The problem with that is that you move to a similar ball joint without addressing the roll center issue. See the posts above in regards to this.
x2
If the design is to be altered to fit a non-OEM style joint, it may as well be one that opens up useful options. Also, as it's advisable to change ball joints while you are in there, why not get a $20.00 each (thats the NAPA price for a Chrysler thread-in style) ball joint upgrade? With the option of adjustability? I still vote for this. The threaded inserts to weld into the arm cost like $11.00.
This isn't 100% finished. It isn't being marketed yet. This thread has nothing to do with commercial sale or distribution. This is a prototype design, and we're looking for advice for changes, improvements, etc...
Suspension Kinematics, far from simple. Race car dynamics has a deluge of variables.
Good luck with that.
How are things coming along with these? Any word on you (Tyler) becoming a supporting vendor? I'm very interested a set of these. Us 1g guys need more options when it comes to building a road race car.
Nice. IMHO the front joint to the crosmember is what should be taking the brunt of the weight transfer and momentum changes from my personal evaluation of it for watever that would be worth. The rear bushing has the leverage of the distance to the front bushing to cancel out any high load the front would see.
____________________________
Matt
dd '90 GST, Holset H1C
Just for everyones' information - the control arm I posted above is made by BMR, a reputable name in the domestic world. They suggest these for drag racing and road racing. So you'd have to think the specs would be enough for our application if they're suitable for a heavier Mustang road racing application.
They use 1.25" DOM, a 3/4" QA1 XR series Teflon lined rod end for the front and an internally greased Delrin bushing in the rear.
I've emailed them to see if I can get more info. Makes you wonder if an '05+ Mustang control arm would fit our cars
____________________________
-Chris
FP3150-powered road racer!
Please use the "Site Problems" forum or the "Tech" forums instead of sending "help" questions directly to me or the Moderators/Wisemen.
Tyler recently built a testing block to compare the strength of his arm to the factory arm. He applied pressure until they permanently fatigued, and his tubular arm proved to be able to accept more force before it deformed.
I don't have all of the details in front of me, so I won't go any furthur with it. I'll let Tyler fill you guys in on the test.
____________________________
-Paul Volk-
'99 GSX
'91 TSI
It looks like such a simple design. I don't see why we can't use it for ours. I really need to get my new welder fired up so I can start practicing. If we can't get a vendor to make some tubular pieces with solid bushings, I'm going to have to make my own. BMR is selling their adjustable kit for $500 for the complete pair with ball joints. And they claim a total of 11.2 lbs weight savings over stock. That's not bad at all.
____________________________
-Chris
FP3150-powered road racer!
Please use the "Site Problems" forum or the "Tech" forums instead of sending "help" questions directly to me or the Moderators/Wisemen.
The biggest question is, is the market willing to pay in upwards of $500 for a quality control arm like those pictured?
Definitely not as many people as in the Mustang market, that's for sure. It's not going to be a bulk item, which will help determine the pricing. I think these can be made and sold for about $350-400 in the DSM world.
These are meant for racing, and the people who are spending money on their cars in this market are the racers. And conversely, these are the only people that will really benefit from this mod anyway - and that's what I've been saying all along in this thread. There really is no sense in making a street car replacement.
The average DSMer won't buy these, just like the average DSMer won't buy 1600cc injectors, or a Driveshaft Shop aluminum driveshaft - how many DSMers will spend $750 on one of those to save 10 lbs of unsprung weight? And yet, many of us are glad that those parts are available. These new control arms could potentially save just as much unsprung weight and address a few major issues for the road racing crowd (like ball joint selection, brake cooling, replaceable solid bushings, etc).
____________________________
-Chris
FP3150-powered road racer!
Please use the "Site Problems" forum or the "Tech" forums instead of sending "help" questions directly to me or the Moderators/Wisemen.
Well, unless you make the rear bushing adjustable. Lowering that joint 1-2 inches will cause the front tires to dig when launching. It will remove the brake anti-dive but will really help front wheel traction that AWD and FWD guys can benefit from. I did a similar mod to my FWD car and I could consistantly launch at a about 800rpms higher with street tires. I never really had an issue with the nose dropping when I was braking either. There's alot of pro-brake dive dialed in the rear.
