SCC adjustable arms and g-mod

[Jasons72]

If i'm going to be using the SCC fully adjustable uca's, will i even benefit from the g-mod since i can add caster and camber with the arm(i also want to run the tall upper and lower ball joints)?

[Mkelcy]

If i'm going to be using the SCC fully adjustable uca's, will i even benefit from the g-mod since i can add caster and camber with the arm(i also want to run the tall upper and lower ball joints)?

Do the Gmod OR the tall ball joints; not both.

[Jasons72]

Ok, then i will just stick with the tall ball joints and the adjustable uppers.

[1968Maro]

Yeah,

Took me a long time to learn that too, but you cannot change the Camber curve without changing the physical pick up points on the vehicle or the hieght of the ball joints

Found this site very usefull

http://www.ozebiz.com.au/racetech/theory/align.html

[Jasons72]

In looking at saving cost, could i do the adjustable upper control arms, the tall lower ball joints and then the g-mod in order to offset the price of also buying the tall upper ball joints? that would save me $170.

[Mkelcy]

In looking at saving cost, could i do the adjustable upper control arms, the tall lower ball joints and then the g-mod in order to offset the price of also buying the tall upper ball joints? that would save me $170.

I wouldn't do the Gmod. Get the adjustable UCAs and the tall upper ball joint for now. Have you called Marcus at SC&C to get his opinion? He's hard to reach but once you do, you'll find the conversation extremely rewarding.

[Jasons72]

Not yet but i had planned on it.

[JRouche]

In looking at saving cost, could i do the adjustable upper control arms, the tall lower ball joints and then the g-mod in order to offset the price of also buying the tall upper ball joints? that would save me $170.

One of the major costs of the tall ball joints (uppers, I didnt think there was a tall lower) I think? Is that they are some superior ball joints. Not just that they are taller, and help with the camber issues , but that they are some really high quality ball joints. You get two fixes in one part.

So by going with the taller ball joints you are getting more than the improved geometry. You are buying a high quality part. JR

[Jasons72]

True, i guess i should just wait and save upto buy better components. Yes there is a tall lower ball joint that actually drops the car from 1/2" to 3/4". Being a college student dropping 715 on ball joints and upper arms and still not having the coilovers is a lot, plus i still have the stock lowers that aren't the strongest that i will have to modify to accept the coilovers. And i still need to fab up my rear 4 link :)

[Mkelcy]

True, i guess i should just wait and save upto buy better components. Yes there is a tall lower ball joint that actually drops the car from 1/2" to 3/4". Being a college student dropping 715 on ball joints and upper arms and still not having the coilovers is a lot, plus i still have the stock lowers that aren't the strongest that i will have to modify to accept the coilovers. And i still need to fab up my rear 4 link :)

The upper arms/balljoints are right around $500. I'd go with that package and do lower control arms/ball joints later, if you think you need them.

Why do you want coilovers? Are you going to be making frequent ride height (and alignment) adjustments?

[wmhjr]

Why do you want coilovers? Are you going to be making frequent ride height (and alignment) adjustments?

Same question from me. Some folks should just rename "coil-overs" to "cool-overs" because the cool look is the reason they do it and not for any performance gains. I'll bet for every well designed coil-over application done with real thought and careful design there are 50 that are just slapped together and are probably out-performed by a well designed non-coil-over application.

[Jasons72]

The reason for coilovers is obviously for the lowered ride height, however i'm not going to drop the car on its nuts just by shortening them as much as possible, i'm actually going to raise the upper mounting height in order to get the correct drop and keep the shock in the proper operating range. I had hotchkis drop springs (loved them by the way) but they just didn't get the car where i wanted it and if i were to cut the springs, not only would i ruin the spring rate and everything else, i would also be taking the shock out of its proper operating range. Drop spindles are out of the question and i refuse to spend the money on afx spindles(though if i had the money i would already have them on the car). I know the tall lower ball joint will drop the car somewhere around a half inch and will also help with the camber curve. I'm going to have to take some measurements and figure out the length of springs and shocks i will need for my car though, i'm planning on something like 550 lb. springs up front, but i'm not sure yet. For the ride height i may even have to notch the frame a bit so that i'm not just sitting on the bump stops all the time as well. I'm going with shorty headers so i will have plenty of ground clearance, should have around 4-4.5" of ground clearance at the frame under the door.

