Fatman Spindles

[fatiger53]

************ Message from Moderator David Pozzi

This thread was originally part of the A arm discussion (Sticky) thread. I have moved all the off-topic posts here. While the discussion got rather unpleasant, there is some good tech and things to think about. - It just didn't belong in the other thread.



I have been doing some research into UCA designs, and would offer a few points. I agree with Matt at Lateral Dynamics that MIG versus TIG welding is more a matter of style than strength. However, since the TIG process is inherently a hands on process, where automated MIG welding is often used to reduce costs, quality control is often better with TIG. That is assuming that the welder is capable and caring!

Moog introduced offset upper control arm shafts long ago since these cars subframes are often out of whack enough that alignment can be difficult. With an offset shaft design, a 3/16" difference is available thru the offset that lets you change the effective length of the UCA a total of 3/8". That really helps get positive camber numbers when the frame is sagged thru use. The better MFG use these, often in a billet steel CNC machined versions because the original MOOG ones are getting hard to get. Matter of fact, those retaining stock stamped arms would often benefit by using these shafts.

Urethane bushings have become a standard for higher performance thru less compliance, but opinions vary as to their effect on ride harshness. Fresh rubber bushings do pretty good, but normal wear needs repair.

Some MFG also alter the position and angle of the upper ball joint. Since lowering these cars is common, the ball joint angles can suffer getting to their limits, and normal caster is reduced by any rake that results. By setting the upper BJ back, more caster is preset, and good alignment can result without bizarre shim stacks. I run 3 degrees positive caster for a real good in the groove feel at speed.
Some guys claim to improve camber action with their arms, but that seems like marketing, not engineering. The shape of the tube has nothing to do with geometry. It's the position of the pivots that creates the action of the control arms and spindles. That's why the UCA relocation technique and the taller improved camber dropped spindles work.

These are questions that will be worth asking when you are shopping. If they can't answer or seem confused, be wary.

[wendell]

I felt compelled to make a few points. Feel free to concider them opinions..

I have been doing some research into UCA designs, and would offer a few points. I agree with Matt at Lateral Dynamics that MIG versus TIG welding is more a matter of style than strength. However, since the TIG process is inherently a hands on process, where automated MIG welding is often used to reduce costs, quality control is often better with TIG. That is assuming that the welder is capable and caring!

Moog introduced offset upper control arm shafts long ago since these cars subframes are often out of whack enough that alignment can be difficult. With an offset shaft design, a 3/16" difference is available thru the offset that lets you change the effective length of the UCA a total of 3/8". The location of the pick up point will not change the "effective length of the UCA" but will change the static camber.That really helps get positive camber numbers when the frame is sagged thru use. Traditionally, negative camber gain in bounce is the attribute that people covet.The better MFG use these, often in a billet steel CNC machined versions because the original MOOG ones are getting hard to get. Matter of fact, those retaining stock stamped arms would often benefit by using these shafts.

Urethane bushings have become a standard for higher performance thru less compliance, but opinions vary as to their effect on ride harshness. I've yet to find an application that benifits from urethane bushings. They have the life span of a rubber bushing, ofter with increased bind. Aluminumw/ delrin incerts or steel w/ a zerk Fresh rubber bushings do pretty good, but normal wear needs repair.

Some MFG also alter the position and angle of the upper ball joint. Since lowering these cars is common, the ball joint angles can suffer getting to their limits, and normal caster is reduced by any rake that results. By setting the upper BJ back, more caster is preset, and good alignment can result without bizarre shim stacks. I run 3 degrees positive caster for a real good in the groove feel at speed.
Some guys claim to improve camber action with their arms, but that seems like marketing, not engineering. Shorter arms will increase camber gain at the expence of RC migration. The shape of the tube has nothing to do with geometry. It's the position of the pivots that creates the action of the control arms and spindles. That's why the UCA relocation technique and the taller improved camber dropped spindles work.

These are questions that will be worth asking when you are shopping. If they can't answer or seem confused, be wary.

[fatiger53]

Here a couple real world (although fuzzy due to enlargement) photos of Chevelles at the Airride track day at Putnam Park IN. Note that the red car has all stock suspension, and the camber of the front wheels is leaning out of the turn-not handling too good! Body roll is extreme, making the camber control worse and shifting the CG outboard.