RWD ls1-6 guys do this to their rear. I'd buy the part for the safety sake alone if it can do what my home suspension work did for me, since my mod can cause a little concern when you stop and think about what you're actually altering.
Making both joints adjustable will dial out the camber results of lowering the car too.
____________________________
Matt
dd '90 GST, Holset H1C
Well, unless you make the rear bushing adjustable. Lowering that joint 1-2 inches will cause the front tires to dig when launching. It will remove the brake anti-dive but will really help front wheel traction that AWD and FWD guys can benefit from. I did a similar mod to my FWD car and I could consistantly launch at a about 800rpms higher with street tires. I never really had an issue with the nose dropping when I was braking either. There's alot of pro-brake dive dialed in the rear.
RWD ls1-6 guys do this to their rear. I'd buy the part for the safety sake alone if it can do what my home suspension work did for me, since my mod can cause a little concern when you stop and think about what you're actually altering.
Making both joints adjustable will dial out the camber results of lowering the car too.
I guess you lost me on the launching - I still think this is more of a road race piece, but I guess that's me.
The rear joint is adjustable on the Mustang parts above. But the adjustable part of the design really isn't as important, since on a 1G, you'd want to adjust the camber with camber plates so as to not throw off the front and rear track. If anything, the real benefit is the solid bushings and the easy replacement of those bushings. And the biggest benefit is the opportunity to address the ball joint - making it so you can use an aftermarket ball joint that is taller in order to offset the negative effects of lowering the car - mainly bump steer.
____________________________
-Chris
FP3150-powered road racer!
Please use the "Site Problems" forum or the "Tech" forums instead of sending "help" questions directly to me or the Moderators/Wisemen.
Definitely not as many people as in the Mustang market, that's for sure. It's not going to be a bulk item, which will help determine the pricing.
These are meant for racing, and the people who are spending money on their cars in this market are the racers. And conversely, these are the only people that will really benefit from this mod anyway - and that's what I've been saying all along in this thread. There really is no sense in making a street car replacement.
The average DSMer won't buy these, just like the average DSMer won't buy 1600cc injectors, or a Driveshaft Shop aluminum driveshaft - how many DSMers will spend $750 on one of those to save 10 lbs of unsprung weight? And yet, many of us are glad that those parts are available. These new control arms could potentially save just as much unsprung weight and address a few major issues for the road racing crowd (like ball joint selection, brake cooling, replaceable solid bushings, etc).
Yeah i hear ya. The reason i get into this is there is a lot of liability in manufacturing structural suspension components such as pictured. Therefore a lot of CAD/stresss analysis should realistically be put into the part before even thinking of realising it to market. The parts pictured on the first page definatly had neither put into them as the welding is very subpar and the bushing design is highly likely to shear off under load. I've done numerous chromoly suspension and steering components in the motocross industry thus i have some interest in such products.
I guess you lost me on the launching - I still think this is more of a road race piece, but I guess that's me.
Sorry. Look at the control arms as butterfly wings. We're dialing in anti-squat-- which usually this term applies to the rear under acceleration-- into the front suspension during acceleration. Here's an article touching on this. Click. Here's the camaro/f'bird anti-squat brackets and an brief explanation (RWD). Click. Here's another article discussing this in more detail focusing on FWD traction. Click. And here's a pic I drew to illustrate this. Click.
The same that applies to RWD applies to the front. This will push the front tires into the ground. Some will look at this and say that it will make the front lift, but having the suspension the other way causes the wheels to apply a force compressing the springs. As the stock suspension sits, once the springs match that force and cancel it, all the force goes to back to acceleration; which causes the force to be applied to the springs again. And over and over; and you see now why wheel hop actually occurs. If the wheels were inclined to dig instead of lift when a forward force is applied to the hub, then wheel hop would diminish and as the car lifts the wheels would go farther down to cancel out the height.
BTW, this really helps FWD and AWD cornering: more traction in the front when you gas it.
____________________________
Matt
dd '90 GST, Holset H1C
Here is my version of a cure for the break, along with an idea of what the Howe balljoint goes in. I know y'all can't actually see the balljoint stud due to the heat wrap but you do see how the body of the thing fits. You can also glimpse the tie rod mod in one shot.
The reinforcement is actually a ChroMo tube, welded all around and double plated. That should do the trick.