[Jasons72]

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2010/01/IMGP1807-1.jpg

Old picture but somewhere around another inch lowered all the way around, maybe 2 in the rear. I will be going with 17" rally's or maybe 17" summit legends.

[wmhjr]

The reason for coilovers is obviously for the lowered ride height, however i'm not going to drop the car on its nuts just by shortening them as much as possible, i'm actually going to raise the upper mounting height in order to get the correct drop and keep the shock in the proper operating range. I had hotchkis drop springs (loved them by the way) but they just didn't get the car where i wanted it and if i were to cut the springs, not only would i ruin the spring rate and everything else, i would also be taking the shock out of its proper operating range. Drop spindles are out of the question and i refuse to spend the money on afx spindles(though if i had the money i would already have them on the car). I know the tall lower ball joint will drop the car somewhere around a half inch and will also help with the camber curve. I'm going to have to take some measurements and figure out the length of springs and shocks i will need for my car though, i'm planning on something like 550 lb. springs up front, but i'm not sure yet. For the ride height i may even have to notch the frame a bit so that i'm not just sitting on the bump stops all the time as well. I'm going with shorty headers so i will have plenty of ground clearance, should have around 4-4.5" of ground clearance at the frame under the door.

So I'm no expert (those guys are around here somewhere) but when I started this I learned that the correct operating range for the shock is the final and not the first step. For real handling you also need to worry about bump steer, etc. You may well have it all covered so don't take offense. My comment about coil-overs was really about all the cars I see on the street that guys slapped coil-overs on - yet the cars wallow around corners like they need a striped cane and a seeing eye dog.

You've got the SCC uppers, right? Why not talk to Marcus?

[JRouche]

Same question from me. Some folks should just rename "coil-overs" to "cool-overs" because the cool look is the reason they do it and not for any performance gains.

I completely get where you are coming from. But dont forget, cool factor really has ALOT to do with street cars, maybe more so due to the limited amount of performance thats needed compared to a track car.

There are many street cars that are over built just for the cool factor. And I for one dont have an issue with that. Street cars are meant to be cool looking even if the performance issue is what a specific part was designed for.

I mean really. Look at all the street cars with blowers sticking out of the hood and there is 1000hp available. Thats overkill for the street. But the coolness factor is up there (for some).

Pro-street cars were the "take it to the limits" for overly built street cars. But they had some appeal to a large group of folks.

Pro-touring is similar but with a more sensible look at street (and track) performance. Putting race products in a street car can be looked at the same way by some purists like alot of folks looked at the pro-street cars, why? Maybe they see it as overkill. I dont know. Maybe they get tired of seeing a guy bolt up every performance part he could without regard to the actual performance.

But I get your point. A poorly thought out suspension will produce a worse handling car than the stock suspension had. There are alot of examples of that.

But from reading many of the posts here I see more guys thinking things out and asking questions to get it correct. Not like some of the forums I frequent. Like a guy asking. "Hey, I just bought these coilovers for my car, do you think they will fit?"

Guys here dont ask if they will fit but ask which coilovers for their specific car and suspension will give the correct handling characteristics. More of a performance orientated group of guys here rather than the group that is concerned if a part looks good and will fit.

I rarely see a post here that doesnt have performance considerations as the key point.
Great forum!!!! JR

[ProdigyCustoms]

In it's range, a coilover conversion set up is a good piece. By coil over conversion I am refering the the ones that use the upper spring pocket for the coil spring and the base of the shock for the bottom of the spring. Problem is 99% of the people want to run these at a lower ride height then the proper range..