The blue car has the Fatman tall spindles, with Airride tubular arms and sway bars. Check out how much flatter the body is, and how the camber change has the tire leaning into the curve. Which one do you want to ride in? Here's proof that the tall spindle works! The same deal works with First Gen Camaros, that photo shows one with a stock suspension.

[TitoJones]

One thing to note on the Fatman tall spindles when applied to an A body car:

These will DOUBLE the amount of bumpsteer that the car already has with a factory spindle. Fatman relocated the steering arm attachment points so they could reduce the bumpsteer on the REAR steer F body cars, but because the A body is FRONT steer, they made it worse than factory by almost double.

The 2 inch drop will also limit the backspacing due to the steering arm/tie rod end hitting the wheel due to the excessive drop.

Tyler

[fatiger53]

I think Tito is possibly forgetting that the front steer Chevelle uses an entirely different steering arms than the rear steer Camaro. The Chevelle steering arms goes almost straight and level forward, while the rear steer Camaro has a distinct drop in it as it goes to the rear. This error is often made when a guy swap disc brake spindles from a 68-72 Chevelle and 67-69 Camaro to get disc brakes on a car that came with drums. Even though the spindle is a direct interchange, you must use the proper steering arm for the suspension type. I have helped a bunch of guys fix their cars after having made this error. Much bumpsteer does result from using the wrong steering arms.

I called Fatman's to ask what they did in their testing. They set up the tall spindle on both a 68 Camaro and a 70 Chevelle. When they did the bumpsteer check, they found that dropping the steering arm .53" got rid of bumpsteer on both chassis.

I have modified the stock centerlink on these chassis, raising the inner tie rod pivot to get rid of the factory designed bumpsteer. Since my own experience shows that this works, it follows that lowering the outer tie rod end as they do would have a similar effect. The taller than stock dropped spindle will alter control arm angles (improving the camber curve), and would require a slightly different change in the tie rod height than a stock height spindle.

Altering the angle of the tie rod assembly relative to the rest of the suspension is a well proven method of reducing bumpsteer, sometimes by raising the inner, sometimes by lowering the outer, as seen in the anti-bumpsteer outer tie rod end kits you see that use a spherical rod end as the outer tie rod end. This is then mounted to a longer stud that bolts into the steering arm and then allows the racer to raise or lower the new outer tie rod with shims.

[TitoJones]

Your info is incorrect. What fatman did not do is testing. There is NO WAY IN HELL that you can LOWER the attachment points on the A body and reduce bumpsteer. You can't have it both ways. One is a front steer car that needs the steering arm attachment point RAISED (A body) and the other is a rear steer car that requires LOWERING of the steering arm.

I know this to be fact. I did the measuring. I confirmed it with multiple other experts, including Mark Stielow, head of R&D for the suspensions at GM.

I know the steering arms are different between the A, and F body cars. You couldn't get them confused even if you tried.

On an A body car, you must replace the upper control arm when using a taller spindle or it will go into ball joint bind. You also mention bumpsteer correction outer tie rod ends. I am very familiar with them, and while they work great on the rear steer F body car, the do the exact opposite on the front steer A body cars. You cannot refute this. I have the engineering data. It is proven solid fact.

Moral of the story- Don't believe everything you hear or read in the magazines. The info Fatman told you is flat out Bullsh*t.

Tyler

[79T/Aman]

another thing to point out is that offset cross shafts do not change the effective length of the control arm it only changes the location of the pivot points

[wendell]

Hey! I covered that point already.

[Steve1968LS2]

Moral of the story- Don't believe everything you hear or read in the magazines.

Hey, why ya gotta drag magazines into this ;)

[Nine Ball]

I called Fatman's to ask what they did in their testing. They set up the tall spindle on both a 68 Camaro and a 70 Chevelle. When they did the bumpsteer check, they found that dropping the steering arm .53" got rid of bumpsteer on both chassis.



Hmmm... aren't you a representative of Fatman? Why would you call yourself? Hopefully you aren't thinking we are easily fooled by someone acting as a customer...when they aren't.

