Forums/Z31P/z31-performance-upgrade-forums suspension-chassis-and-brakes/Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Calcs
Imported from Z31Performance.com Forums{{#if:adamvann3| — original post by adamvann3}}{{#if:2011-10-31 23:46:02|, posted 2011-10-31 23:46:02}}{{#if:117| · 117 post{{#ifeq:117|1||s}}}}{{#if:/Z31performance_archive/forum/z31-performance-upgrade-forums/suspension-chassis-and-brakes/15972-adjustable-toe-and-binding-reduction-stage-2-measure-calcs.html|
Local archive: view archived thread on dev.z31library.com}}
adamvann3: (2011-10-31 23:46:02)
Anyone have a set laying around they can measure the shoulder (part that goes through the inner sleeves of the bushings) diameter?
Also the length of the inner sleeve or space between the two mounts on the rear x-member? I think I may have a few sleeves left over I can look at if I ever get near my car again.
862sik: (2011-11-01 05:59:21)
Re: Rear Control Arm Camber and Toe Bolt Diameter
I hope my measurments are good. However I can never interpret them correctly, so I posted pictures =)
Inner Toe bracket
Inner toe bracket with a different tool
Outer toe bracket
Bolt diameter
What project you got going on :-D
adamvann3: (2011-11-01 22:45:30)
Re: Rear Control Arm Camber and Toe Bolt Diameter
All your measurement tools are in 16th… so just count the number of markings/16.
Your measuring tape and caliper both measured for the toe bracket spacing~2.5625inches and ~0.5625 on the shoulder diameter.
What I am planning on doing is chopping off the bushing ends of my rear control arms and adding in an adjustable joints, thus allowing me to bring my toe back to within spec and eliminate bushing binding from an extreme drop. What I am trying to determine is if I want to use aurora end links with machined spacers, or try one of these forged end rods for off road truck suspension.
As luck has it both the 'Ballstic' and 'Jonny' Joint measure:
Bushing length: 2.625"
Bearing thru hole: 9/16"
Cost: $41.95/ea Jonny and $53.99/ea for the Ballstic
In which you get down to brass tacks your actual toe length measurement was 66.4mm~2.614"
Both these joints are forged, rebuildable and greasable.
[archived image: forging4.jpg]
There is also the option of using a forged end rod as well with the same dimensions as measured above.
[archived image: rodend9.jpg]
[archived image: rodend10.jpg]
[archived image: rodend7.jpg]
Cost: $79.99/ea
You can also buy threaded ends to be welded into pipes… but I would rather machine out square stock to weld into the control arms rather than trying to use a round peg for a square hole. I am picking up a rear control arm and mating half of the cross member (thanks JoeZ31) to get some measurements for cutting, and how deep I can make my threaded inserts.
I leaning towards the Joint version over the Rod. Pivot movement should be to a minimum because of the way the semi trailing arm is designed and the only reason there is binding is because I am lowered. Why spend the extra 30/joint for extra movement if its not necessary.
Thanks 862sik for the prelim measurements. Its appreciated.
DeleriousZ: (2011-11-02 02:37:36)
Re: Rear Control Arm Camber and Toe Bolt Diameter
ballistic fab is the bees knees, i've used em before and they're solid.
Careless: (2011-11-02 06:01:11)
Re: Rear Control Arm Camber and Toe Bolt Diameter
lookin forward to what you do with these badass rod ends
862sik: (2011-11-02 08:35:13)
Re: Rear Control Arm Camber and Toe Bolt Diameter
Are you just going to modify the inner toe? Or you are also doing the outer?
adamvann3: (2011-11-02 23:13:44)
Re: Rear Control Arm Camber and Toe Bolt Diameter
[Topic name change]
Planning on doing both inner and outer, as you are either going to have binding in both of the joints or none at all. My only concern is that two rod end joints in the same direction will now allow more free side to side play in the control arm.
Basing my idea off this e30 setup, but can you see where my concern comes from? This may allow the control arm to pivot side to side. Granted the pivot points are pretty far apart which should keep movement to a minimum, if any. But I really wont know unitl I play with a mock-up.
[archived image: tarm1.jpg]
If the above doesnt pan out, I do have a plan B. This would involve flipping or positioning one of the ends so that they are perpendicular. Now this would require a whole new mount fabbed onto the rear x-member. And I would use a more conventional rod end and use spacers to adjust camber.
But if it does come to plan B, I would probably buy another x-member and set of vented brake rear control arms to fab. However before I would commit to "B" I would need to do a cost benefit. At that point, it may be cheaper to sell what I currently have and go multi-link.
But before I get ahead of myself its only going to cost me a set of end rod joints to prove out plan A. Joe is being kind enough to supply me with 1/2 an x-member with mating control arm. After some measurements I will lop off the bushing ends, wedge in some wood inserts, drill a hole and press in the rod end joints. I can easily measure/see if there is any play. Probably wont happen until around the christmas time when I can get the x-member and control arm unless someone else will sell/provide one I can pick up in SC, NC, GA.
shromy: (2011-11-02 23:35:10)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 1 Planning
I have a 88t subframe and 1 88 na control arm ATM. If I get to the sub swap before then, I will have another subframe and 2 more arms. Cheap, but not free, 2j's get spensive!! PM me if interested with a offer.
nismopu: (2011-11-02 23:43:55)
Re: Rear Control Arm Camber and Toe Bolt Diameter
You saw the e30 setup I posted last year right? They had adjustable camber built in as well. I will see if I can dig up the link.
sprtcrazy17: (2011-11-03 01:39:09)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 1 Planning
I can't visualize how there could be side to side movement if the rod ends and spacers have a tight fit
edit: nvm
adamvann3: (2011-11-03 02:31:56)
Re: Rear Control Arm Camber and Toe Bolt Diameter
Not sure, but my guess is Jake Larsen's DTM setup: http://www.s14.net/jakesdtmtours/suspension.html
Also some good e30 enough here: http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/sh … ?t=1344968
and here: http://www.bigcoupe.com/phpBB2/viewtopi … 7f4624bea3
It's all a little more intense than I am willing to go with the semi trailing. Plan A will be my last full efforts with the semi trailing. After that it would be just be beneficial to cross into the multi link land. I am not giving up hope yet. Each step forward and can almost taste victory. The fact that these joints are dimensionally right on.... is a good sign.
adamvann3: (2011-11-03 02:33:54)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 1 Planning
Not axial, but pivot. Hopefully the pivot points are far enough out, and at slight enough opposed angles there will be none.
