My Ride Tech lower Strong arms are too narrow!

['71cutlasluvr]

I hope this is appropriate for the ER. My hands aren't dirty cause my frame is stripped, painted and supported by tacked welded angle iron to suspend it for easy access during the suspension install.

I waffled a long time over coil overs or air bags, and finally decided on the latter. I purchase just the front and rear Shockwaves and the front lower a-arms as I have SPC upper a-arms and ATS spindles.

I drilled the 3/4" hole (was 5/8" stock) to accept the front Shockwave. I then tried to insert the lower strong arm into the chassis. It didn't Fit! Thought I was losing my mind so installed the Hotchkiss lower a-arms I had installed several years ago and they slipped right in! What the heck??

I measured both arms and the inside bushing to bushing dimension for the strong arms is 3/16" NARROWER than the hotchkiss (and I assume, stock) a-arms. I called the salesguy at Ridetech and he's flabberghasted. They have sold thousands of these strongarms for gm a-bodies and I'm the first one to have a fitment problem. If it was 1/32 or even 1/16" I could do some massaging but 3/16"? Might as well be a foot off. I shouldn't have to.. this is supposed to be a bolt in update.

Ridetech doesn't list olds cutlass' as one of the muscle cars their products will fit, but I was assured that the same setup for a chevelle would work. I had no reason not to believe him since the Hotchkiss pieces are for a chevelle also....

Be advised, the frame has never been in an accident and I had a frame alignment shop straighten what little was needed while it was on the hotchkiss suspension before I primed and painted the frame. It's dead straight. No damage at the a-arm mounting points.

Thought maybe I should go coil overs but that setup uses the same strong arm a-arms.
I really wanted to make this work.... didn't really want to mess with coil overs and the air shocks made sense as I'm getting older.

I bought from RT since they have a stellar rep and have a highly rated customer service department. But I think I'm gonna get a cold shoulder on this since there seems to be no explanation as to why this is happening. I'll probably take a hit on shipping and maybe a restocking fee. I would really like to avoid that!

Anybody ever run into this with ride tech strong arms on their a-body chassis?? If so, how did you make it work? I'm $3k in the hole and have wasted two weekends on this mess. All input would be appreciated.

:cheers:

'71CL

[WallaceMFG]

Mine bolted in no problems. Maybe a bad one slipped through, it happens to everybody once in a while.

['71cutlasluvr]

Mine bolted in no problems. Maybe a bad one slipped through, it happens to everybody once in a while.

Thanks for your quick response. Yeah, I thought that too but the sales rep (who also builds them) says he uses a jig for repeatability. I sent him the dimensions (strong arms were 8 5/8" inside dimension bushing to bushing, the hotchkiss is 8 13/16") and he says that is correct for the strong arms. How can it be?? I'm at a loss... I'll ask him to re measure... perhaps he made a mistake.

Thanks for the input.
Anyone else? Please?

[SSLance]

Mine were about an 1/8" off the same direction as yours. The back ears can be moved pretty easily to accommodate the arms. I used a little machinist screw jack to put in between them to spread the front ear forward enough to get the bushing in, then used a crescent wrench to nudge the rear arm forward.

They are hot rods...sometimes they or the parts you are trying to put on need a little loving to make them all place nice together.

['71cutlasluvr]

Mine were about an 1/8" off the same direction as yours. The back ears can be moved pretty easily to accommodate the arms. I used a little machinist screw jack to put in between them to spread the front ear forward enough to get the bushing in, then used a crescent wrench to nudge the rear arm forward.

They are hot rods...sometimes they or the parts you are trying to put on need a little loving to make them all place nice together.



Great Advice. Thank you for the detailed procedure for the fix. It makes sense and I am capable of "tweaking" the ears if it means saving my project from hitting a wall.

I'm not much of a machinist and not familiar with machinist jacks. There isn't much space between those "ears". What size jack would you recommend and where can I find the reasonably priced one?

Why the heck didn't the ride tech sales guy/welder explain this? Could it be he didn't want to admit his Jig may not quite be set up correctly? Go figure. I know there is always going to be tweaking and fabricating with this hot rod hobby, but I expected the Strong arms to slip right in. The hotchkiss ones did!

Thanks for saving the day Lance. I owe you a beer!

atb
Gus

['71cutlasluvr]

BTW: Love your Monte!

[andrewb70]

BTW: Love your Monte!

Call them and ask them what the dimensions should be for the arms. Things happen and the arms could be off. There is 100% interchangeability between GM a-body clones in terms of suspension.

Andrew

['71cutlasluvr]

Call them and ask them what the dimensions should be for the arms. Things happen and the arms could be off. There is 100% interchangeability between GM a-body clones in terms of suspension.

Andrew

Hi Andy.

Good to hear from you. I've been gone a while but trying to get my pro touring project back on track.

I explained your point to the tech support rep three days ago and even sent him the strong arm dimensions AND the differing Hotchkiss arms dimensions (which fit with no struggle). He said the strong arms are correct! (?) He countered with they have sold thousands of these without issue for all a-bodies. He didn't seem to want to hear it but was very polite about it. But what I needed I didn't get.... No offer to make me a "correct" set (he told me he actually welds these, I guess when he's not providing tech support) or at least measure another set for me to see if I got a bad pair. I even sent pics, although in a separate email, and he said he didn't get them. I sent them again early afternoon yesterday. Didn't hear from him. Sent another email late afternoon, asking if he got them this time and can he please give me some options.....Nothing! Really? You drop $3k on 4 air shocks and two lower a-arms and you can't even give a frustrated customer a timely response? Really?

I don't want to waste another weekend not being able to assemble what is supposed to be a bolt on kit. Very frustrating. I expected better from Ride tech. I hope the rest of the experience is more rewarding. Maybe should have gone coil over with Detroit speeds stuff...... Time will tell..