:ssst:

[Marcus SC&C]

Tito`s right. The outter tie rod pickups on `64-`72 A bodys needs to go up not down to improve bumpsteer. The misalignment is also not .53" on the A body,it`s more. Brett "the FatMan" told me personally that their spindles drop the steering arm mounting points .514", good on a 1st gen F body and particularly effective with near stock alignment specs. Dropping the stock A body steering arm the same amount will increase the already bad factory bumpsteer by nearly double. Similar to B body spindles but without the steering ratio and ackerman issues. The factory misalignment is obvious enough than anyone with a good understanding of suspension/steering can easily see it just looking at the suspension/steering head on. Dropping the outter tie rod end .53" (or .514") would only make it much more obvious. We`ve actually had clients use modified ATS steering arms to correct the bumpsteer with Fatman spindles with good results. It`s not perfect and it`s not a direct swap but it takes care of the bumpsteer problem. We do consulting and testing with many aftermarket companies on their steering and suspension products,we`re testing a rack and pinion system for A body right now. It really doesn`t matter a lick who makes a part or how they market it geometry is geometry is geometry. It`s not a matter of opinion,it`s easily quantified.
I`ll agree that in general taller spindles (or taller ball joints) can be used to huge advantage on the A body chassis though. Once the geometry has been improved the upper arms usually are no longer the right length,offset and angle to fit the car any longer and that`s where specific aftermarket upper arms come into their own,to complete the system. Mark SC&C

PS. A friendly note to other manufacturers new to posting here. The folks on this forum are a SHARP bunch. They know their tech better than a lot of companies out there and you have to be spot on or they`ll call ya on it every time. That`s a good thing!
Keeps us on our toes. :angel:

[TitoJones]

Start reading.

post # 5 proves my point: http://www.chevelles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=202467&highlight=fatman

http://www.chevelles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=200463&highlight=fatman

http://www.chevelles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=197289&highlight=fatman

http://www.chevelles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115654&highlight=fatman

My favorite REAL WORLD experience thread:
http://www.chevelles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=140829&highlight=fatman

and the Fix to the above thread:

http://www.chevelles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=142187&highlight=fatman

All of this is only from one forum. If I add Lateral-G, P-T and Camaros.net you will be reading about yourself for the next 5 days.

If you do work for Fatman, or you happen to be Bret;

Welcome to our corner of the internet. We don't allow mis-information to be spouted off as fact, so you better break out the bumpsteer gauge again and bring technical data to back it up.

Tyler

[69HuggrrrPT]

Hmmm... aren't you a representative of Fatman? Why would you call yourself? Hopefully you aren't thinking we are easily fooled by someone acting as a customer...when they aren't.

:ssst:

I was thinking the same thing "FATiger" HMMMM...:barf:

[TonyL]

interesting read so far. I await Fatiger53's response.
My reccomendation? Be truthful here. We're all a sharp bunch and know when someone is pretending to be a customer of his own company. It never ends well.

[baz67]

Anyone taking bets he does not respond?

[mpozzi]

Nope, it's tucked and he's running ...

Cheers,
Mary Pozzi

[fatiger53]

Yea, I am Fatman and I am my own customer. I actually use my stuff, test it on the track and in the shop The 69 Camaro and the 70 Chevelle used for fitting and testing did have bumpsteer checks done on them and are then driven in the real world. Airride has tested all the tall spindle set ups, and says our are the best. That's backed up with real testing by Pro race drivers on the track. And I do have the numbers.

Also, since upper shafts do relocate the inner pivot points further from the ball joint than a stock, not offset shaft, logic says they do change the effective length of the control arm. That's not an opinion.

The tall spindle swap on the A bodies used to require a special length UCA to get it to work. Our spindle takes care of that by relocating the upper ball joint. There is a small effect on scrub radius, but with so many different offset wheels used on a regular basis, I am of the opinion that it's not a problem.

I got on this site in an effort to learn more about what's going on in the Pro Touring world. If you think that's evil, sorry 'bout that. What I find is plenty of guys pumping their own stuff and blasting anybody with a different opinion. Here in NASCAR country, there are plenty of different educated opinions on how best to make a car handle.

[wendell]

Wow. Hustling up business with fake posts has been bad form for a LONG time. You're a class act. If these are the ethics you apply to the rest of yuor business, you're going to be a lot hapier selling chromed A-arms to the trailer crowd.