862sik: (2011-11-03 06:16:37)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 1 Planning
If you are thinking it may pivot, then either put spacers on the side, which should be more than enough (you can use the factory sleeves cut) or re-weld the tabs on the crossmember to me not as wide.
May the force be with you :lol:
sbs z31: (2011-11-03 08:37:52)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 1 Planning
Sounds like a solid plan adam, i remember talking to you about doing this way before i did my multilink swap. Keep up the good work man!
nismopu: (2011-11-03 15:19:16)
Re: Rear Control Arm Camber and Toe Bolt Diameter
[quote]adamvann3 wrote:
That's the one! Never seen the bimmer forums one, decent execution it just lacks alot in the quality of hardware he chose. Also, can't figure out why he used square tube......
Benedict: (2011-11-05 07:42:19)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 1 Planning
When our cars are slammed in addition to the rear wheels gaining toe in the wheel also moves forward in the wheel well.
If toe adjustment is made on the inner mount it will need to be shortened to straighten out toe, but the wheel will still be further forward in the wheel well.
Instead, consider making your toe adjustment on the outboard heim by extending it's length, pushing the wheel back to the center of the wheel well while also reducing toe in.
End result being the inner mount is a heim to reduce binding, the outer mount is a heim to extend the length of the control arm, reducing toe, returning the wheel to the center of the wheel arch, and also having some sort of camber adjustment.
Yes, I've thought about doing this for a while, lol.
ShamWow: (2011-11-05 18:12:43)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 1 Planning
^exactly. The main problem still remains though, toe/camber gain on our low cars is unbearable.
Careless: (2011-11-06 16:53:50)
Re: Rear Control Arm Camber and Toe Bolt Diameter
[quote]nismopu wrote: [quote=adamvann3]
I can think of at least 3 ways to do what he did better.
Benedict: (2011-11-06 18:44:22)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 1 Planning
With my tire/fender clearance I have 1" suspension travel. Removing that from the situation, with 12k's I might have 2" travel. How much camber/toe gain can be seen at 1" and 2" travel assuming the starting point is zero toe/camber?
I feel like at my ride height the camber gains seen during 1" of travel are greater than what would be seen on a stock car raised high enough to have zero toe/camber. But that's just an eyeballing guestimation.
ShamWow: (2011-11-06 20:27:46)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 1 Planning
[quote]Benedict wrote:
^exactly. The main problem still remains though, toe/camber gain on our low cars is unbearable.How much camber/toe gain can be seen at 1" and 2" travel assuming the starting point is zero toe/camber?
A lot on a low car. Not much on a car with stock ride height. There are ways to measure, caveman method tapes a marker to the hub and have it draw on pc of cardboard as you stroke the suspension through its travel.
adamvann3: (2011-11-08 00:04:09)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 1 Planning
Here is one of the articles that sparked my interest in the matter: http://www.e30m3project.com/e30m3perfor … /index.htm
Just an awesome write up on the matter at hand. In my nights of random suspension reading, I have found the e30 community to be the most informative on the semi trailing arm, and pretty reliant to what the z31 has. Once I nab a rear x-member+CA I will put together some calculations, and graphs more specific to the z31.
For now, here is some general calcs from the above link.
Off hand I dont have the sweep angle for the z31, so for shits and giggles lets assume its the same as the e30's. For a pure trailing arm theta=0 thus no change in camber or toe throughout the suspension travel. Below what you're going to see is the e30 sweep angle=15* along with a modified BMW motorsport e30 m3 touring=12*. The basis of the graph is with the CA at 0* with a full sweep up to 90* (unrealistic, however if you read the article the author later uses realistic inches of travel vs camber gains). When rotation of the arm =90, the sweep angle=camber angle.
more reads later:
Same article goes into the same depth in toe curve, in which you can read.
In the end semi trailing on a lowered car on pavement is not ideal (now for an off road buggy its s different situation). I am not going to argue that. All that I am trying to gain from this is better static alignment numbers, thus allowing be to drive my car without chewing up rear tires driving in a straight line. For race car sake, this is not the best. However if I feel like making the car more competitive I will switch to multi-link (thanks mike for the kits, butter and others for write-ups and research). The semi trailing is more than capable of hard/spirited back road driving in which my car sees a lot of; cost vs benefit
Enjoy!
vegasZ31T: (2011-11-08 03:06:09)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 1 Planning
As a suggestion: Before you start buying things and hacking away you might want to map the suspension â at least 3â above and below actual ride height, so that you know for sure where the best possible ride height is.
Say for every ¼â (plus or minus from static) ride height change how much does it change camber and toe? It costs you nothing but time.
For mapping the front you might also map it a 10*, 20* & 30* left and right turns to see if the results are much different that straight ahead. It will also give you and indication of what caster changes, if any, might be helpful.
When you map the rear, you can find a sweet spot that gives you the least toe change in your anticipated operating range and also find the most consistent camber change (which your tires will thank you for). Running at that set up lets my tires run within a couple degrees temperature on the outside, middle and inside. Their happy place!
The two Z31âs that I have mapped ended up having slightly different best ride heights. Also the left and right rear maps will be slightly different â as the rear suspension seems to have been manufactured that way.
As it works out with my current overall set up (coilovers ++ but no adjustable rear cross member yet), I have to run my ride height about 1.5â higher than I would really like to, because it produces the best grip - under all conditions.
At least by mapping you will have a starting point to measure everything else from. Mapping, along with tire temperatures, skid pad timing, and driver feel, will help point out some things you may need like: camber adjusters, bump steer spacers, spring and stabilizer bar changes, shock settings and caster adjusters.
I am probably at 80% on my suspension modifications â an ongoing (primary) process, and a bit less complete on the engine.
adamvann3: (2012-01-05 02:07:55)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Spare rear (thanks JoeZ31) rigged up to measure sweep angle:
Calculations to come when I figure what the fuck is wrong with my toe curve equations/commands.