Thanks for weighing in Andy.
Excuse me. I gotta try to find a machinists jack screw that will fit between 2" and 3" or thereabouts.
atb
Gus

[andrewb70]

Gus,

It is very hard for me to believe that they are simply throwing their arms in the air and not digging into this further. Are you certain that the arm pockets on your frame aren't compressed? You say that they are off by 3/16", which isn't much. Each pocket would have to be compressed only 3/32" to cause the issue. Perhaps you can post pictures of the arms and your frame?

Andrew

['71cutlasluvr]

Well the rep didn't let me know if he got the pics so he hasn't weighed in. He has been polite and perhaps "throwing his arms in the air" is a bit dramatic, but he's not giving me any options. Sticking to his "have sold thousands" mantra. I'll have to resize the pics then I can attach them but they don't show the pockets very well. What they DO show is the Hotchkiss TVS arms fit perfectly with very little effort to line up the bolt holes. Right now I'm feeling I've been left to fend for myself. Expected more.

I'm going to run with Lance's suggestion. Ride tech hasn't given me any other options....

Pics coming soon. Not good at that resizing thing yet.
thanks for the effort Andy.
g

[andrewb70]

....

I'm going to run with Lance's suggestion. Ride tech hasn't given me any other options....

.....

That's what I would be doing. In fact, as I recall, I had to do that when I installed my Global West arms back in 2002.

What bushing material do the Hotchkis arms use? What about the Ridetech arms?

Andrew

['71cutlasluvr]

as promised. Here are the pics.

115400115401115402115403115404

['71cutlasluvr]

That's what I would be doing. In fact, as I recall, I had to do that when I installed my Global West arms back in 2002.

What bushing material do the Hotchkis arms use? What about the Ridetech arms?

Andrew

Agreed !

The hotchkiss is a hard rubber I think. The Ridetechs are a very hard plastic. Kinda wonder about that. The difference in dimension between the two arms is the amount the bushing protrudes from the ride tech arm on one side. See pic. In other words, if I cut off one side of one bushing, it would probably fit. So close.... But for the price, they should fit perfectly... Never read anything to the contrary.... guess I'm in the minority.

Just placed my order for this. Rush delivery for Saturday. I should call ride tech and ask they pay for the tool. Sheesh.

http://www.amazon.com/Starrett-190A-Little-Giant-SE50681/dp/B0006J4DH6/ref=sr_1_5?s=industrial&ie=UTF8&qid=1437694518&sr=1-5&keywords=Jack+Screw+Set+2%22+to+3%22

Thanks again Andy (and Lance). You still thrashing that beautiful goat??
atb
Gus

[SSLance]

That is exactly what I used Gus, it'll work perfectly. When bending the ears, go a little bit, then back off...go a little bit more, then back off. Test fit the arm and keep going until the arm moves freely inside the ears. Put the screw jack as close to the frame itself as you can get it.

It is not a difference in the arms...it is the factory tolerances on the frames themselves... That's why the factory arms use those big ol rubber bushings in them, to make up for the slop in the factory frame manufacturing. What you are going through is not that uncommon.

I thought about trimming my delrin bushing as well but went the other route and it was the better decision.

Now, be careful and don't crank those bolts down so tight that you put the control arms in a bind. To work their best, they need to move freely.

[SSLance]

BTW: Love your Monte!


Thanks... Can't wait to see your car done as well.

[andrewb70]

Gus,

I think what happened is that when the Hotchkis arms were installed, the bolts were tightened down too much and crushed the pockets. Now you have hard bushings that don't give and the pockets are too small. Spread them out and you'll be good to go.

Andrew

['71cutlasluvr]

Hi Lance. Glad I found the right tool.

Thanks for the additional detailed instructions. I can see how I could spread the ears too far apart if I get a bit carried away with the jack screw. I'll be careful and do a bit at a time. Did you use any sort of lithium grease for the hard plastic bushings? I thought I saw mention of the lithium grease in the instructions.. maybe not, can't remember, but perhaps you found a better lube.

Thanks again for the help. A load off of my mind. Too bad the AR support rep couldn't have mentioned this. Glad the forum is here with helpful hotrodders like yourself and Andy. :worship:

I'll check in with this thread once the arms are in. Now I can work on the rears while waiting for the jack screw. Was afraid of going any further in case I had to return the kit. Took some time off so i can dedicate getting some work done. Fri - tues. Hoping to get the suspension completely in and have a rolling chassis by wed. :fingersx:

:cheers:

atb
Gus

['71cutlasluvr]

Thanks... Can't wait to see your car done as well.

Yeah, that makes two of us! The drivetrain is a 468 out of my RIP 'vert, pretty stout. A th2004r and a auburn posi 3.08 12 bolt rear end rounds out the drive train. Want to get the drivetrain in and start the engine as it's been sitting a couple of years since the 'vert got wrecked. (Hit a telephone pole avoiding a deer) I don't have a build thread since the project is so on and off, but I have added my numerous pics, thoughts and questions on another thread I kinda hijacked.... https://www.pro-touring.com/threads/94970-69-GTO-Build/page20. Fortunately Eric and Mike are kind soles and didn't mind me jumping on. You can see lots of pics and my waffling between prebuilt chassis, narrowing the chassis, coil overs and air ride (we know how that ended, don't we?) I will probably continue to post there although haven't lately due to the air ride fiasco. If the spirit moves, subscribe to the thread... Eric is a master fabricator and Mike has built a beautiful goat as well albeit plagued with engine issues that I hope has corrected by now. Not much activity lately but read through the whole 20 pages if you have time. I wish I had a fraction of Erics skills!

atb
Gus

['71cutlasluvr]

Gus,

I think what happened is that when the Hotchkis arms were installed, the bolts were tightened down too much and crushed the pockets. Now you have hard bushings that don't give and the pockets are too small. Spread them out and you'll be good to go.