And for the record; changing the inner pick up point w/ an offset shaft does NOT change the distance between the pick up point and the ball joint. It's important that you understand that.

[68Formula]

I got on this site in an effort to learn more about what's going on in the Pro Touring world. If you think that's evil, sorry 'bout that. What I find is plenty of guys pumping their own stuff and blasting anybody with a different opinion. Here in NASCAR country, there are plenty of different educated opinions on how best to make a car handle.

Nobody has faulted you for joining to learn more about what is going on. It's encouraged that you do.

The problem was the fake posts in an effort to drum up business. If you want to tout the benefits of your system do it on a technical basis and be honest about your position.

The two pet peeves people have here is a vendor who claims to be just a pleased customer, or one who offers no technical depth other than "check out my stuff." It's insulting, and no better than spam or male enhancement ads you find in magazines. Be ethical. No one here is going to purchase anything from someone who is not.

[David Pozzi]

fatiger53,
Honest discussion is what we are here for.
You have the opportunity to defend your product if you feel the need to. But you should have been honest from the start about your identity and intentions. Members here would have been quite pleased to have direct tech discussions with a manufacturer.

David

[6'9"Witha69]

What I find is plenty of guys pumping their own stuff and blasting anybody with a different opinion. Funny, all the vendors here have the SAME opinion and while they have competing packages, get along quite well. Misinformation is bashed and we will all back that.
Here in NASCAR country, there are plenty of different educated opinions on how best to make a car handle.:bsjerk:

[TitoJones]

You say you have the numbers for the Chevelle and Camaro eh? Post them up. I've posted our numbers for our AFX spindle, and we are not shy about what it is capable of. I'd like to see a graph with the following info on it:

Vehicle year, make and model
Alignment specs (static caster, static camber, and toe)
Upper control arm manufacturer
Spindle, & steering arm used
Amount of total suspension travel measured, and the bumpsteer measurement at each point in 1/2 increments.

I hate to break it to you, but there are no opinions in math or geometry. It is either correct or it isn't. It is like saying 'I think the best way to get 4 is by adding 2 + 1.' It doesn't work that way.

I have some other questions about your spindle if you will actually answer them with technical data, that can be verified with CAD or pictures, or, well- anything at this point.

What is the overall height of the spindle?
What is the king pin inclination?
Where did you relocate the upper ball joint attachment point in relation to factory?
How far did you relocate the steering arm attachment point from factory?
What is the max backspacing you can have on your spindle before the wheel hits the tie rod end?
What is the spindle made from?
Is it forged, cast or billet?
Is it cast/forged/machined here in the USA?
What is the total amount of camber gain in degrees per inch of suspension travel you can get with your tall spindle?
Are you claiming that a factory A body upper control arm can be used with your spindle without going into ball joint bind? If so, do you have pictures of the above combo?
What are your recommended alignment settings for the F and A body cars when using your tall spindle?
What is the total amount of bumpsteer for the A body car over 4.5" of suspension travel (full droop, to full compression?)
What is the total amount of bumpsteer for the F body car over 4.5" of suspension travel (full droop, to full compression?)

That is all I have for today. I'll even answer every question I asked of you, for our own product so you don't feel I'm attacking you.

Here is the camber gain graph for our tall AFX spindle on a 1st gen F body with Global West upper control arms. Recommended alignment specs are as follows:
Camber- 0.25-0.5 neg
Caster- 4.0-5.5 pos
Toe- 1/16" toe in

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

Here is the caster graph- same setup as above:

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

Here is the bumpsteer graph:

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif


What is the overall height of the spindle? The overall height of the tall AFX spindle is 8.5"

What is the king pin inclination? The Tall AFX spindle uses a KPI of 8 degrees

Where did you relocate the upper ball joint attachment point in relation to factory? We raised the height by 1.5"

How far did you relocate the steering arm attachment point from factory? For improvement on the F body, we lowered it about .50" from factory. This translated to roughly double on the A body so we made a new steering arm to correct it.

What is the max backspacing you can have on your spindle before the wheel hits the tie rod end? On the Tall AFX spindle which only uses a 7/8" drop you can run up to 6.0" of backspacing.