1sikz: (2012-01-05 02:09:26)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Glad to see you're underway with this. I just recently got my parts car to the house and have yet to pull the subframe out to get those measurements for you.
adamvann3: (2012-01-05 02:38:01)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Wish I was further. Still need to order Ballistic joints. End game goal is May/June so I have some time to procrastinate.
It will get done, I will not be chewing up tires every 3k.
vegasZ31T: (2012-01-05 03:01:36)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
I think you will find that the toe changes very little (or not at all) within 1" above above and 2" below below a static ride height (with a hub center to fender lower lip height) of about 16". I measured the toe change out of the car (just the crossmember & STAs hanging absolutely vertical) with the suspension unloaded, and stock bushings.
However, you may have different results if you are jacking the suspension up and down with everything connected while measuring the toe. If so, I would be very interested in seeing the figures.
adamvann3: (2012-01-05 03:19:09)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
You can calculate the entire 180* of suspension travel using a couple of calculations. No need to sit and measure everything at different heights. Granted I am making a few assumptions (non adjustable toe and camber), but ball park they should be close. Makes life a little easier.
Neil86t: (2012-01-05 04:05:25)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
I wanna kit when you make it because I said so :lol:
[archived image: watch-out-we-got-a-badass-over-here-meme.png]
KungFooMASTA: (2012-01-10 20:06:19)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
WARNING! Do Not Buy From Balistic Fab! Unless you like paying for parts you will never get, or dealing with thieves don't do it. Time and time again they have screwed over many people in the offroad comunity. They WILL do the same thing to you.
Read some of these from the Pirate4x4 board. By the way they are so crooked they where banned from Pirate even though they where a Sponsoring Vendor of Pirate.
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=992142
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthre … listic+fab
DeleriousZ: (2012-01-10 20:22:50)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Weird, I had no problem with ballistic. That was like a year and a half ago, maybe things have changed.
KungFooMASTA: (2012-01-10 21:02:00)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Yeah it seems that one out of 100 people have no problem, but that is bad odds if you ask me.
adamvann3: (2012-01-11 02:03:49)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Sounds like a bunch of tools to me. There are similar products for cheaper out there.
Thanks again for the heads up. Its appreciated
PurePontiacKid: (2012-01-23 03:38:17)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
lol, you're still talking about this, I just finished doing this to my control arms. took me two weeks, dgaf
adamvann3: (2012-01-23 03:58:00)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
I work a lot faster when I am not 1000mi from home.
Post up some pictures.
vegasZ31T: (2012-01-23 05:19:33)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
I also saw the E30 link info you referenced, but when I mapped my stock rear suspension (about 18 months ago) I found out there seems to be flat spot - with little or no change in toe from about horizontal (measured on the top of the STA) to about 4" above horizontal. So, if you stay within that range the rear will be less twitchy.
So, by their nature, the E30 calculations will give you a smooth curve, but that doesn't jive with the empirical evidence.
As an aside, the left and right rear maps worked out slightly different because, I now believe, that either the STA's and/or the cross-member tabs are not symmetrical. As you are taking your measurements, do you think you could verify this?
The camber gain/loss (curve) seems to be fairly constant (which is good for your tires) from about 1" below horizontal to 4.5" above, so the E30 calculations do confirm that.
ShamWow: (2012-01-23 21:29:22)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Stage 3: Install Mike G S-chassis conversion kit and do a burnout
Switchback Motions: (2012-01-23 21:47:32)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
^^^ I'd love to.... but who knows how good my s13 subframe is or where I could get another one…
adamvann3: (2012-01-24 02:50:25)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
This will be my last stand with the semi-trailing.
But in reality the amount of time and fab work, multilink conversion would be an easier route to go.
adamvann3: (2012-01-24 03:44:23)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
I can revisit. I was able to stick a rod through all the mounting points, which leads me to believe all the tabs are same side symmetrical. Measuring the sweep angle of both sides should verify.
I wish I had rack time to sit and measure everything out to compare to actual data. Either way it will get done. I have my current alignment specs, will get new ones at the same ride height with new adjustable heims, than lower the rear and get another final alignment. That will provide a good 4 more points in addition to the 2 I have already.
NissanEgg: (2012-01-24 04:40:24)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Can you not raise the holes for the toe adjustment some? This would make camber go less negative. Would this adversly affect camber sweep?
Or, why not raise both inner and outer holes up some equal amounts, say 1/4" to 3/4". Wouldn't this make the toe and camber closer to stock and get some of the control arm angle back into the correct direction?
nismopu: (2012-01-24 13:57:50)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Thats what I was thinking ^
Benedict: (2012-01-29 02:32:08)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Position inner heim's mounting bolt at top of stock adjustment and make stationary with welded washers to eliminate eccentric.
Outer heim is extended to set toe within desired range and move wheel rearward to recenter it in the wheel well.
Outer heim mounting bolt is an eccentric moved downward from original position to make camber near zero at static. Eccentric should be larger/have larger range than our OEM's. That combined with moving downward will require extending the subframe mounting tabs and making new eccentric washer guides.
Remembering off the top of my head that Formula D rules say suspension pick up points can not be moved more than 1" in any direction. (correct me if I'm wrong)
Should outer heim need to be moved more than 1" to achieve zero camber then consider alternatives such as raising inner up to 1" or mounting heim's offset from OE control arm bushings' elevation relative to the arm.
All adjustments set at desired ride height (slammed).
Camber/toe changes during range of motion reduced by running baller springs.
Would it be better than S-chassis multi-link? NO, but it would be competition legal.
Criticise away. Let's get it on 8)
DeleriousZ: (2012-01-29 06:02:45)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
very yes Benedict. would be great to have alternatives to just going s chassis to have 'ok' geometry at slammed ride heights
adamvann3: (2012-01-29 19:52:03)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Im back in Milwaukee and have the inter webs.
Its going to 40s out this week, so it will be tolerable in the garage. I am going to put in the new Braille and start it up, then add in the new center section tool box I have sitting there.