Andrew

You may be right Andrew. I don't think I did the over tightening of the Hotchkiss arms.....the car was never "done" while the those arms were on the chassis and the bolts were left finger tight, so never torqued to mfrs specs. However, the car IS a converted drag car so perhaps a previous owner overtighened the stock arms (which came with the car) pinching the pockets a bit. Who knows.. the cars 44 years old!

I agree, the Hotchkiss arms softer rubber may have helped, but they always slipped in with minimal effort. I think the compression of the pockets is the main culprit, as you say. I still don't understand how there can be such a big discrepancy between manufacturer's, but I'm glad there is a relatively easy fix!

Thanks for the input. You and Lance have taken a load of worry off of me. Much appreciated.
:cheers:

atb
Gus

[andrewb70]

Glad to be of help.

Andrew

[Josh@Ridetech]

Good talking to you, Gus! Glad you got this figured out. Post up some pictures when you're done :)

[Hotchkis]

Could just put the Hotchkis ones back in and call it done :)

[Rick Dorion]

I too had the same fitment dilemma with my 69 camaro and Global West LCA's. Same solution too!

[RLJ676]

I had the same problem w/ ridetech lowers on my 72 Camaro. For "bolt in" it was the most sweat I've ever broke lol. Used pry bars and sheer will over hours to get them in. Wouldn't wish it on anyone... I'd just make the Hotchkiss work if it fits, and honestly would have shipped these back if there was an alternative that would have fit and I knew it.

If there's that much frame variance they should ship w/ two bushings, a wide and a narrow inner. For the price I don't think that'd be unreasonable...

['71cutlasluvr]

As nice as the hotchkiss arms fit, they do not play nicely with the shockwaves. There is a mod that I could probably do involving welding a plate to the hotchkiss a-arms thus eliminating the strong arms from the equation... if the jack screw fix becomes more of a headache than it's worth, then I'll consider the other mod and return the strong arms, but will have to determine if there will be a sacrifice in ride height adjustability and if the HQ shockwaves can still be used with the modified hotchkiss arm.

In the meantime, if anyone is interested in some barely used hotchkiss TVS upper and lower a-arms with ball joints for a 68-72 a-body, let me know.. I may have a set available soon. I have the springs too. ;)

['71cutlasluvr]

Good to know this path had been trod before. Josh at ridetech thought of the same fix and called me yesterday to discuss. We shall see if the screw jacks can compensate for a full 3/16" offset. If not, the Josh and I will have to talk again but these pieces are designed to work together... I don't want any more surprises slowing down my progress. This project has been in the planning stages far to long. Time to move forward.

Appreciate the input guys.
Thanks
ATB
Gus

['71cutlasluvr]

I had the same problem w/ ridetech lowers on my 72 Camaro. For "bolt in" it was the most sweat I've ever broke lol. Used pry bars and sheer will over hours to get them in. Wouldn't wish it on anyone... I'd just make the Hotchkiss work if it fits, and honestly would have shipped these back if there was an alternative that would have fit and I knew it.

If there's that much frame variance they should ship w/ two bushings, a wide and a narrow inner. For the price I don't think that'd be unreasonable...

I hear ya RL! Just couldn't understand why there was such a large discrepancy... Seems RT erred on the narrower dimension to facilitate a "universal" fit. IDK. But if the Jack screw fix is too radical and won't make enough room to easily slide in the strong arms without significant distortion, I may have to opt out, but the frame material in that area is fairly thin so hoping for the best.

The bushing options is a good idea. Perhaps many others have had this problem but have never expressed their difficulties with RT? :dunno:

Thanks for the input. Appreciated.
Jack screw comes today. Guaranteed from amazon to be here by 8pm. If that late, will do tomorrow and update the thread.
atb
Gus

[SSLance]

I think you'll find adjusting the frame ears is no big deal.

['71cutlasluvr]

I think you'll find adjusting the frame ears is no big deal.

Well, that was what I hoped Lance.... Not the case.

(Please excuse the length of this post... but I included pics and a lot of detail to verify my efforts to make this system work. I want ridetech to understand what I've gone through and why I've decided to do a return my purchase)

Now that I've cooled down a bit, here's what happened:

After quite a lot of time working the jack screw, using a big adj. crescent wrench and some upper body muscle, I finally got the drivers side strong arm in. It wasn't pretty and it was a struggle to get the bolts in, but i did it and was happy I was going to be able to use the SA's. Installed the shockwave, marked out where to cut with the plasma cutter and was about to do so, then thought I should do both sides then do all my cutting at once.

Well, the pass side seemed to go a bit faster and before I knew it, I got the strong arm in, but there was still a lot of tweaking with the crescent wrench and jack screw. Put in one bolt (front frame pocket), no problem. Tried the put in the second bolt.... the bolt hole in the SA was at least 3/8" off center! Really? Am I losing it?? So just to check my sanity, I put the hotchkiss pass side arm in. Even with the pockets/ears spread apart, the H arm went right in, no problem, albeit a bit sloppily.

Really? C'mon! this can't be! I attached pics so y'all know I'm not a blithering idiot. I'm no fabricator and this is only a hobby for me, but the only thing that can explain such gross misalignment is that there was a mistake made when welding up the pass side (probably both) arm. Why else would the hotchkiss still line up??

Look at the pic of the hole I'm supposed to put the bolt in (#6).... there is no way I can fix that much of an error without drilling a new hole and some serious fabricating. Then, how can I be sure the car can be aligned after modifying the a-arm mounting holes?? I don't have the patience or the skill to do that. This is supposed to be a bolt in mod, right?