What is the spindle made from? The Tall AFX spindle is made from Aircraft 6061-T6 aluminum

Is it forged, cast or billet? The Tall AFX spindle is Forged

Is it cast/forged/machined here in the USA? Damn right it is. TX to be exact.

What is the total amount of camber gain in degrees per inch of suspension travel you can get with your tall spindle? Depending on alignment settings and UCA manufacturer anywhere from .7 to .9 degrees of negative camber gain per inch of travel.

Are you claiming that a factory A body upper control arm can be used with your spindle without going into ball joint bind? If so, do you have pictures of the above combo? No way, and not a chance.

What are your recommended alignment settings for the F and A body cars when using your tall spindle? see above graphs.

What is the total amount of bumpsteer for the A body car over 4.5" of suspension travel (full droop, to full compression?) Can't find the figure, but I WILL edit this post when I locate my figures.

What is the total amount of bumpsteer for the F body car over 4.5" of suspension travel (full droop, to full compression?) Thirty-six thousnadths of an inch over 4.5" of travel.

Tyler

[Hidro]

Dont have to wonder where i spend my money ,

thanks tito.

Post numbers if you have them. :hammer:

[TonyL]

aaaand that is how one "Brings the tech"

And for the record I agree that good handling isn't a matter of "seat of the pants feel", but of recordable and repeatable data and science.

I'd like someone from airride tech to verify the claim they called fatman's product "best".

[baz67]

Wow Tito it seems I have seen those graphs before. Yes Tyler has done exactly what claims.

[Damn True]

Fatman, can we see your test data?

[70bird]

Wow, I just read all of this and my head hurts now.

[TonyL]

Just a quick note to those who've read this far into the thread.
Pretending to be a customer of the company you work for or own is one of the lowest tricks a vendor can pull. We won't stand for it here a pro-touring.com Anyone caught trying to deceive our members will bear the flames they have coming and will NEVER be brought under our umbrella of approved sponsors. We only associate with trustworthy knowledgeable and reliable vendors. We are constantly vigilant on this one and try to catch them all when it happens.


"I got on this site in an effort to learn more about what's going on in the Pro Touring world. If you think that's evil, sorry 'bout that."

Looks like you found out we're a LOT less gullible than street rod guys. And yes. Lying to our members *is* evil.


What I find is plenty of guys pumping their own stuff and blasting anybody with a different opinion.

Pumping their own stuff? You mean like you were? When you were pretending to be someone else? Especially when they *pay* for the right to do so?

Blasting anyone over differing opinions? Well no. They were blasting you for stating things that were simply FALSE and UNTRUE. Pro-touring is built around cars that are driven at the limit of what's possible, so things like safety and handling are kinda important. Matter of fact, it can be sort of a life and death thing. So, the science is kinda critical there. There's no room for seat of the pants "feels good enough for me" parts in the pro-touring world. They need to work. Be proven to work scientifically. People want to spend their money on what won't get them killed. Not what looks shiny and cool, cuz we actually drive these cars hard. And if you say you have data to back up your claims, Now would be a good time to produce it. Cuz Im on the verge of locking this one up, and letting this egg sit on your face forever.

[James OLC]

...logic says they do change the effective length of the control arm. That's not an opinion.

I am sorry; this is not a confidence inspiring quote from any suspension vendor, especially one whose products are intended (?) to be used in a 'hard core' driving environment. Logic is one thing; facts are often another, but a good, proven (and demonstratable) design will always be welcomed.


Here in NASCAR country, there are plenty of different educated opinions on how best to make a car handle.

That is true everywhere. There are several ways to get to the same destination and all of them, in the end, should be quantifiable with good engineering.

When I was researching the suspension options for the ’67 I first went through David’s site and a variety of other internet resources before calling all of the vendors who were offering products or services that appeared to meet the needs of the project. While everyone that I contacted had their own opinions on how to achieve the best possible result for the most part they consistently were able to provide engineering and technical backup to demonstrate their design rational. Those that couldn’t were no longer options in our search. In your own words:


These are questions that will be worth asking when you are shopping. If they can't answer or seem confused, be wary.

That is the one thing that you have said that I have to agree with 100% and, based upon your posts, I am.