After that I will be back at it.
I see what everyone is saying. Ideally I really dont want to hack up my x-member again, but I do have the spare I am working with for my mock ups. Mainly I am just trying to fix toe, an added bonus will be adjustable CAs allowing me to center the wheel.
The way I have it in my head I will be making threaded block then welding them in CA. I could mount them higher or lower in the CA when fabbing if I need to correct any camber. ETA on the new wheels is march. I want to do mock-ups with the new wheels to see how aggressive/conservative I need to be. Ill just use threaded wood blocks as prototypes. From there I will determine if I can run less camber. (currently at -2/-2.5 but will be at -3.5 with new height).
vegasZ31T: (2012-01-29 22:14:06)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Don't know if this will be helpful or not: I put the ZX up on tire dollys (Harbor Freight) and then taped 1" thick sheets of styrofoam (from Lowes) - rounded to my new tire size, to the tires until i got the profile I wanted.
http://www.rimsntires.com/specs.jsp?…&text1=&text2=
Then I turned the psuedo tires back and forth to verify the clearances I needed; and then ordered the wheels and tires.
adamvann3: (2012-02-23 03:19:01)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Subframe is being moved into the garage
Jonny Joints x2 have been ordered
I have been basking in ideas for a while now (work whiteboard is littered with them, rather than.... work things [archived image: smile.png] ). Will probably make the first go around at inserts out of wood, to check sweep movement, lateral play ect....
I would like to do double threaded inserts LH, and RH thread so I can adjust them on an alignment rack. Just wish the CA arms were longer/straighter/parallel. Its going to be battle.... and I really dont feel like re-making extended portions of the arms.
insert Braveheart speech for motivation
[archived image: braveheart-3.jpg]
adamvann3: (2012-03-28 02:58:37)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Above post was a lie… parts have been ordered tonight.
After staring and battling with the rear lower control arms, I am still not convinced there is going to be a straight forward way to attach anything. I would Like to just cut the bushing ends off, weld in a block threaded adapter and call it a day. But the fact that the damn arms arent straight for anything more than an inch is really crushing my dreams. Not to mention the inner support welded to the bushing ends will need to be cut out to make it work. Option 2, start hacking off sections of the rear control arm and replace with DOM tubing for a half OEM/ half tubular ends. This would need to entail some precise bends, and a jig to ensure mounting datums remain the same to keep the camber with in reason/ the same on both sides. I really dont want to make a jig. However I did order some threaded tube ends and some sections of DOM tubing just in case.
Ian and Kye were kind enough to text me some pics of his setup on the s130. Since the end result is making the CA legs longer all he did was cut the bushing ends in half, weld in a threaded insert and called it a day (making it sound easier then it was). Thus giving the back of the bushing ends a surface to weld on, and possibly leaving enough of a straight leg to weld a threaded adapter. All that would be needed is a hell of a clamping device and drilling/milling out a straight hole to weld in the insert. This does not involve a jig and would remain pretty precise throughout the process. I think he was onto something here..............
1sikz: (2012-03-28 18:18:57)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Option one sounds very similar to what I had imagined. Only other thing might be to make the adjustments in the subframe itself. In ther words, have an adjustable heim joint coming from the subframe. And the mounting points within the control arms ( opposite to the oem mounting). I have not looked closely enough after coming up with this idea to see if it is indeed feasable.
1sikz: (2012-03-28 18:23:32)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Well, now that I think about it even more in depth.... That would end up making the pivot point variable (depending on adjustments), and that may not create desirable suspension geometry. I don't know, I'll have to look at it all again and see what I can come up with.
Edit: I guess the best way for me to describe what maddness is is my head would be this…
To be put simply. The adjustable points would be coming out of the cross-member, and this would allow for an adjustable sweep angle. This, in turn, would allow for adjustment to reduce the amount of toe-in and negative camber during suspension compression. That would also change the roll center.
1sikz: (2012-03-30 13:08:03)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
I'm guessing that this is completely asinine, and would not work?
adamvann3: (2012-03-30 23:27:41)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
It could. Just depends what you do with the sweep angle. If done right it would just remain the same and you are essentially just extending the mounting areas.
It does have a high risk of fucking up the sweep angle and screwing up dynamic suspension geometry. I havent thought too much about it to weigh in.
This and now you are moving the pivot point away from the rear x-member. I am not sure if that joint is heavily weight bearing, but if it is you now have a very high stress point concentration (opposed to distributing it through the entire x-member)
1sikz: (2012-03-31 00:45:23)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
From my understanding from reading the E30 suspension stuff, a reduced sweep angle (the angle of the subframe itself) would reduce the amount of toe in and negative camber during suspension compression. This would require extending the outer pivot away from the subframe (or moving the inner pivot closer if it were possible). Then it comes back the your concern of the weight on that particular area. I couldn't imagine that it would have much weight on it, as it is a pivot point. If there were weight, that would greatly reduce the efficiency.
adamvann3: (2012-03-31 02:12:45)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Not worried about the weight of the car, just lateral forces seen during hard corning, drifting ect....
PurePontiacKid: (2012-03-31 02:16:14)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
but your car doesn't see hard driving! lolololol
btw, not sure how it happened on my car, but I gained a shitload of toe-out with my heim conversion, not sure how it happened… and now my only option is adjusting the inner ends, which pushes my wheels out far as fuck and creats all sorts of rubbing/poke problems and sucks balls. hopefully when I get it aligned next week it won't need too much adjustment and I won't have to do anymore of a fender pull :/
1sikz: (2012-03-31 11:00:39)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Ok, well I'm glad that I understood it properly and wasn't just making crap up in my head
G-E: (2012-04-12 06:34:18)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
the budget option
[archived image: sbFcf.jpg]
adamvann3: (2012-04-13 03:06:44)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
I like your style.
I finally open my Jonny Joint boxes tonight. Reading what the sizes are and holding them are two different things. They are bigger than a baseball and robust as all hell. Had me back to the drawing board again.
I'll be making some progress on it this weekend. You say budget option, however the simplest solutions are most time the best. It would be the cheapest, wouldnt evolve making a fixture or jig. Weld in plates would be cake to fabricate, as well would be the shims. This plus the adjustable stocks should do the trick. It has me thinking I can still win this battle.
