PM

You would be pretty hard pressed to notice or find the missing metal if ground properly. I am fairly confident that the modification would not harm the perceived value of our cars.
Posted By: Keith Black®

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/14/13 09:27 PM

DynoDave., its the relocation of the pivot point and resulting camber adjustment that is appealing. I have a ton of other modifications as well so I feel they will work well with my combo.
Posted By: cudazappa

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/15/13 03:31 PM

IIRC that's only for E-bodies. The A-body UCA doesn't involve any modification.
Posted By: ScottSmith_Harms

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/16/13 05:13 AM

Quote:

IIRC that's only for E-bodies. The A-body UCA doesn't involve any modification.




Now that's something I had not heard! Are you certain of this?
Posted By: Dan@Hotchkis

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/16/13 06:36 AM

Correct. The B and E's in just to clear the relocation bracket's hardware.
Posted By: ScottSmith_Harms

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/16/13 04:45 PM

Awesome I'm back in for some then
Posted By: autoxcuda

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/16/13 06:12 PM

Quote:

IIRC that's only for E-bodies. The A-body UCA doesn't involve any modification.



The little lip was cut on my A-body for the Hotchkis A-Arms for installation. I have pics I can show later.

I believe it is covered in the instructions if you download and read them.
Posted By: moparcyco

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/18/13 06:05 PM

Well after stewing on this awhile I dedided to bite the bullet and bought the firm feel UCA'S I really like these guys and have always treated me well.Will get the m painted to match my combo and installed this weekend.Also decided to up my torsion bars to 1.00 units should make for an awesome cruiser!Thanks everyone

Posted By: moparAL

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/31/13 06:02 AM

This is for you autoxcuda. I came across these on e-bay. They were interesting and super adjustable.

Attached picture 7725578-moparcontrolarm1.jpg
Posted By: dangina

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/31/13 07:09 AM

Quote:

This is for you autoxcuda. I came across these on e-bay. They were interesting and super adjustable.



are they custom made? do you have the link? edit i found it:

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/B-E-Body-Adjustab...r#ht_823wt_1141
Posted By: Jjs72D

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/31/13 09:53 AM

The idea of unprotected Heim joints on the street seems risky to me.
Posted By: ScottSmith_Harms

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 05/31/13 01:51 PM

A-Body

A-body Aluminum

Interesting stuff!
Posted By: jcc

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 06/02/13 01:40 AM

Posted By: 67autocross

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 06/02/13 02:03 AM

I don't think I would run those in aluminium.

Attached picture 7727824-$(KGrHqRHJEEFENiBKr(MBRGFs1s81!~~60_14.JPG
Posted By: brads70

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 06/02/13 02:48 AM

All those parts are common in circle track racing( not expensive) and made from steel usually. I have never seen them in aluminum?


edit: I see what your saying now
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/A-Body-ALUMINUM-u...=item48556cea42

That's just plain dumb!
Posted By: moparAL

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 06/02/13 03:46 AM

No, I am not going to buy this item. But what I found interesting and wanted to share with everybody, was the wide range of adjustment. If you read this e-bay sellers other auctions he was offering two versions one used a 1 inch aluminum adjusters and the other auction the UCA used dom .120 steel wall tube adjusters. The way I read it but I could be wrong, one version was using all steel components. Here is a excerpt from that ad.


*built and shipped in stock a-arm specs Up for auction is a pair of fully adjustable control arms (A-arms) for 1962-72 B-body and 1970-74 E-body Mopar, Dodge and Plymouth. Dial in your castor and camber with these homebuilt fully adjustable A arms. Removes unwanted play and excessive movement in the front end by eliminating the rubber bushings. Features in car adjustability high misalignment rod ends, strong DOM .120 wall steel tubes, and ball joint collars (built for racing in IMCA, stock car and NASCAR) upgraded from 3/8" hole to 1/2" hole and fits stock (screw in style) 1968-89 Chrysler K772 ball joints (ball joints not included). Includes steel rod ends and new hardware.

Was it welded around the ball joint collar, obviously. Would it have been better to have been solid billet, yes. But I get tired of seeing Chevy and Ford unique suspension items all the time and when someone comes out with a little different Mopar piece, I think that is cool!

