Kubs Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 This question is in regards to E19 "Alteration of ball joints/dive angles +2" I am changing out the front upper control arms on my 1990 Vette for adjustable ones, and taking the points for it, but they require a ball joint from another GM vehicle. Both ball joints are bolt in style, and the taper puts the control arm and knuckle in the exact same location. The only difference is the OEM Vette ball joint is made to bolt to a thicker control arm (~.75" aluminum vs .25" steel on the new control arm). Since the geometry does not change do I need to take 2 points for it? I can post pictures of the parts tomorrow when I am at the garage if that will help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbow Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 I'm all ears because this might be the only way I can get real negative camber on my 92 vette as well. If its a 6pt mod 4 + 2 I won't do it and live with whatever the lower adjustable bushings get me. I've been living with 0 so long even -1 will seem like an upgrade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kubs Posted October 15, 2011 Author Share Posted October 15, 2011 I'm all ears because this might be the only way I can get real negative camber on my 92 vette as well. If its a 6pt mod 4 + 2 I won't do it and live with whatever the lower adjustable bushings get me. I've been living with 0 so long even -1 will seem like an upgrade Well now you make me sound greedy... I've been "living" with -2.2 but I want -2.7 or more. I ended up making my own control arms for way less than the SPC ones made for our cars. Ill get some pictures tomorrow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbow Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Yea, I'd be real happy with -3, know a few guys that got lucky and were able to get it with just the bushings, they were better than -2 without them. All stock. His car could really turn. good luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kubs Posted October 15, 2011 Author Share Posted October 15, 2011 Ok here are some pictures to show the similarities in the two ball joints. The taper is the same and the knuckle ends up in the same position. OEM on left OEM Mine On the car Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aardwolf Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 Yea, I'd be real happy with -3, know a few guys that got lucky and were able to get it with just the bushings, they were better than -2 without them. All stock. His car could really turn. good luck! Try cutting down the conical a-arm spacers. That got me 2.2° for a big cost of zero. I just spun them on my drill press, didn't take long. You will be amazed how much better it turns with some camber!!! I think I made a thread about the project on CF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kubs Posted October 18, 2011 Author Share Posted October 18, 2011 Any input from some TT directors or Greg on whether I should take points or not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 send in the specs to Greg - it sounds like something he might grant a waiver for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kubs Posted October 18, 2011 Author Share Posted October 18, 2011 send in the specs to Greg - it sounds like something he might grant a waiver for. Thanks. I figured it might be no points/waiver because the rule says "alteration of dive angles" not "NON OEM ball joints", and the angles are all the same. Ill send him the pics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kubs Posted October 20, 2011 Author Share Posted October 20, 2011 According to Greg this is a +2 mod. The reason is, even though it may perform the exact same function the fact is it is not OEM and does not meet the OEM replacement rule. It would also be too hard to make a waiver for it based on the large variances from car to car. It would make it hard to say this application is OK but someone's variation is not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbow Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Don't the SPC adjustable A-Arms use the stock ball joints? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kubs Posted October 21, 2011 Author Share Posted October 21, 2011 Don't the SPC adjustable A-Arms use the stock ball joints? No. The part number for replacement ball joints is what you see in my pictures. I used the same ones SPC does. the only difference is SPC gives a MOOG part number and I used the cheaper Valucraft equivalent for fitment/mock up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottBell Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Us Honda people went back and forth with Greg on camber adjustment for double a arm front suspensions. The long and the short of the situation turned out to be that strut cars get free camber adjustment and double a arms have to make do with factory adjustments, and for a Honda that would be none. Its my theory, and this is only my personal opinion, that struts vs. real suspensions are taken into account on base classing and you just have to take the points if you want/need camber adjustment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Its my theory, and this is only my personal opinion, that struts vs. real suspensions are taken into account on base classing. that's my understanding of things as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILIKETODRIVE Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Us Honda people went back and forth with Greg on camber adjustment for double a arm front suspensions. The long and the short of the situation turned out to be that strut cars get free camber adjustment and double a arms have to make do with factory adjustments, and for a Honda that would be none. Its my theory, and this is only my personal opinion, that struts vs. real suspensions are taken into account on base classing and you just have to take the points if you want/need camber adjustment. Yup, this does suck. However, I deal with it so that I can stay in PTE/TTE and not be smack dab in the middle of PTD/TTD with the same car but more camber. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dans2k Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Us Honda people went back and forth with Greg on camber adjustment for double a arm front suspensions. The long and the short of the situation turned out to be that strut cars get free camber adjustment and double a arms have to make do with factory adjustments, and for a Honda that would be none. Its my theory, and this is only my personal opinion, that struts vs. real suspensions are taken into account on base classing and you just have to take the points if you want/need camber adjustment. Yup, this does suck. However, I deal with it so that I can stay in PTE/TTE and not be smack dab in the middle of PTD/TTD with the same car but more camber. Non-metallic suspension bushings are free. I just got a set of front upper control arms for the S2000 with offset delrin bushings. Should be good for at least -3 degrees camber instead of -1.8 I got stock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.