Careless: (2012-04-13 03:45:33)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
the only problem i see with that modification G-E posted is the bind on the opposite bushing. It may not be enough of a difference to cause a problem, but with a poly bushing- i know it's tight already when torquing it down to 80+ ftlbs
adamvann3: (2012-04-13 04:06:49)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Its not going to binding. You are not changing the bushing axis, but the axle axis. After 2k miles I am interested in seeing what my poly bushings look like.
DeleriousZ: (2012-04-13 04:36:55)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
Binding problem is solved with rod-ends anyway [archived image: wink.png].
Making a fixture for this wouldn't be too-too difficult, and would give good peace of mind. Looking forward to what you come up with Adam.
Hopefully I'll be undertaking something similar to this either in the summer or next winter. Whenever I can find a good shop to rent anyway.
Careless: (2012-04-13 04:44:02)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
[quote]adamvann3 wrote:
the only problem i see with that modification G-E posted is the bind on the opposite bushing. It may not be enough of a difference to cause a problem, but with a poly bushing- i know it's tight already when torquing it down to 80+ ftlbs
Its not going to binding. You are not changing the bushing axis, but the axle axis. After 2k miles I am interested in seeing what my poly bushings look like.
what??? the two arms that hold the bushings are made with the bushing holes parallel to one another. when you extend one arm, you are pivoting one arm, and that changes the axis of both bushings in relation to one another. the inner bushing is the pivot point if you extend the outer arm length.
again- it probably doesn't change it much- but it does change. there is no way to keep the bushing hole axis perfectly parallel unless you extend the inner arm as well; but that would defeat the purpose here, I think.
DeleriousZ: (2012-04-13 05:12:16)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
I know what you're getting at careless. I can't remember who it was, but I think someone mentioned issues with binding after doing the camber correction "extend ears, drill hole way lower" method.
The method that G E shows will cause the inbound bushing to be rotated towards the rear of the car as the hub is pushed rearward because there's still a solid link between the hub and the inbound bushing. The only way I see to counteract this would be to cut the inbound arm as well and shim it similarly, only cutting more material away and shimming back up to just-shorter-than stock geometry.
Careless: (2012-04-13 05:25:44)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
exactly that, except it's on the horizontal axis in terms of bushing bind, and not the vertical.
I'm not sure it would make a huge difference, and if adam is replacing the bushings with rod-ends, then it most likely will not change anything because of the amount of angle rod ends can exhibit- but I didn't really read most of this thread or his posts regarding the subject, so I'm not even sure what he's doing and what he ordered. But with regular bushings- binding is something to think about.
you COULD slot the outer hole of the inner bushing, and then re-weld a washer or fill the slot to the proper axis, but you lose adjustability… and you might have to tweak the bolt-ears with a finely calibrated smashometer to get them to bind less.
G-E: (2012-04-13 05:44:06)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
well obviously there's 2 motions allowed by what I suggested
the first being lateral with shims, this would be so minor I wouldn't worry…
the second being vertical, and careless is right here, the inner tabs can be hammered a little to allow the twist
(to visuablize it for people, hammer bottom of tabs inward, tops outward -- literally 2mm is probably too much)
G-E: (2012-04-13 05:44:39)
Re: Adjustable Toe and binding Reduction: Stage 2 Measure/Ca
I knew you missed me :P
G-E: (2014-01-24 00:11:47)
Because someone else is doing something similar I thought I'd bump this thread with pics… but I can tell you right now, my snazzy drawing above with the sandwich plates for the outer arm, and a rodend/spherical conversion for the inner arm (or both) is the way to go
But anyway, here's what they are mucking about with:
[archived image: WedJan22180252PST2014_zps65829c91.jpg]
[archived image: WedJan22180318PST2014_zpsfee55b22.jpg]
[archived image: ThuJan23143629PST2014_zps0df9b8b3.jpg]
adamvann3: (2014-01-24 02:01:45)
Fixes toe, thats for sure. I hope everything was welded square or camber could get interesting.
G-E: (2014-01-24 04:33:12)
I can look into making up a weld-in kit that does what I'm talking about sometime at the end of march…
Anyone interested in something like that?
james: (2014-01-24 05:30:35)
I'm interested in your rod end spherical conversion, I got to the point where I'm happy with my sub frame and just couldn't be arsed detailing out the spherical bearings.
adamvann3: (2014-01-24 17:22:56)
Yes. I am interested in reducing binding and toe adjust-ability in the shiro. Similar to James, I am happy with where I am at with camber, just want to optimize static toe and dynamic motion.
zdriver_kado: (2014-01-24 20:14:49)
I have interest in something like that. Being able to class for national SCCA/NASA with the original trail-arm suspension and keep toe/binding issues in check is why. I think if there are many others out there wanting to road race their Z31's you'll be able to make some profit too.
G-E: (2014-01-25 04:11:00)
Sounds like I have to devise 1 multiple plane adjuster… I'll aim for summer, but I have a plan [archived image: wink.png]
domingo: (2014-02-13 13:52:32)
I would also be interested
G-E: (2014-02-27 15:15:07)
How about this on both arm pivots? Much more effective if you can tilt from each side, and adjust length…
[archived image: rodend-adjuster.jpg]
NissanEgg: (2014-02-27 19:01:00)
^Nice.
How about if you made the inner lower hole on the inner arm a hole, for the pivot point of camber adjustment, with slight slots for the other 3 holes. This way you can be sure that relative height from ground to lower side of inner arm from each side are the same height to make adjustments easier. And for the outer arm you could use the above illustrated part with all slotted holes for main camber adjustment.
OR, you could just make the inner arm have a plate with just one central hole for camber adjustment pivot for ease of manufacture.
NissanEgg: (2014-02-27 19:16:05)
Crude paint drawing of what I am talking about. Can still use the captive turnbuckle for toe/length adjustments.
Attached Files
camber.JPG (9.1 KB)
G-E: (2014-02-27 20:28:44)
^Nice.
