Hotchkis A arms for camaros

[cudaman]

Anyone know anything about the new tubular A-arms coming in April from Hotchkis? Their website shows them for early camaros, but says nothing about them other than April availability. Just curious since I am ready to pull the trigger on a GW set. If they were somewhat cheaper and offered geometry improvements, I might consider waiting another month. I'm sure they won't be any less expensive based on the pricing of the rest of their products, though.

[zbugger]

John told me at SEMA that they were to complete their TVS setup. He also said that they didn't have any geometry improvements, but I wouldn't hold that against them. They looked like good parts when I saw the display units at SEMA. Even though the welds looked crappy, but he told me that it was slapped together to get ready for the display.

[cudaman]

Don't like the added caster in other arms?

[essenge]

I would imagine the hotchki's set would cost more then the GW, and if they do not help any with camber gains then I would say go with the GW set up.

[PTAddict]

Simply swapping arms won't do much about geometry in any case, other than allowing for more caster (which also means a bit more negative camber at high steering angles, but certainly not enough to offset the terrible camber gain characteristics of the stock first gen suspension). More caster is definitely worthwhile, but most aftermarket arms will offer that.

To really improve on geometry, you have to do the Guldstrand mod at least, or lengthen the spindle using taller ball joints or AFX spindles.

Guldstrand mod:

http://www.pozziracing.com/first_gen_suspension_geome.htm#Re-located%20upper%20mount

Longer spindles:

http://www.scandc.com/suspensions.htm

[cudaman]

I'm doing the g-mod irrespective of new arms. I didn't expect the Hotchkis arms to be any better than the others, I just wondered if they might save me a few dollars.

Isn't the added caster (and consequential negative camber gain) a pretty good start towards geometry improvement?

[importkiller69ss]

where are all of yall getting the templet for the g-mod?

[PTAddict]

I'm doing the g-mod irrespective of new arms. I didn't expect the Hotchkis arms to be any better than the others, I just wondered if they might save me a few dollars.

Isn't the added caster (and consequential negative camber gain) a pretty good start towards geometry improvement?


Caster, by itself, will lend a greater sense of stability and steering feel, and most cars will require a control arm swap to get enough caster by modern standards. The negative camber gain due to greater caster is purely a function of steering lock, not of roll angle. So in very slow, sharp corners, the camber gain might be useful (minimally useful), but not much in high speed corners. In any case, first gen geometry is massively screwed up in many ways besides camber gain. Low roll center, drastic shift in roll center position, bump steer, to name a few. The g-mod and/or taller spindles can potentially help all of these things, to a much greater degree than a control arm swap alone.

On the other hand, you can have too much of a good thing. Doing the g-mod, and using an AFX spindle, for example, might give you very big camber gain but excessively shorten the front view swing arm. Or might not. You have to either do your own analysis, or trust somebody else's, when it comes to decisions like this.

[cudaman]

The research I've done indicates that the G-mod and arm swap will be comletely compatible. The 6* caster added by the GW arm along with the modest gain of the G-mod should not be excessive enough to cause other problems. The G-mod is the first priority, the arms are just to add the high speed stability, steering return to center, and the improved feel. This along with my IROC box will complete the package, I hope. So far, everything is going according to plan. Thanks for the help.