I've been wanting to do this... but not too good at welding and I'm a perfectionist so I would never complete them the way I want cause they would never be perfect enough... but I always wanted Tubular Suspension thats fully adjustable... I had custom tubular suspension made for my old 87 Accord along time ago... I loved it... For longer races I could adjust anything to help me out. IT was great...
I wish I could get some stuff for the talon... Mainly the rear end... My camber is soo screwed in the rear... front is straight.... so its less of a problem then the rear is.
Also, it would be nice for a fully tubular rear end for wider tires/wheels. I'm on 8.5" wide wheels and they have a couple dings in them so I had to shave down the rear arm so they would stop rubbing. Car wouldn't move!
____________________________
-Josh
94 Talon TSI AWD
Headlights are EBAY.
Here is my version of a cure for the break, along with an idea of what the Howe balljoint goes in. I know y'all can't actually see the balljoint stud due to the heat wrap but you do see how the body of the thing fits. You can also glimpse the tie rod mod in one shot.
The reinforcement is actually a ChroMo tube, welded all around and double plated. That should do the trick.
Ah! so maybe the threaded rodstock wouldn't break AT the rear bushing. But you at least have you have to take into consideration the material for the lever arm between the front and rear bushings. I see. The rear bushing may see much more load than I would have thought too. Though the mustang rear bushing deams to be fine with a heavier car and the samy style as Paul's.
I'll add that Paul has a weld and two tubes at the point where that above control arm broke:
As soon as the other a-ar reduced to one tube, it broke right there:
Your mod to that other A-arm looks like it might hold up well. You can only test it and find out. Testing suspension prototypes is frightening .
____________________________
Matt
dd '90 GST, Holset H1C
I've only heard of that one failure. Evidently, almost no-one else is road coursing these arms.
I've done a couple of track days before the reinforcement so I'm thinking that with the multiplication of strength in that area I'll be ok. Especially considering the similarity in the Mustang arm, which has just a simple gusset. Maybe the R.R. arm is visually different?
As for Paul's arms, I would still not skimp on over-engineering the rear triangle/bushing junction. A LOT of braking force goes through that area. It seems to me that it'd be easier to continue the tube right into the bushing and include a delrin or aluminium bushing for less overall cost than buying a urethane bushing, a bolt and then tapping that area after fabrication. And it'd be stronger/less liability. >No question<. That and the balljoint thing aside, I really like the arm design they are working on. I have voiced my opinion earlier on that aspect though.
No one has tried, to the best of my limited knowledge. A note in the Howe catalog mentions that the ball joint I'm using is compatible with Pinto spindles. Mustang-Pinto_Ford. I still wouldn't count on it.
Feel free to order a set for a trial fit. If the return policy is halfway cool, it may be worth it.
No one has tried, to the best of my limited knowledge. A note in the Howe catalog mentions that the ball joint I'm using is compatible with Pinto spindles. Mustang-Pinto_Ford. I still wouldn't count on it.
Feel free to order a set for a trial fit. If the return policy is halfway cool, it may be worth it.
The balljoint fitment is not even my concern. The arm can be modified to accept the balljoint we want it to with little work I'm sure. It's the connection points and the geometry that is key in my mind.
____________________________
-Chris
FP3150-powered road racer!
Please use the "Site Problems" forum or the "Tech" forums instead of sending "help" questions directly to me or the Moderators/Wisemen.
So, have you guys thought about when it comes time to lower your car off the lift, and you still have extreme negative camber? Or you may want a little toe in, and less camber. Have you guys thought about that at all with these lower A Arms?
I am trying to decide if i want to cut the arms a little, to "tuck" the wheel in better and run a little less camber.
James
____________________________
:91 Talon TSi AWD HX40
Ah! so maybe the threaded rodstock wouldn't break AT the rear bushing. But you at least have you have to take into consideration the material for the lever arm between the front and rear bushings. I see. The rear bushing may see much more load than I would have thought too. Though the mustang rear bushing deams to be fine with a heavier car and the samy style as Paul's.
I'll add that Paul has a weld and two tubes at the point where that above control arm broke:
As soon as the other a-ar reduced to one tube, it broke right there:
Your mod to that other A-arm looks like it might hold up well. You can only test it and find out. Testing suspension prototypes is frightening .
If these parts are chromoly and undersized wall thickness then the welding procedure could have created the problem which is what i suspect being it broke right outside a weld area.
.