Now it sounds like you want to run a true coil over. If you do a Chicane kit, a DSE Speed kit, or you build your own, by changing the upper mount point you can control having the shock in the proper range at ride height because you set it up that way. So that would make it the first thing to do.

[Bryce]

I have coilovers on 3 cars right now.

My DD 95 mustang has coilovers in the front and adjustable spring perches on the rear LCAs. It was so that I could lower the car to my desired ride height without srewing with someones "drop springs". I wanted to choose my spring rate and free length to get the correct ride height and handling I wanted out of the car. Its my DD I want to have fun in the car.

My falcon has C/O for the same reasons as well as the tuning needed to have a multipurpose car. The coilover springs are smaller and lighter than stock and come in any length and rate. This allows the end user to calculate the required droop and initial spring compression to have the car at the correct height and performance level. Preload is a very important consideration when ordering and designing a coilover system.

[wmhjr]

Guys, don't get me wrong. I'm not knocking coil-overs. As for over-building, and race technology on a street car - have you looked at my build thread? I'm probably the poster child for over-building. I was just saying that (outside of forums like this) the majority of people have absolutely no idea what the real benefits of a coil-over are - and the disadvantages. Nor do they have any idea "how" to properly build a suspension system. So many times I've seen a reasonably nice car, lowered, crappy brakes but flashy calipers, coil-overs, but 22 inch wheels that must weigh 100 pounds each. That's all. It's a pet peeve of mine. Completely opposite from the nice builds that have well thought out suspension that actually (gasp) gets pushed every now and then.

[Bryce]

Guys, don't get me wrong. I'm not knocking coil-overs. As for over-building, and race technology on a street car - have you looked at my build thread? I'm probably the poster child for over-building. I was just saying that (outside of forums like this) the majority of people have absolutely no idea what the real benefits of a coil-over are - and the disadvantages. Nor do they have any idea "how" to properly build a suspension system. So many times I've seen a reasonably nice car, lowered, crappy brakes but flashy calipers, coil-overs, but 22 inch wheels that must weigh 100 pounds each. That's all. It's a pet peeve of mine. Completely opposite from the nice builds that have well thought out suspension that actually (gasp) gets pushed every now and then.

I agree with this. Now we can get back to the thread.

[DEIGuy38]

When I put my front end together I talked to Marcus at SC&C. Here was his reccommendations. I have stock upper control arms with the 1/2" taller ball joints from SC&C and the g-mod. He said not to run the taller lower ball joints because you add to the bump steer issue. I'm running the taller outer tie rod end from SC&C to help eliminate most of the bump steer. I also have adjustable spring buckets which give you about 2.5" of adjustment. Look at afco, landrum, lefthander chassis or other manufacturers for the coil heights and rates you want to run.

[MonzaRacer]

Hey thats a cool setup for spring adjustment, DEIGUY38, you build those adjusters?

[Mkelcy]

Hey thats a cool setup for spring adjustment, DEIGUY38, you build those adjusters?


http://www.afabcorp.com/AFCO_Dynatech_USbrake/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=A&Product_Code=20191&Category_Code=ct_coil-access

[DEIGuy38]

Hey thats a cool setup for spring adjustment, DEIGUY38, you build those adjusters?

I got them from http://www.lefthanderchassis.com/main.asp they have 2 different styles and alot of other good parts. http://www.lefthanderchassis.com/viewproduct.asp?idproduct=0013041 http://www.lefthanderchassis.com/viewproduct.asp?idproduct=0013042 I think Mark Stielow used them on the thrasher camaro.

[Jasons72]

So i've been looking at my budget lately and since my hours have been cut...again...and my wages suck, i think i'm going to have to wait on the adjustable uppers and go with the g-mod instead. I guess i will have to go with the tall upper ball joints if i'm to have any luck with camber gain.