I can't seem to insert comments between pics so here is a description:

1. frame prepped and ready for suspension
2. drivers side finally in
3. really had to bend those ears to get it in. why?
4. marked for plasma cutting drivers side. Man am I glad I didn't cut!!
5 &6. With one bolt in the front pocket, look at how far the rear bushing is off! In pic 6, how am I supposed to get a bolt in there without serious mods??
7. Ironically, even with the mangling of the pockets, the Hotchkiss pass side arm still fits! There is something WRONG with the Strong arm.

I'm done. I give up. Disgusted. Wasted countless hours planning this part of the build, asking for help here (which everyone here graciously provided) and took some time off to dedicate getting the part of the build done, just to be stopped dead with a part so far out of alignment no amount of tweaking with a screw jack and crescent wrench is going to align the rear pocket mounting hole to allow the bolt to go through.

Guys, my hands are up in the air and I've had it. Thanks for all of your input but I'm out of options. I guess the cool ride setup is an option but that requires welding to the hotchkiss arms and i'm not ready to take a chance and ruin those. Looks like I got a bad batch so Josh, you can expect a call from me tomorrow morning asking for a return authorization and 3 prepaid return shipping labels. I expect a full refund and NO restocking fee! Not a reflection on you.. you did your best. Thanks for trying.

Looking at the pics, No one can say I didn't do my best to try and make this work.
I think I'll just put the hotchkiss stuff back on so I have a rolling chassis and continue moving forward with the drive train and body work. I'm sooooooo tired of playing with a-arms that don't bolt in as advertised....

I welcome any suggestions for any options in which I can use the Hotchkiss lower a-arms. I have SPC adjustable upper a-arms and ATS spindles already from Mark at SC&C. Maybe he has some ideas on how to salvage this mess.

Thanks again for all the help guys. You gave me hope,..... for a while anyway.
atb

Gus

[marolf101x]

What bushings are in the H arms?

['71cutlasluvr]

Hello Britt,

As mentioned previously in this post, the H arms have a firm rubber bushing I believe.

However, If you look at the pic showing the gross misalignment of the second bolt hole with the front bolt inserted, it's clear that it's not a bushing problem. The problem is the frame pocket hole is not aligned with the SA bushing hole, preventing me from inserting the second bolt. If the SA was dimensionally correct, the second SA hole would line up with the frame pocket hole. It does not. This shows an inherent error in the SA. Again, the stock and Hotchkiss arm still fits without issue, even with the bending/stretching/twisting I had to do to just get the SA into the pocket.

btw: As mentioned earlier in this thread, The initial problem was the SA's are a full 3/16" narrower than the stock or hotchkiss a-arms. Had hoped the mini jack screw would solve the problem, and it did, for the most part, on the drivers side, but the passenger side is beyond hope without major frame alterations, which I cannot and will not do.

Sorry to be so negative Britt, but this whole installation has been far more difficult than it should have been considering it's supposed to be a "bolt in" kit. I've wasted days researching why the kit isn't going in like a true bolt in kit should and have spent additional $ on a tool I'll probably never use again in an effort to make this system work. Others have had similar issues, but they were able to bend and pry their way into a usable scenario. I was not. I know there are some differences between these 45 year old frames since quality control wasn't that great in the day, but the variation is too extreme in this case and the strong arms are just too far out from stock dimensions without additional modifications. I see no options available to make this system usable with my stock Olds Cutlass hardtop frame so I will need to return all components. Unless you have a miracle fix that doesn't require any more bending, twisting, tweaking or frame mods involving cutting, drilling and/or welding, I'm basically sol and way out of patience.

Thanks for reaching out though.

Gus

[SSLance]

Gus, I realize you are probably passed this point by now...but here's a little something I did while fixing the front geometry on my car. I bought some 12mm drill rod and made two pieces to use to align the holes in my front and rear LCA mounts. From the factory, they were off enough that I could not run the rod through all 4 holes at once...on both sides of the car. And I'm positive they were like that from the factory.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2013/08/DSC03220JPG-1.jpg

I opened up a couple of the holes enough to get the drill rod through all 4 holes (no control arm in place) and then went to work moving the holes to improve the front geometry. The work I did on this can be found here. https://www.pro-touring.com/threads/98063-Need-a-little-help-figuring-something-out/page9?p=1015092#post1015092

I'll bet if you tried to run a piece of drill rod the same through your 4 LCA mount holes, they wouldn't even be close to lined up either. Like said above, this isn't an issue when you are running rubber bushings in your control arms. Once you put control arms with delrin bushings in, it becomes more important to line everything up so nothing gets in a bind.

[darren@ridetech]

Gus and I spent some time on the phone this afternoon, just thought I'd let everyone know what we came up with. Having to "massage" the oem spring pockets a tick is not uncommon as the ears can pinch in as bushings wear and bolts get over-tightened. Going to a harder Delrin bushing can amplify this... but the benefits of a Delrin bushing far outweigh this.
Although after listening to Gus's description of the problem, it sounded like what he was experiencing was requiring more than "massaging", so I checked into is a little more. The Factory bushing split should be right at 8 3/4"; verified this on our engineering prints, the jig & the a 66 Chevelle we are restoring. It appears that Gus' arms are about 1/16" out of tolerance. OEM tolerances back there were so wide that in most cases 1/16" one way or another wouldn't matter, but on this car it does. Sending him a new set of lower arms.

