G-body front upper a-arm ???'s

[86Cutlass383SR]

I've decided to stay with my stock g-body spindle instead of the b-body spindle swap. I have questions on which a-arms to use. I currently have both setups.

#1 I have the CTA-88A Global West front upper a-arms. These were ordered for a "b-body spindle swap" but GW sent me the wrong arms (Ordered years ago, sent me the wrong arms, and apparently won't exchange for the correct ones). It lists this on the GW website:

"G-PLUS arms bolt directly to stock spindles or 2 inch drop spindles. The arms have additional caster built into the them and a improved camber curve. The combination keeps the tire contact patch flatter on the pavement verses stock."

#2 I have a set of stock upper and lower g-body a-arms with the GW bushings in them.

Should I use the tall ball joints in either of these arms in the upper, the lower, or both upper and lower arms?

I'm looking for "spirited street driving" and highway use. It will probably end up as close to a daily driver.

Thoughts and ideas welcome.

Thanks

[Tony_SS]

DO NOT waste your time with a tubular upper A arm. They are heavy and you'll probably end up with a fat stack of shims.

Get with Marcus for a Stage I kit at least. The SPC arms are great.. no shims and they let you dial in the exact alignment settings. Very lightweight too.

[86Cutlass383SR]

If I don't use the Global West a-arms I have then I'll probably just reuse my stock arms that have the Del-A-Lum bushings in them.

[MonzaRacer]

Agreed call Marcus at SC&C and get his uppers, and go for the tall ball joints.

[Tony_SS]

If I don't use the Global West a-arms I have then I'll probably just reuse my stock arms that have the Del-A-Lum bushings in them.

Don't waste your time with either of those arms. You'll never be able to dial in the alignment specs needed with those setups.

Been there done that... Learn from my mistakes. Sell what you have on ebay, and do it right the first time.

I run stock spindles with LS1 brakes and a Stage I (tall uppers) with the SPC uppers (Stage I kit). The difference btw stock specs and from the ones that Marcus supplied with the kit were night and day. For street duty the Stage I results were amazing compared to what I was running before.

It's one of those things where you don't think that the correct castor/camber will ever make a difference until you drive it and see how great it is. And you'll never get that with the stockers. You might with the tubulars, but they are heavy and might need an inch of shims.

Good luck!

[novaderrik]

why would he need a huge stack of shims with the GW arms he has?
he says the arms they sent him are the arms for the stock spindles.
is the GW design just that bad?

[Tony_SS]

If the arms are for the short stock spindles, they should be designed to run the stock alignment specs, which suck! If he wants to dial in more ideal castor and camber settings, stock arms won't allow for it.

The stock geometry on G-bodies are worse than horrible. Running factory arms OR tubular arms that a copies of the factory ones are pointless.

[86Cutlass383SR]

If the arms are for the short stock spindles, they should be designed to run the stock alignment specs, which suck! If he wants to dial in more ideal castor and camber settings, stock arms won't allow for it.

The stock geometry on G-bodies are worse than horrible. Running factory arms OR tubular arms that a copies of the factory ones are pointless.

Please don't take anything as arguing. I'm just trying to get the best setup I can. I don't have hordes of cash to throw at this project. This is all just friendly discussion.

It lists this on the GW website:

"G-PLUS arms bolt directly to stock spindles or 2 inch drop spindles. The arms have additional caster built into the them and a improved camber curve. The combination keeps the tire contact patch flatter on the pavement verses stock."

Okay, if the stock upper arms are so bad, I won't use them. But with the additional caster and improved camber would they be anything close to what the SPC arms have to offer? The alignment specs GW recommends on the instruction sheet for the GW arms is: Caster 4.5*+ driver side - 5*+ passenger side, Camber .25* - .5* neg both sides, toe in 1/32" both sides. Taken right off the instruction sheet.

I have about $560. tied up in the GW arms. Would they at least be worth a try? Would you use the tall ball joints with them, and if so in the upper the lower or both. I'm just looking for ideas as I am by far a suspension guru. I'm just asking for opinions and guidance from those more knowing than I am.

Thanks

[Tony_SS]

You trust the product description of a company who sent you the wrong parts? I digress.

Yes, they'll claim to have better geometry, and if that's the case it'll only cost you time and money for an alignment to try them out if you install them yourself. But I wouldn't be surprised that even if you get those specs listed, you'll end up with a fat stack of shims.

If you have $560 in the arms you should be able to get $300 to put toward a Stage I.

Not arguing Doug, just saying the tubular arms I tried made the exact same claims and that's where I ended up. Good thing I got the arms in trade for work. But I wasted my time and a $150 alignment to figure out they were worthless.

But I'm not a guru either, maybe Marcus will chime in. At the least give him a call and tell him your situation. He won't sell on anything, he'll just give you expert advice though.

[86Cutlass383SR]

Ya know Tony, You got a point there! LOL.

Anybody want to buy some a-arms?

I know you wasn't arguing either, I just wanted you to know we wasn't. All I wanted is good info, and I got it!

Hello, Marcus....What's your thought on this.... hmmmm where'd he go...

[83hurstguy]

since you are using the stock spindles with these GW arms, you have done nothing to raise the roll center or fix any bump steer.

[Turbo Rob]

86 Cutlass383,

Here are a couple of pics of the arms Tony is talking about:

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2009/03/HPIM1959-1.jpg

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2009/03/HPIM1958-1.jpg

Rob

[86Cutlass383SR]

Ok Ok... LOL ... You guys have convinced me already!!!