How about if you made the inner lower hole on the inner arm a hole, for the pivot point of camber adjustment, with slight slots for the other 3 holes. This way you can be sure that relative height from ground to lower side of inner arm from each side are the same height to make adjustments easier. And for the outer arm you could use the above illustrated part with all slotted holes for main camber adjustment.
OR, you could just make the inner arm have a plate with just one central hole for camber adjustment pivot for ease of manufacture.
Not really sure what you're getting at, if both can move, you can split the difference between the pivots, so instead of all toe on the inboard and all camber on the outboard, you can do half and half…
The total adjustment range should be approximately triple what the eccentric bolts could do.
For manufacturing, it's cheaper to make more of the same, than fewer of different types, just fyi [archived image: smile.png]
adamvann3: (2014-02-27 20:37:58)
GE,
Really great design idea. I really like the progression here. Point of concern or thought and problem I had when trying to add hiems to the control arms is there is no really good square/perpendicular area to subframe to fabricate off of. One would have to build a jig and rebuild part of the arms to ensure everything would be nice and square to the cross member mounting points. I thought about chopping off part of the arms, then rebuilding with tubes (but that became more of a hassle then it was worth for me at the time). You may have to do some experimenting on chopping part of the control arms off, and designing the weld on plate with some offset angle to accommodate.
(i circled in red the area of concern on the control arms)
Justin,
I like your suggestion, however when you (1) lower the z31 and (2) adjust toe using only 'one' arm there is caster change. Look at a lowered z31 and you will notice that the wheel sits further forward in the wheel well. You need both to be length adjustable to re-zero the caster.
Control Arm.jpg
G-E: (2014-02-27 20:46:57)
I'm not sure I see the difficulty, since you can effectively mark a cutline for both arms at the same time, just keep it parallel to the bushing as a starting point, and mark the bushing centers perpendicular to that. I'd suggest a big rubber band might actually be the easiest way to mark it, then spray over it with white paint or something, for a silhouette line to follow on all surfaces…
NissanEgg: (2014-02-27 21:28:03)
That's why I said you can still use the GE plates with turnbuckles on them to adjust length/toe. Basically the inboard arm will have a turnbuckle plate with a central pivot for camber, and the out board arms will have a turnbuckle plate with 4 slotted holes to adjust the camber and lock it in place. The turnbuckles would then be used to adjust the length of the arm for toe change, while keeping the heim joints for bind-free funtion.
Basically this in its current form for the outer arms.
[archived image: rodend-adjuster.jpg]
Then the same, but without slots but a central pivot hole for the inboard arm.
adamvann3: (2014-02-28 02:47:17)
I'm not sure I see the difficulty, since you can effectively mark a cutline for both arms at the same time, just keep it parallel to the bushing as a starting point, and mark the bushing centers perpendicular to that. I'd suggest a big rubber band might actually be the easiest way to mark it, then spray over it with white paint or something, for a silhouette line to follow on all surfaces…
Im just saying, after you cut the ends off on the arms there isnt really a nice to place weld on. Depending on how far you cut down as well the arms curve (especially the inner) not giving a probable mount location in realitive of where it has to mount to the subframe and not giving enough room for the heim joint shaft.
These are the issues I ran into when trying to use my monster baseball sized jonny joints. Im not disproving or saying your idea is shit here. Just trying to give some insight to issues I had. I think cutting a control arm with some prototypes is going to be key here. The weld on portions to the arm may have to be offset depending. I have faith you can reach a solution.
That's why I said you can still use the GE plates with turnbuckles on them to adjust length/toe. Basically the inboard arm will have a turnbuckle plate with a central pivot for camber, and the out board arms will have a turnbuckle plate with 4 slotted holes to adjust the camber and lock it in place. The turnbuckles would then be used to adjust the length of the arm for toe change, while keeping the heim joints for bind-free funtion.
Then the same, but without slots but a central pivot hole for the inboard arm.
Just re-read your post. Was slammed at work and just focused on the pretty pictures and not the actual explanation you gave. Valid points.
G-E: (2014-02-28 03:06:27)
These are the issues I ran into when trying to use my monster baseball sized jonny joints. Im not disproving or saying your idea is shit here. Just trying to give some insight to issues I had. I think cutting a control arm with some prototypes is going to be key here. The weld on portions to the arm may have to be offset depending. I have faith you can reach a solution.
I understand, which is why the weld-on plate is the simplest piece in the whole kit, it's just a plate with 4 holes for M10 studs, in fact that's the part anyone could make themselves; or a person could just add gussets of some kind to whatever it's final position is, the plate won't need to be accessed from the rear [archived image: smile.png]
Anyway the plan is to offer these for any trailing arm based vehicle, E30, AE86 whatever, it's a universal item, and I'll have a couple of sizes of misalignment spacer, but there's always the off-the-shelf spacers, or they can be made to order -- in most cases doing rodend conversions won't need misalignment spacers, as the rodends will never be asked to tilt more than 5 degrees, straight spacers would work just fine, I am just thinking beyond that [archived image: smile.png]
adamvann3: (2014-02-28 15:48:27)
Look at the arm. They are no where near straight where they are connected to the busing area. Depending on how far back they will need to be cut there could be possible issues with aligning the heim to the subframe (the heim would not longer be on center).
You will also need clearance for the shaft of the heim depending on length that is sticking out.
I understand you want to make this universal, and I really like this concept but I would create a couple to see what I am expressing. I had these issues when trying to add heims to the control arms when ever I started this project. What I found would work best is leaving part of the back of the bushing housing to use for reference and keep things square. Its just a matter of how far back the arms need to be cut.
G-E: (2014-02-28 20:37:26)
Again, this is all stuff that's largely irrelevant, the control arm segments could be the shape of peanuts, it wouldn't change anything. You need to make a cut, mockup, then weld, then weld some more. It's like the work involved in re-boxing the frame sections after doing a subframe swap, no one does a writeup on that, because that's not the important part.
Like I said, using a rubber band is probably the easiest way to mark the cuts, everything can be laid out and measured off the car, both sides can be made equal without a jig. Also like the subframe swap, you can embellish the process your way, there's no hard and fast rule how to do it.