['71cutlasluvr]

Gus, I realize you are probably passed this point by now...but here's a little something I did while fixing the front geometry on my car. I bought some 12mm drill rod and made two pieces to use to align the holes in my front and rear LCA mounts. From the factory, they were off enough that I could not run the rod through all 4 holes at once...on both sides of the car. And I'm positive they were like that from the factory.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2013/08/DSC03220JPG-1.jpg

I opened up a couple of the holes enough to get the drill rod through all 4 holes (no control arm in place) and then went to work moving the holes to improve the front geometry. The work I did on this can be found here. https://www.pro-touring.com/threads/98063-Need-a-little-help-figuring-something-out/page9?p=1015092#post1015092

I'll bet if you tried to run a piece of drill rod the same through your 4 LCA mount holes, they wouldn't even be close to lined up either. Like said above, this isn't an issue when you are running rubber bushings in your control arms. Once you put control arms with delrin bushings in, it becomes more important to line everything up so nothing gets in a bind.

Thanks for the input Lance. Lets see if the brandy new arms Darren sends me is the miracle fix I need to salvage this nightmare. I'll post my results on this thread once I have installed the new arms. Probably in a couple of weeks.

Wish me Luck!

:cheers:

atb
Gus

[andrewb70]

Thanks for the input Lance. Lets see if the brandy new arms Darren sends me is the miracle fix I need to salvage this nightmare. I'll post my results on this thread once I have installed the new arms. Probably in a couple of weeks.

Wish me Luck!

:cheers:

atb
Gus

Gus,

All this is hardly a "nightmare." What you are experiencing is fairly common with hotrodding. Old cars were never built very accurately, many have unknown histories and are damaged, manufacturers of parts sometimes have hick-ups. Just be happy that you bought parts from a reputable manufacturer that is clearly standing behind their product, instead of some mystery vendor on eBay and ching-chong parts. Remember, this is supposed to be FUN, damn it!!!! :yeah:

Andrew

[matt816]

^^^^^^ Exactly what he said, this is not a nightmare! Had a similar issue with my strong arms on my 67 Camaro. Alittle persuasion, few cuss words and patience, problem solved. I called their tech line for a different issue with their spindle hardware, no questions asked new hardware arrived within 3 days. Things happen, be happy Ridetech is so great to work with

[Josh@Ridetech]

^^^^^^ Exactly what he said, this is not a nightmare! Had a similar issue with my strong arms on my 67 Camaro. Alittle persuasion, few cuss words and patience, problem solved. I called their tech line for a different issue with their spindle hardware, no questions asked new hardware arrived within 3 days. Things happen, be happy Ridetech is so great to work with

Thanks for the good words, Matt!

Gus, be sure to let us know when you get a chance to work with the new Strong Arms.

[dirty rick]

Gus, I realize you are probably passed this point by now...but here's a little something I did while fixing the front geometry on my car. I bought some 12mm drill rod and made two pieces to use to align the holes in my front and rear LCA mounts. From the factory, they were off enough that I could not run the rod through all 4 holes at once...on both sides of the car. And I'm positive they were like that from the factory.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2013/08/DSC03220JPG-1.jpg

I opened up a couple of the holes enough to get the drill rod through all 4 holes (no control arm in place) and then went to work moving the holes to improve the front geometry. The work I did on this can be found here. https://www.pro-touring.com/threads/98063-Need-a-little-help-figuring-something-out/page9?p=1015092#post1015092

I'll bet if you tried to run a piece of drill rod the same through your 4 LCA mount holes, they wouldn't even be close to lined up either. Like said above, this isn't an issue when you are running rubber bushings in your control arms. Once you put control arms with delrin bushings in, it becomes more important to line everything up so nothing gets in a bind.

So after opening up bolt holes to allow the drill rod to pass did you weld washers on the tabs to maintain bolt alignment?

[SSLance]

Yep... Actually I moved the holes even further to help even them out side to side and improve the front geometry, then welded the washers in place. If you click that link in the post, we detailed pretty well what we did.

['71cutlasluvr]

^^^^^^ Exactly what he said, this is not a nightmare! Had a similar issue with my strong arms on my 67 Camaro. Alittle persuasion, few cuss words and patience, problem solved. I called their tech line for a different issue with their spindle hardware, no questions asked new hardware arrived within 3 days. Things happen, be happy Ridetech is so great to work with

Thanks for the input matt, but a little persuasion didn't cut it this time. (read my post and look at how bent up the pocket's ears are in the pics) I am normally a very patient person... losing patience usually leads to breaking stuff, so I try to contain it. But in this case, the SA's I got were not correct for my chassis. Perhaps "nightmare" is a bit too strong of a term, so I retract it, but after several days of hits and misses, sore muscles and bent up frame pockets, cussing just wasn't cutting it and the frustration meter was redlined. So you'll have to forgive my rant... I was not a happy camper and my posts obviously showed that.

But as you say, Ridetech is great to work with and Darren found the fix. With the inside dimension being correct (from 8 5/8" to 8 3/4"), I have no doubt the new SA's will fit like a glove and I can move forward with this long term project.

:cheers:

['71cutlasluvr]

Thanks for the good words, Matt!

Gus, be sure to let us know when you get a chance to work with the new Strong Arms.

Hey Josh,
Will do. Thanks for the followup.
When an eta is available, if you could pass it on to me, I would appreciate it.
atb

:cheers:

['71cutlasluvr]

Yep... Actually I moved the holes even further to help even them out side to side and improve the front geometry, then welded the washers in place. If you click that link in the post, we detailed pretty well what we did.

Very clever fix Lance. Kudos on your ingenuity. I'm afraid I'm not that talented and was hoping to just stick 'em in and bolt 'em up like the H arms. Oh well. Live and learn, ay? I'll bet dollars to donuts the new SA's slide right in like the H's.... problem solved.

I'll post pics when I get them in.
Thanks again to all who tried to help. Much appreciated. :twothumbs
atb
Gus

[ra11ysport]

For something called strong arm why do they look so weak! Looks like the "SA" could fit inside the hotchkis tubing..........

[Josh@Ridetech]

For something called strong arm why do they look so weak! Looks like the "SA" could fit inside the hotchkis tubing..........