And even though it has been said several times already, although there may seem to be “plenty of guys pumping their own stuff and blasting anybody with a different opinion”, Marcus, and Tyler, and Blake, and Kyle, and Mark never pretended to be anything other that what they are – enthusiasts, manufacturers, and supporters of this hobby and this site. I (and I think that I can safely say WE) welcome direct participation from anybody involved in this industry and this hobby/sport in particular, provided they are honest about who they are and their intentions. I would have preferred to read a technical post from “a representative of Fatman” rather than a poorly scripted story. Unfortunately, it reflected poorly on yourself and your company.

Just my 2 bits.

[Damn True]

Well said James. I would not have been so tactfull.

[fatiger53]

Guys, believe it or not, I meant no evil here. I am an enthusiast as well as in the business, as are many of you. When I registered for the site, I recieved the usual welcome email. I responded to that with my identity and said that I wanted to join this site and forum, having heard many good things about the tech info available here. I thought I could learn some things, and maybe pass on a couple things as well.

Had I wanted to disguise myself, I surely would not have used a name with fat in it. Nor did I imagine that anyone watching would not have made the connection. You guys are way sharper than that, and I know that. Perhaps I should have made it VERY clear who I am, but frankly, I thought that would make it MORE likely that guys would ask directly business related questions rather than tech. I participate in other forums with the same name, and have never had a problem like this.

So, being an old guy and probably not as hip to online protocol as I might be (and am now better educated) , I apologize to any and all I may have offended.

[Damn True]

Thanks for the effort there but:



I called Fatman's to ask what they did in their testing. They set up the tall spindle on both a 68 Camaro and a 70 Chevelle. When they did the bumpsteer check, they found that dropping the steering arm .53" got rid of bumpsteer on both chassis.



...and in another thread:


What's the word on the taller dropped spindles by Fatman and Heidts? They are supposed to get a better camber curve as well as the drop.

C'mon dude. You clearly attempted to pass yourself off as "just another dude" and made no attempt at all to present yourself as a principal at Fatman.

[bret]

The universal problem with online conversation is that there is no tone, no inflection, no body language to put a person's words into context. Having known Brent VanDervort of Fatman's for over 12 years I can say that there is no finer human being. I know there was no "evil" intent to disguise his identity but just a simple wish to avoid shameless self promotion. But there is no way for you guys to know that through a simple online conversation.
At this point, with Brent having been thouroughly chastised, and him having acknowledged his faux pax, [real or imagined] I want to lead the charge to live and let live. This is not the first time, nor will it be the last, that someone has offended or been offended. You will find his input to be accurate and relevant to what we all are doing here. While you may not agree with what he [or anyone else] has to say, there is likely something positive that can be taken away.
Now...bring on the marshmellows and lets sing kum-ba-ya!!
BTW...so there is no chance of confusion...I am Bret Voelkel, owner of Air Ride Technologies.

[eville]

Tito, thanks for the VERY informative post. I almost let this VERY old post slip past, I'm glad I did not.

Fatman, please post up data to backup your claims.
I think Tito asked the best questions. We'd all be satisfied if you responded and continued the discussion.

[TonyL]

I think Tito asked the best questions. We'd all be satisfied if you responded and continued the discussion.

Agreed. I'd like to offically offer Brent an olive branch here. The best way to smooth this thing over is to make good on the promises of numbers to back up the claims made. Bret's vouching for you, so thats a major plus. I'd still like an official answer to the statement
"Airride has tested all the tall spindle set ups, and says our are the best." If that is so, we want to know. I want our members to have the best information and tech data they can find on the internet. That's what everyone wants.

[TitoJones]

Bret (Fatman) and Bret (Air ride):

Fatman first-

I don't give 2 sh*ts if you want to pass yourself off as some random bystander on the internet, pretend you work for the NSA or CIA and that you have 12 passports from 9 countries.
What I can't stand is when a company cannot back up a single statement they've made with proven factual data. Fatman is one of those companies. You make street rod stuff, which is great, the market could use another pair of chromed out tubular control arms, but don't think that for one second you belong in this segment.
You are not a Pro-Touring manufacturer, no matter how hard you try to re-brand yourself as one. You have already proven that you don't understand the basic fundamentals of suspension geometry. You have been asked to bring the tech, and you bring apologies. You don't even understand WHY your product doesn't work the way you claim it to. That is a huge problem for a company trying to sell parts in this niche. You said you wanted to learn about the industry, so here is a piece of advice:
Listen to what we are telling you. We know what we are talking about. Read a book on suspension- hell read 3 or 4 of them. Then come back here and answer all the technical questions asked of you.