If you want to mount the two plates to adjust in an arcing motion instead of up and down, that's fine too; you might lose some range, but there should be enough tolerance in the clamping plate to do it (one of the key areas I had to solve)…
adamvann3: (2014-03-01 17:21:26)
Again, this is all stuff that's largely irrelevant, the control arm segments could be the shape of peanuts, it wouldn't change anything. You need to make a cut, mockup, then weld, then weld some more. It's like the work involved in re-boxing the frame sections after doing a subframe swap, no one does a writeup on that, because that's not the important part.
So when I cut the the control arms, lets say 2 inches back weld in your adjustable plates, then go to bolt them to my subframe and the heims are no longer centered in the mounts and moved 1" total inboard I wouldn't be pissed? Because this is largely irrelevant?
Since none of the arms profile is not straight its hard to use any surface as a datum or guide. I am not sure how many rear alignments you have done on your z31, but 1/4" segments equates to a lot adjustment, Not being square, or somewhat precise on both sides could lead to some large variation overall.
On the s13 swap, cutting the frame and boxing is to allow for the raised pick-up points. This has nothing to do with the dynamics or alignment of the suspension of the suspension other than clearance......................................... .........................
Like I said, using a rubber band is probably the easiest way to mark the cuts, everything can be laid out and measured off the car, both sides can be made equal without a jig. Also like the subframe swap, you can embellish the process your way, there's no hard and fast rule how to do it.
If you want to mount the two plates to adjust in an arcing motion instead of up and down, that's fine too; you might lose some range, but there should be enough tolerance in the clamping plate to do it (one of the key areas I had to solve)…
With the s13 subframe you can use the z31 differential mounting points for to position the new rear pins. You can bolt in the rear subframe and tack weld the front mounting points using the z31 pins.... Thus keeping everything square with no issues. I dont think using a rubber band is going to have the same effects.
I can not deny you have a great ability to come up with some unique solutions to issues. However it is largely shadowed by your inability to understand all the risks in application and lack of verification testing.
Your continued negligence to advice from someone who has attempted similar applications is overwhelming. I can see my experience and insight is not needed here, I am done. I will look forward to seeing sales and peoples feedback once trying to install.
G-E: (2014-03-01 21:26:03)
I understand the risks of doing it wrong, what I don't understand is why you have so little confidence in measuring devices?
Consider shamwow's subframe swap kit, he included that long flat bar to keep the pins equidistant, why could you not do the same here? How hard is it to cut a strip of metal or wood, add 2 holes at each end to hold the weld-in plates at the correct position?
You literally only need 3 points of measurement per arm to make the cuts, and once marked with reference locations on the remaining section, installing the plates is just about verifying position… AND it can all be done sitting next to the subframe itself.
I'm perfectly aware some people need hand holding, I can always offer extra plates for boxing it in or even just aligning it, but again, that doesn't change the core adjuster hardware I'm talking about here, which is why i'm not talking about it.
People can build pyramids with water, string, sand and wood, remember that…
G-E: (2014-03-14 07:30:35)
I should have everything in to make this happen first week april… I will show you how to measure and cut easily
[archived image: adjuster-render.jpg]
Neil86t: (2014-03-14 17:28:42)
Yall are getting close. Finish it up so you can take my money!
G-E: (2014-03-21 00:33:38)
[archived image: sta-cut.jpg]
Attached Files
sta-cut.jpg (52.1 KB)
G-E: (2014-05-21 04:00:18)
Hmm what's going on here?
DSCF0098.jpg
adamvann3: (2014-05-21 04:51:24)
Spray paint to mark the cuts but showing no progress.
Been a few people making some strides lately with some decent jigs. Overall idea's are starting to become fruitful, some better than others.
G-E: (2014-05-21 06:35:42)
Anyone can make a jig and weld a bung… this is going to be more elegant…
I'm going to make 1 backing plate for each arm that spans both pivots, that will have studs in it for my clamp plates and turnbuckles, just like my drawing, except connected
Installation will be as simple as lining it up against something vertical, marking off a set distance, chopping with a sawzall or whatever, then welding, no jig required [archived image: smile.png]
adamvann3: (2014-05-21 14:47:06)
Well a jig ensures properly alignment for whatever fabrication you so choose to pursue. Gives the best baseline.
A poka yoke design would be best for masses capable of understanding and installing. Cheap, quick and effective will always win the market battle. I wish you luck.
michaelp: (2014-05-21 15:13:59)
I'll follow the already-done group. The group that gets things done? Whatever that is.
G-E: (2014-05-21 17:38:43)
I am so in awe, you don't even know… I might as well just quit now eh? [archived image: smile.png]
michaelp: (2014-05-21 17:44:27)
Well a jig ensures properly alignment for whatever fabrication you so choose to pursue. Gives the best baseline.
lol G-E. What you don't know. Theres a reason multiple people are furthering their cars and actually have them functioning, while you keep pushing out cookie cutter untested crap. I've yet to see your car function.
Neil86t: (2014-05-21 17:48:58)
Yall quit whining and build me something.
88Turbozx: (2014-05-22 04:25:11)
I think that GE has a good design in mind. My only concern is the plate slipping. Perhaps some kind of slots to lock the plate in place? So that when tightened down, the plate locks into the slots so even if the nuts come loose, it wont slip. I would rather have an arm that can adjust BOTH camber and toe, so that's why GE most likely will be taking my money. So far in regards to the arms that have been created recently, the options are between an arm with only toe adjustment that has to be unbolted from the subframe to be adjusted, and an arm that is cut in half and bent with adjusters… This seems promising…
Rustspecs13: (2014-05-22 11:18:54)
Mike posted my picture. You can see my inner heim joint is mostly centered in the crossmember bracket, and the outer is offset a little. I did that so the welded insert didn't interfere with tire clearance. I didn't have the 315/30/18 hooser slicks I'll eventually run on the race car.
Also I can use double adjustable heims, I just did my first ones with plain welded inserts because thats what was available and I didn't want to wait on parts. The next set I do will have adjustment with out removing the heim to turn it.