Looks can be deceiving... They're 1.25" OD with a .188" wall thickness, it would take one heck of a hit to hurt the arms. Sadly, I've seen a couple of cars/trucks be put into wall or wrecked on the track and the arms fell back into the control arm jig with no issues. Just because they "look" like they could fit inside of something else doesn't mean they aren't a "Strongarm". :cheers:

[Streetbu]

I had the same EXACT issue on my 78 Malibu. Measurement was off exactly 1/4" too narrow. I was told they are right and to modify my frame to make them fit. VERY disappointed that $1,300 control arms don't fit and obviously it's not just me. Sounds like they need to change their jig and make them correctly the first time. Took me a few hours, a torch and a BFH to get mine moved far enough for the arms to go in. The internal distance for each pocket was correct, in other words the bushings fit inside of the frame, but the distance between the front and rear bushing was wrong. I'm still not happy with how the rear bushings don't sit flush against the frame mount. The proper way would have been to cut the whole mount off the frame, bolt it to the arm, then weld them back onto the frame. Or better yet, make the control arms properly and this wouldn't be an issue.

[Josh@Ridetech]

I had the same EXACT issue on my 78 Malibu. Measurement was off exactly 1/4" too narrow. I was told they are right and to modify my frame to make them fit. VERY disappointed that $1,300 control arms don't fit and obviously it's not just me. Sounds like they need to change their jig and make them correctly the first time. Took me a few hours, a torch and a BFH to get mine moved far enough for the arms to go in. The internal distance for each pocket was correct, in other words the bushings fit inside of the frame, but the distance between the front and rear bushing was wrong. I'm still not happy with how the rear bushings don't sit flush against the frame mount. The proper way would have been to cut the whole mount off the frame, bolt it to the arm, then weld them back onto the frame. Or better yet, make the control arms properly and this wouldn't be an issue.

Just like the A body platform, the stock G body bushings will crush down more when tightened allowing the mounts to pull together. By switching to a delrin bushing, they are less forgiving and don't crush down when tightened. It's not uncommon to see one of these cars that have had the mounts over-tightened which can make an arm with solid bushings harder to squeeze in. The mounts can be spread back apart with a port-a-power...or an easier method, a piece of all thread, a couple washers, and nuts can spread the mount back out if they have been pulled in over time.

[Streetbu]

Maybe I'm not explaining it correctly. Each "pocket" in the frame fit the new arms perfectly so they are not crushed at all. It has nothing to do with rubber or Delrin bushings. The distance between the pockets is the problem. If they were crushed as you say, then the new arms wouldn't fit in each individual pocket perfectly with no slop.

[marolf101x]

What you are experiencing is the tolerance to which the frames were built. Since the OE setup used rubber bushings the tolerances were "yeah, that's close enough", as the rubber bushings moved to where ever they fit when pressed into the frame. The Delrin bushings don't move, so you notice it when trying to install.
We see it A LOT of this on the metric chassis, but we also see some tolerance issues with the A-Body frame, but mostly tabs that have been crushed or have moved on that application. I've even had the same issues on the commercial side with frames from the 70's through the 90's. The newer cars are a lot better about this.

Unfortunately there's no great solution. . .if we change the jigs to fit your car there'll be another customer on here next week saying it doesn't fit his car. The OE frames are just that far off from each other.

[Streetbu]

Once again your talking about the "crush". That would only be on each pocket, not the distance between them. On top of that, why would every person that has installed g-body Tru-turn setup had to bend their frame? That would mean there wasnt a single frame that was straight. That's impossible and even if that was the case, you should make them to the majority. I've owned at least 1 g-body since 1992, the current one since 1994. I know my way around them, i've owned many. The "tolerance" your talking about means that factory control arms wouldn't bolt in without things being bent either. Yet they, yet other brand as stated above bolt in fine too. If a factory arm works, an aftermarket arm fits, then these are NOT built correctly. Tell you what, get the inside to inside measurement on aftermarket and factory control arms and I bet Ridetechs are closer together.

[70camaro406]

Any update on Gus's car?

[bret]

What you are experiencing is the tolerance to which the frames were built. Since the OE setup used rubber bushings the tolerances were "yeah, that's close enough", as the rubber bushings moved to where ever they fit when pressed into the frame. The Delrin bushings don't move, so you notice it when trying to install.
We see it A LOT of this on the metric chassis, but we also see some tolerance issues with the A-Body frame, but mostly tabs that have been crushed or have moved on that application. I've even had the same issues on the commercial side with frames from the 70's through the 90's. The newer cars are a lot better about this.

Unfortunately there's no great solution. . .if we change the jigs to fit your car there'll be another customer on here next week saying it doesn't fit his car. The OE frames are just that far off from each other.

Every suspension manufacturer who is reading this is now quietly nodding their head in agreement. Everyone who has been the victim of your experience is now nodding their head in sympathy with your situation. As Britt said...the "perfect" solution does not exist. I will tell you that possibly another manufacturer has selected a different mount-to mount measurement that more closely mirrors yours...I have no proof of that, it is only theoretically possible. If you can determine that another manufacturers arms would fit better, I would certainly offer you a full refund on ours. It is more important to us that you end up happy with your hotrod than it is to sell an individual set of control arms.

OR...if you really want to optimize your suspension, AND solve your problem at the same time, Do as SSLance indicated above...take the time to plot your suspension measurements [finding out along the way that they will likely vary considerably even from side to side on the same car] contact Ron Sutton to help you optimize the precise locations for the control arms mounts and other suspension components, make whatever modifications necessary to achieve optimized geometry [and fitment of your control arms] and enjoy the benefits of a truly mapped and optimized suspension.
This is a fair amount of work, no doubt. Would I do it for a street car? Probably not, unless I intended to compete seriously in autocross or road course events. BUT, since your are trying to coincidently resolve a related fitment problem, the amount of extra work required to truly optimize the suspension points would not be huge.