Tony - Thanks for standing firm on your experience.

Rob - Thanks for the pics. So that's the Stage 2 kit, huh. Nice!

Could both you guys PM me with your front and rear spring setup, rear suspension setup and if you'd change anything about your setups please.

I'll be calling Marcus.

Thanks again guys.

[Samckitt]

Hey Tony, I already have these arms you are talking about & am ready to take the car in to have it aligned. Is your set to stock values or different & if different do you know what they are?

Thanks.
Scot

[86Cutlass383SR]

Scot, In post #7 Tony stated "to run the stock alignment specs, which suck! " So, by that statement, I'd say they are differant.

[Tony_SS]

LoL.. Doug's right. I'm running 4.5 caster, -.5 camber and 1/16 toe.

Doug, you'll be happy you did. The Stage I was plenty for my needs since the car is basically just a weekend street beater so from the sound of yours I think that'd suit you too.

[86Cutlass383SR]

You may be right Tony, and I have no reason to doubt you. I'll admit, it don't take me much to over-engineer anything. Afterall, I'm just wanting a daily-drivable street car with the best manners as reasonably possible. I know whats too radical for some is too soft for others. It's all about compromise.

[Norm Peterson]

The alignment specs GW recommends on the instruction sheet for the GW arms is: Caster 4.5*+ driver side - 5*+ passenger side, Camber .25* - .5* neg both sides, toe in 1/32" both sides. Taken right off the instruction sheet.

They recommend those settings perhaps because it'd be difficult to impossible to obtain anything much more aggressive. In order to get about 1.5° more +caster than stock, you need something like 1/4" more shim on the rear packs. If you already are at -0.5° camber, that 1/4" of caster shimming eats up most of the remaining thread on the rear bolts. Shimming the front bolts will give you more -camber, but the +caster that you just got will be reduced. Like with the stock arms, you end up either compromising camber for caster or vice-versa. I could get a little more than -2° camber with stock arms as long as I held the caster down to about +3°, but I was just barely getting full thread engagement through the rear nuts and the right side control arm was dimpling a header tube when the engine torqued over on acceleration.


Norm

[Steven]

I'll jump in a little late and tell 86cutlass383sr that I went the slow route from changing simple suspension parts (sway bars,trailing arms,shocks even tires/rim combo). All helped a little, but the biggest change came after speaking to marcus and going with the his stage two kit. The car handles so well on the street and track. Difference between night and day. It's what GM should have done, or I years ago after my first track day.

[Tony_SS]

Norms right. I tried for those specs with my tubular arms, we ran out of threads. Don't go there Doug! lol


You may be right Tony, and I have no reason to doubt you. I'll admit, it don't take me much to over-engineer anything. Afterall, I'm just wanting a daily-drivable street car with the best manners as reasonably possible. I know whats too radical for some is too soft for others. It's all about compromise.

I think one of the benefits with the Stage 2 kit is that the tall lower ball joint lowers the front end ~.75". In my case this wasn't needed so I went with the Stage I.

Either way, my guy who was doing the alignment really loved the arms for their adjustability, not to mention they are really light and require no shims! I can't say enough about them (obviously) :) They along with those specs have made the best the mod to car. Handling wise and driving at high speeds its very solid and controllable.

[Turbo Rob]

Rob - Thanks for the pics. So that's the Stage 2 kit, huh. Nice!

Could both you guys PM me with your front and rear spring setup, rear suspension setup and if you'd change anything about your setups please.


Here is my suspension set up at the current time:

Front: SC&C Street Comp Stage 2 (adjustable UCA, Howe tall upper/lower ball joints), S10 Xtreme LCA bump stops and stock lower control arms, Moog 5658 front springs with SPC .5" spacers

Rear: GW S-69 rear springs

I will be adding a Spohn PT sway bar, and more than likely Currietrac lower control arms on the rear end.

Would I change anything - I would have probably bought the SPC matched spring set (front and rear) versus the Moog/GW combo I have now. Other than that, I am pretty happy with my setup.

Although not the best pics, you can see how the car sets with my current suspension combo:

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2009/04/DSC00525-1.jpg

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2009/04/DSC00527-1.jpg

Although not slammed like some of the great rides on the site, I am happy with how it sits. And besides that, I move about every 2.5 years and never now where I am going to be living next, what the roads are like, etc., so I do not want to go too low until I settle down permanently.

Rob

[86Cutlass383SR]

Rob that is a sweet setup you have, meaning both suspension and car! In the PM that Marcus sent me, he mentioned I should run the Stage 2 and if I wanted to stay with my 5662 IROC front springs and 36mm sway bar that I should go with the SC&C/Spohn pro-touring rear bar, too.

I imagine I'll stay with my front springs and try his suggested 5413 rear springs for now and order his stage 2 a-arm/tall ball joints. After I get it running and back on the road I'll play with the ride height. I was pretty happy with the way the 5662's and 36mm bar handled and rode so I'll experiment with trimming the springs then. I've got the alum SuperRam injection and alum AFR heads so my front end weight is a little lighter than stock.

Like you, I don't want to get too low as mine will be a street driver and I plan on running sidepipes so that will give it a lowered look more than it actually is.

Like Steven says, I'll probably be replacing stuff a few times to get it all "just right". That's way our cars are never "finished"!

Thanks again to all for the valuable info!