Air Ride next-

Bret-

I'm sure the other Bret is one hell of a nice guy who would do anything for one of his friends. I hope to god you realize that when you recommend a manufacturer that has known provable flaws with their stuff that this reflects badly on you. You are knowledgeable on suspensions, so you must comprehend what we are trying to get Fatman to realize. If you don't, there are plenty of us who would love to help educate you, since you have helped this industry for the better.

Tyler

[bret]

I can't believe I'm actually responding to this...
If you are calling me out because I have defended a friend that deserves defending, I plead guilty with no apologies.
I am also aware that Brent's spindles [along with many others] are not perfect. I have not yet seen the perfect product [mine included]. I am also aware that his spindles, in combimation with our StrongArms and ShockWaves make our cars faster and easier to drive on the track and the street. If I must choose between the tape measure and the stopwatch...I'll have to take the stopwatch.
BTW...we looked at your spindles...they're nice too. We ran some camber curve numbers and bumpsteer numbers on Fatman's, Heidt's and the ATS spindles about a year and a half ago. I am digging up those notes now and may start another thread with that data. Unfortunately that data will only tell part of the story. A car suspension consists of more components than the spindles. Also unfortunately, I have to use some of the time it would take to satisfy all the tech junkies to build some product to pay the bills. I'll get out what I can when I can.

Education comes in many forms. Your kind offer to educate me has been preceded by our customers and the race track. You may want to take a peek under the Goodguys Chevelle and our 66 Chevelle that placed 1st and 2nd at the Run Through The Hills Autocross in Pigeon Forge in 2007. And my 70 GSX that won that event there in 2006. Those cars all have the Fatmans G Max spindle on them.
For any that missed those events there will be another opportunity at the Goodguys autocross in Costa Mesa In March as well as several other Goodguys events this summer.

[navyflyer72]

I will add my two cents to this post tentatively. Since it is obvious that there are many bent ego's and possibly even a few bent reputations, I would offer this advice:

Honesty in all you do is the best policy, be it promoting your products abilities, or simply posting an answer to a tech question. If you do not know the answer, just say "I'll find out" and then find out and report back. It works in my business and it will work in yours, and people will respect you for it. No one knows everything and this fact is as true in pro-touring as it is in any business or hobby.

We can all learn from each other, so when it comes to posting lets all leave the fragile ego's behind and come to the table with our cards shown, we could all learn a lot more that way.


That's all I have to say on this because I know virtually NOTHING about suspension geometry... yet.

[zbugger]

Yeah, I think this is about done. If you have issues about this, just let me know and we'll get you taken care of.

[David Pozzi]

So, either we get past this and have a tech discussion, or give up and go work on our cars. Tyler provided some good questions and info, but needs to calm down. I'd like to see similar data for the Fatman spindles please.

I'm all done spankin' fatiger53, - I'm not really enjoying it like I thought I would.:spank2:
David

[Larry]

Way to go CCrs! It's refreshing to see the good stuff spreading "out there".

[killer69]

HUMMMMMMM i'm just going to sit here and read.

[carguy502]

Ok, so, I am running these spindles on my 69 nova and they work great, save for the limited wheel backspace. Being ignorant of geometry issues, I got a set for my 1969 chevelle as well, so I am up a creek now. Would it be possible to redesign the steering arm or is it how it mounts to the spindle that creats the geometry issue?

[MrQuick]

Ok, so, I am running these spindles on my 69 nova and they work great, save for the limited wheel backspace. Being ignorant of geometry issues, I got a set for my 1969 chevelle as well, so I am up a creek now. Would it be possible to redesign the steering arm or is it how it mounts to the spindle that creats the geometry issue?

Yes, it is how it is mounted to the spindle.

On a rear steer F/X body spindle, the tie rod has to go down the correct the bumpsteer issue inherent to the design.
On an A/B/G body or front steer application it is the opposite. In this the drop arm mount would not help decrease bumpsteer. So the the need for a special steering arm was required. ATS does sell the required arm. So all is not lost.