I am not trying to defend our products or procedures, just trying to offer relevant information and a wider range of potential solutions. We will help in any way feasible.

[70camaro406]

Every suspension manufacturer who is reading this is now quietly nodding their head in agreement. Everyone who has been the victim of your experience is now nodding their head in sympathy with your situation. As Britt said...the "perfect" solution does not exist. I will tell you that possibly another manufacturer has selected a different mount-to mount measurement that more closely mirrors yours...I have no proof of that, it is only theoretically possible. If you can determine that another manufacturers arms would fit better, I would certainly offer you a full refund on ours. It is more important to us that you end up happy with your hotrod than it is to sell an individual set of control arms.

OR...if you really want to optimize your suspension, AND solve your problem at the same time, Do as SSLance indicated above...take the time to plot your suspension measurements [finding out along the way that they will likely vary considerably even from side to side on the same car] contact Ron Sutton to help you optimize the precise locations for the control arms mounts and other suspension components, make whatever modifications necessary to achieve optimized geometry [and fitment of your control arms] and enjoy the benefits of a truly mapped and optimized suspension.
This is a fair amount of work, no doubt. Would I do it for a street car? Probably not, unless I intended to compete seriously in autocross or road course events. BUT, since your are trying to coincidently resolve a related fitment problem, the amount of extra work required to truly optimize the suspension points would not be huge.

I am not trying to defend our products or procedures, just trying to offer relevant information and a wider range of potential solutions. We will help in any way feasible.

Where's the "LIKE" button? Nice post Bret.

[Streetbu]

So how are the frame mounting points crushed together when there are 2 bolts and 2 pockets? If there was one long bolt I could understand it....unless of course you are saying that the lower control arms are all bad from the factory too.

[marolf101x]

I apologize if my previous post was confusing. . . I grew up dirt track racing where we call the GM G-Body (1978-88 Chevy Monte Carlo, Buick Regal, Pontiac Grand Prix, Oldsmobile Cutlass) the "metric" chassis. I've seen hundreds of these front ends on race cars, and have cut up dozens in an effort to make things fit, to make geometry better, to make things stronger (they don't last long when you hit a wall).

I am saying on the G-Body that the actual location in which the lower control arm mounts are welded to the frame changes from vehicle to vehicle, not necessarily that they crush. (The crush statement was directed more toward the A-Body chassis; Chevelle and the like).
For example, if you found a "new old stock" chassis that had never been used, the mounts may be straight and perfect but they might still be 1/4" different than your car.

[Streetbu]

I understand what you're saying but I think somehow my point is not coming across. If the frame mounts are welded in the wrong position, then how do factory control arms fit properly? It has NOTHING to do with rubber crushing down. If the mounts were "off" by 1/4" like mine the factory control arm wouldn't fit in place either...

[marolf101x]

Actually the OE arms will fit in mounts as far off as 1/4" (sometimes more); which is part of the reason no one ever notices the mount tolerances when using OE style bushings.

The main steel part of the OE control arm is quite a bit narrower than the mounts. The rubber bushings stick out of the mounts a bit and have a steel sleeve inside.
The steel sleeve is not quite as wide as the OE mounts so they’ll slide into the mount.
The mounts are not just square and flat. They have a radius to them leading into the bolt hole. So when you push the arm into the mounts, the steel sleeves can be forced forward and backward in the relation to the vehicle, by the mounts.
If the steel sleeves were welded directly to the OE steel arm it would not go into the mount. Does this make sense?

We appreciate your feedback and strive to provide not only the best parts we can make, but also the best customer service of anyone in any industry.
As such we are investigating this issue as thoroughly as possible. Should we find that a change in width is required we will do so forthwith.

[bret]

Forthwith...is that even a word anymore? :)

One of the tings we have always done here on an ongoing basis is evaluate our jigs and fixtures to make sure nothing has changed...or even to change them if we find the need. By doing this on a rotating basis, every control arm jig gets examined and re-evaluated about every year or so. [actually we do this will all jigs and fixtures, not just control arms]. Mostly we do this to discover easier/better ways to refine manufacturing, but once in a great while we will find a jig that has moved, worn, or been otherwise damaged. OR [more often]...we will refine the geometry based on our ongoing racing and suspension testing results. [but that doesn't have any relevance to the specific fitment issue that we are talking about here] Since the G body has come up we will move that one to the top of the list for examination. [Forthwith!]

What Britt was saying above about the rubber bushings is quite true..the same characteristics that we all hate about them...unwanted and uncontrolled flex of the suspension points...is the same characteristic that allows the ease of installation with a mating component that may or may not be accurately located. That is why you will find a fairly large range of alignment adjustment available in these old cars. If you take a look at many [most?] newer cars, you will find that there is little or NO alignment adjustment. Three reasons for this: 1. CNC manufacturing has made components and jigs much more accurate. 2. no adjustment means more efficient assembly...no alignment adjustments required. 3. no adjustments keeps the customer from mis-adjusting things. Ask any body shop / frame repair shop how they have to "adjust" alignment on a crashed newer vehicle. [hint: lots of hydraulic power]

Streetbu, I am not directing this at you...I am putting this out there for all the others who are lurking on this thread and are trying to understand the whole issue.

BTW...if you guys don't hear from me and Britt for about a week...we are both going on the Cars N Cones Roadtour and will have limited access [iphones] to the forums.

Cheers!

[Streetbu]

I'm not taking this personally and apologize if that's how I'm coming across. After dealing with g-bodies for over 30 years myself, I know there are "tolerances" on them, but I also think many people exaggerate how bad they were/are. Many times you'll find it's more a case of items being worn out than factory tolerances being poor.