Yes my LCAs dont have camber adjustment built in. I offset the outer mounting point to reduce camber and get it closer to a desirable ~2deg base camber at low ride heights. Its just simpler. Then with a standard camber mod on the crossmember if you need it and you have your adjustment. I slotted my crossmember but didn't put in eccentrics to adjust it easily as Im just going to align it and see how my my LCAs changed camber and what range I want to do the final mod at.
With GE's design, it looks alright. But there isnt a ton of camber adjustment. Which is half of the battle at low ride heights. Plus look at my control arms. Those are stock placement of the heims, and the inner is adjusted about 2 turns out to get to zero toe. If you eye ball where the flat plate is in relation to the heim joint its self, it puts the plate 1/3 off the side of the control arm or more depending on how far back you have to cut. More bracing and reworking of the factory metal for less adjustability. Plus you still need access to FOUR nuts/bolts to adjust or secure camber. Im not sure if those will stay tight forever, especially when you start putting some sticky tires on it.
G-E: (2014-05-22 17:27:46)
I didn't think you needed a ton of adjustment at the rodend, because the tabs can still be slotted, and the whole thing can be welded already tilted to a more normal orientation, since everything is being cut off already…
The slots will allow about 1cm of twist, the rodends will have about 2cm of extention, and the spacers are unequal, so the trackwidth can be adjusted slightly too
All very conservative, because part of the goal was to be idiot-proof [archived image: smile.png]
Rustspecs13: (2014-05-23 16:06:42)
Do you still have to unbolt the heim joint to adjust it? Looks like it. Also are you selling those parts to individuals or are you going to do a complete service with finished control arms?
From what I've done so far I'll offer two control arms. Average ride height and low ride height with reduced camber. All finished, bolt on solution. I wanted to figure something out to adjust camber on the arms, but it just adds lots of complexity and weight.
I really want to get started on full tubular control arms. Probably just use the housing for the wheel bearing and build off there. Im looking at the R31 and M30 differences vs the Z31 control arms. Lots of work but should look/function awesome.
Neil86t: (2014-05-23 16:13:33)
I really want to get started on full tubular control arms. Probably just use the housing for the wheel bearing and build off there. Im looking at the R31 and M30 differences vs the Z31 control arms. Lots of work but should look/function awesome.
Tubular would be most excellent. Sign me up!
Rustspecs13: (2014-05-23 16:55:40)
You're number two after Josh Hensley. Haha but consider it done.
G-E: (2014-05-23 17:25:09)
Do you still have to unbolt the heim joint to adjust it? Looks like it. Also are you selling those parts to individuals or are you going to do a complete service with finished control arms?
No but that's partly because I'm in canada, I'm willing to partner/advise someone who wants to do it (like andrew…)
And to adjust the the camber, you only have to loosen the locknuts slightly, slide the plate with the turnbuckle, retighten
To adjust extension/toe, you also have to loosed the jamnut and turn the turnbuckle, before retightening
From what I've done so far I'll offer two control arms. Average ride height and low ride height with reduced camber. All finished, bolt on solution. I wanted to figure something out to adjust camber on the arms, but it just adds lots of complexity and weight.
If you wanted to save weight after adding weight from my kit, my suggestion would be a hole saw to perforate all the panels further towards the hub where they have greater leveraged mass… maybe cut out the old spring perch area etc…
I really want to get started on full tubular control arms. Probably just use the housing for the wheel bearing and build off there. Im looking at the R31 and M30 differences vs the Z31 control arms. Lots of work but should look/function awesome.
Well that's kinda why I went the route I did, I examined the weight of using various sizes of dom tubing and wall thicknesses, and came to the conclusion that going tubular won't make it more rigid or lighter
And then you end up doing a ton of fab work on an area that doesn't add function
G-E: (2014-05-27 06:22:10)
Made some changes to allow more camber adjustment and eventually more trackwidth adjustment without binding… I would like to see a z31 rear go +10mm wider [archived image: smile.png]
Should allow greater than 3* of correction, in base increments, then fine tuning with the slots [archived image: smile.png]
[archived image: sWDBYsr.jpg]
G-E: (2014-06-10 05:35:00)
Assembled (minus rodends)
Note that the studs are a bit long and will have to be cut shorter, but I wasn't able to source the ideal size stud for anything resembling a reasonable price, so I went with something more common…
[archived image: backing-plate-assembled.jpg]
[archived image: camber-adjuster1.jpg]
[archived image: camber-adjuster2.jpg]
michaelp: (2014-06-10 05:38:55)
The question now is - will it be tested on a functioning car before you try to sell it? lol
G-E: (2014-06-10 08:27:17)
Why do I get the impression you actually like this one? hahaha
khyronzx: (2014-06-10 10:07:32)
What will be the price
G-E: (2014-06-10 10:21:26)
I am waiting for rodends to arrive (tomorrow) to know the final cost, but it will be under $300, plus shipping
adamvann3: (2014-06-10 15:10:08)
Im interested in seeing the install, testing and results. Very promising.
michaelp: (2014-06-10 16:17:35)
Why do I get the impression you actually like this one? hahaha
I like the concept. I'm interested in seeing it function, but I would very much like to see it actually on a car being tested and DRIVEN before you offer it for sale. [archived image: wink.png]
Justin88na: (2014-06-10 18:54:26)
So far, the Silhouette Autosports brackets have been working great! I did a base alignment myself, going to get it fully aligned in July when I get my new tires. I will post the alignment specs as soon as I do.
2014-05-24 13.53.12.jpg
2014-05-03 09.17.11.jpg
2014-05-04 14.jpg
G-E: (2014-06-11 22:20:12)
What will be the price
Price will be around $300 for a kit… or about $500 with a welding service through andrew
260DET: (2016-06-09 23:15:02)
This topic came up on a search so a bump and a look later.
Reds89: (2016-06-10 14:25:39)
So, it looks like there were some issues with the RT Trackpro kit. What is the safest way to adjust camber if you lower your car? For instance, mine is on stock springs and I'm about 2 degrees off on one side. Don't have my printout handy, but do remember that. Is most of the deflection just worn out bushings? Plan on changing them all out when i install the ST springs and new shocks.
edicer2: (2016-06-11 19:20:34)
Please send messages to GE/Paul on facebook.