Attached picture 7727936-moparcontrolarm1.jpg
Posted By: 72Swinger

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 06/02/13 04:59 AM

Quote:

No, I am not going to buy this item. But what I found interesting and wanted to share with everybody, was the wide range of adjustment. If you read this e-bay sellers other auctions he was offering two versions one used a 1 inch aluminum adjusters and the other auction the UCA used dom .120 steel wall tube adjusters. The way I read it but I could be wrong, one version was using all steel components. Here is a excerpt from that ad.


*built and shipped in stock a-arm specs Up for auction is a pair of fully adjustable control arms (A-arms) for 1962-72 B-body and 1970-74 E-body Mopar, Dodge and Plymouth. Dial in your castor and camber with these homebuilt fully adjustable A arms. Removes unwanted play and excessive movement in the front end by eliminating the rubber bushings. Features in car adjustability high misalignment rod ends, strong DOM .120 wall steel tubes, and ball joint collars (built for racing in IMCA, stock car and NASCAR) upgraded from 3/8" hole to 1/2" hole and fits stock (screw in style) 1968-89 Chrysler K772 ball joints (ball joints not included). Includes steel rod ends and new hardware.

Was it welded around the ball joint collar, obviously. Would it have been better to have been solid billet, yes. But I get tired of seeing Chevy and Ford unique suspension items all the time and when someone comes out with a little different Mopar piece, I think that is cool!

Peter Bergmann on here has some arms like those, SPC I think?, that look WAY better built and offer the same adjustment.
Posted By: moparAL

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 06/02/13 05:45 AM

Haven't seen the SPC piece before, but here it is, the SPC upper control arm. It mentions all steel contruction. Doesn't say but looks like standard bushings, NOT A HEIM JOINT, Peter would know. Price retail on the SPC adjustable piece is $482 a pair. The previous posted upper control arms were $270, that is a difference of $212. Just saying this because the topic of this post is Tubular control arms, too much. Here is a exerpt from the SPC ad.

Product Description
B & E Body, Passenger Side, Front Upper, Fully Adjustable Style, Steel, Black, Dodge, Plymouth, Each

These SPC Performance street rod and musclecar control arms are available in fully adjustable upper or tubular upper and lower control arm configurations. These arms allow you to fine-tune your suspension to meet your exact needs. Tubular-style arms are available to accept stock, coil-over, and air ride suspensions. Camber, caster, offset, and arm lengths are quickly and easily changed on all adjustable arms.

Attached picture 7728030-SPCuppercontolarm.jpg
Posted By: mod5v

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 06/05/13 10:58 PM

I have used this style on a dirt race car for years and never had a failure other than a serious hit in the wheel. I would not hesitate to use them on the street. Those dirt tracks can develop ruts in them you could loose a tractor in and we would run thru them full throtle.
Posted By: ScottSmith_Harms

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 06/06/13 02:01 AM

Quote:

I have used this style on a dirt race car for years and never had a failure other than a serious hit in the wheel.



Which style?
Posted By: TC@HP2

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 06/07/13 05:55 PM

The SPC arms have been out for a few years now, but since most of their work is in the Corba kit car business, they have not pursued advertising for their mopar products.

Since the Mopar upper ball joint is used extensively in oval track racing, the mounting cup as show in these two recent styles of control arms is also widely available and it is entirely possible to fab up a system similar to these two with very little effort and quite a bit of cost savings.
Posted By: SCATPK

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 06/09/13 05:35 AM

Can someone tell me what the difference is on the arms of a 67-72 a-body vs the 66 and earlier ones?
Posted By: Jjs72D

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 06/09/13 05:47 AM

That is a good question. I always thought that the small ball joint Uppers were all the same.
I was happy to read that Dr Diff sells spacers to allow the use of the small upper ball joint arms to be used with the 73 and later disc knuckle.
Posted By: autoxcuda

Re: Tubular UCA'S to much? - 06/09/13 06:41 PM

Quote:

Can someone tell me what the difference is on the arms of a 67-72 a-body vs the 66 and earlier ones?



The 63-67 A-body UCA arms are the same as long as they use the K704 pn ball joint.

The 60-62 A-bodies use a bunch of different suspension pieces and parts. IIRC, they have even smaller UCA ball joints.
© 2024 Moparts Forums