[ra11ysport]

Looks can be deceiving... They're 1.25" OD with a .188" wall thickness, it would take one heck of a hit to hurt the arms. Sadly, I've seen a couple of cars/trucks be put into wall or wrecked on the track and the arms fell back into the control arm jig with no issues. Just because they "look" like they could fit inside of something else doesn't mean they aren't a "Strongarm". :cheers:

After holding these in hand you are correct these are stout for sho! I even bought a set with the HQ coilovers and they are a quality arm. I do have some what the same issue here with the pass side fitting and the driver side not so much. JMH but i think the tolerance is a touch too tight cause the hard bushing leaves no room/give what so ever. Another issue is the coilover clearance would have been nice to put the lower coilover mounting hole where the coilover is free from hitting the frame. Quality products but they just take more fudging than others!

[MonzaRacer]

OK so where the coil over is mounted in relation to the pivot point is set for optimum leverage, hence making framemod necessary. It's not to allow you to install with no mods. There is a method and design to the madness that they brew up. It's not a Chinese/etc designer with worn metric tape measure guessing. These guys will work their collection give backsides off to build parts as close to OEM designs WITH mods for performance upgrades. After attempting to install a set of aftermarket stock replacement control arms in a metric chassis (Monte Carlo), it was an old GM test pool car that had trans issues and only had 583 miles on it. An actual NEW SS that was never sold till GM filed bankruptcy and an old factory turned storage was cleaned out. A fragged 200/4r a fresh GM shipping title never issued to a GM dealer and nearly locked up 305(odd as we expected 307) but owner was happier in not having to swap in Chevy parts or build an Olds.
The car had also Sat in water as evidenced by bottom edge of rotors and drums were rotted off and wheels were in similar shape
But frame was still covered in that waxy black sealer GM should still be using.
Anyway some rust was in control arms so be pulled these off his rear ended current G body. IE they had already fit on car for about week before Freightliner relocated trunk lock.
To install these in NEW car took 6 hrs and lots of tweaking. 6 months later Ridetech strongarms went in and took nearly same amount of time too fineness into place. New/aftermarket sheet metal arms were sold to .y old boss for his metric chassis dirt car,,,,, they fell in!
The OTHER new stock type arms he had installed before we gave him those had strength issues and ball joints loosened up and had to be beat into place. And tape measure confirmed at least 3/16 difference in mount measurements directly taken from 4 different cars and GM frame straightening specs. NONE were dead on and in 30 yrs of being an alignment tech taught me that none of the old cars are much closer than 1/8" at best over several thousand cars. Stock specs ARE loose and I can guarantee you stopping the line to verify jigs didnt happen unless something major showed up down the line. It's not Ridetech it's them trying to build to a blueprint spec designed for a car designed and produced in 60/70/80s with 1/8 tolerances and they try to hit thousandths of an inch tolerances in their jigs. Learning to not get frustrated, and learning to work through , as some noted, with ingenuity is part of this hobby. Gooduck, wish me some as I am building a 77 Monza, ever wonder just how screwy THAT car will be? And I have to build most of my parts as few companies make H body parts for our hobby.

[ra11ysport]

OK so where the coil over is mounted in relation to the pivot point is set for optimum leverage, hence making framemod necessary. It's not to allow you to install with no mods. There is a method and design to the madness that they brew up. It's not a Chinese/etc designer with worn metric tape measure guessing. These guys will work their collection give backsides off to build parts as close to OEM designs WITH mods for performance upgrades. After attempting to install a set of aftermarket stock replacement control arms in a metric chassis (Monte Carlo), it was an old GM test pool car that had trans issues and only had 583 miles on it. An actual NEW SS that was never sold till GM filed bankruptcy and an old factory turned storage was cleaned out. A fragged 200/4r a fresh GM shipping title never issued to a GM dealer and nearly locked up 305(odd as we expected 307) but owner was happier in not having to swap in Chevy parts or build an Olds.
The car had also Sat in water as evidenced by bottom edge of rotors and drums were rotted off and wheels were in similar shape
But frame was still covered in that waxy black sealer GM should still be using.
Anyway some rust was in control arms so be pulled these off his rear ended current G body. IE they had already fit on car for about week before Freightliner relocated trunk lock.
To install these in NEW car took 6 hrs and lots of tweaking. 6 months later Ridetech strongarms went in and took nearly same amount of time too fineness into place. New/aftermarket sheet metal arms were sold to .y old boss for his metric chassis dirt car,,,,, they fell in!
The OTHER new stock type arms he had installed before we gave him those had strength issues and ball joints loosened up and had to be beat into place. And tape measure confirmed at least 3/16 difference in mount measurements directly taken from 4 different cars and GM frame straightening specs. NONE were dead on and in 30 yrs of being an alignment tech taught me that none of the old cars are much closer than 1/8" at best over several thousand cars. Stock specs ARE loose and I can guarantee you stopping the line to verify jigs didnt happen unless something major showed up down the line. It's not Ridetech it's them trying to build to a blueprint spec designed for a car designed and produced in 60/70/80s with 1/8 tolerances and they try to hit thousandths of an inch tolerances in their jigs. Learning to not get frustrated, and learning to work through , as some noted, with ingenuity is part of this hobby. Gooduck, wish me some as I am building a 77 Monza, ever wonder just how screwy THAT car will be? And I have to build most of my parts as few companies make H body parts for our hobby.

I read the first paragraph after that you lost me but pertaining to the coil over issue I think its a tweak thats uneeded but thats my opinion!! I love ridetech i think its a great company, but we are also hard on the one we love!!
I was able to get my driverside lca installed and woller out the coil pocket for the coilover. However, my frames coil pocket is for the most ruined other than that im happy. I cant wait to install the Muscle Bar now thats a nice piece!!!