When running the taller outer tie rod end how does that help with bump steer? does it still mount under the spindle like stock or does it mount on top?

If i can sell my GTI then i could possibly afford them since i will be taking the money and buying a cheaper car (hopefully another nova) so i should be able to use the extra money to get a few parts.

Another thought, if i use stock uppers i won't be able to use a taller mounting point for a coilover since there will be no room for the mount...

[DEIGuy38]

[QUOTE=Jasons72;629682]
When running the taller outer tie rod end how does that help with bump steer? does it still mount under the spindle like stock or does it mount on top?

Hope this will help. Yes, the tie rod still mounts under the spindle like the stock one. http://www.thedirtforum.com/bumpsteer.htm

[JRouche]

When running the taller outer tie rod end how does that help with bump steer? does it still mount under the spindle like stock or does it mount on top?

Still mounts at the bottom. From what I understand by lowering the steering arms (tie rod) outside pivot you get the pivot action closer to the pivot action of the lower control arms. You want the tie rod arc to mimic the arc of the lower control arm. Ideally they would occupy the same space, but thats impossible.

So say during compression as the control arm pulls the spindle in, closer to the center of the car the tie rod is pulling the steering arm of the spindle in at the same rate and distance. If not you get bump steer.

Many stock tie rod locations have the tie rod rising at a faster rate than the control arm. Either due to a short tie rod (pivot to pivot) or because the outer pivot is already up too high.

If its up too high (past the three O-clock position at ride height, and the control arm is at the three O-clock position (level lower control arm) then its already pulling in on the steering arm of the spindle before the control arm starts to pull the spindle in during compression. And at a faster rate due to its position higher up on the circle. Picture the 90* between the horizontal (3 O-clock) and twelve O-clock (drivers side looking from the front of the car). If the tie rod is already up into the 90* section by say 5* it is gonna pull in the steering arm of the spindle at a higher rate than the control arm is pulling in on the spindle that is starting out at the 3 O-clock position.

So the idea is to lower the outside pivot of the tie rod to get it closer to the three O-clock position and inline with the lower control arm. Maybe even lower than three O-clock to make up for a really short tie rod. But lower is worse. Cause if the tie rod is pointing down and the control arm is level you will have some squirmy steering. BUMP STEER. Cause during compression the tie rod goes from a "short arm" (being below the 3 O-clock position) growing in length as it rises, pushing the steering arm of the spindle out as the tie rod rises during compression of the suspension to a shortening arm as it passes 3 O-clock and on up. So you transition from a pushing to a pulling when the control arm was pulling during the entire compression cycle. That IMO is the worst of bump steer. Better to keep the tie rod at least in the same pulling or pushing cycle as the control arm than to over compensate and having the tie rod do a flip flop during compression..

Oh, why am I only talking about the compression cycle? Well, because I would have to write all of this for the rebound cycle too. Ok, I will.. :) Kidding. Wont bore you more. But I do think it is more important to talk about the compression cycle because in a turn the outside tire is gonna be in compression, and it happens to be the tire that is gonna have the most influence on the handling. Might as well lift the inside tire off the ground if yer fast. Kidding again. All the tires matter. I just happened to choose compression.

Again, ideally the two arms (control and tie rod) would occupy the same area and be the same length.

But in a long answer thats how I see it.

Summary.. Tall rod ends lower the tie rod to put it in sync with the control arm. Solly for the confusing reply. I explain things better in person. Writing wasnt one of my better skills :) JR

[Jasons72]

That was a very good explanation and i did understand it. Makes very good sense and i see how it will help. If i could sell one of my two VW's i think i could afford to spend a little more and get everything i will need to do the suspension correctly, ie the adjustable upper arms, taller ball joints and whatever spring and shock combo i'm going to come up with since the ride height i have has very poor lca angle, also going to put solid lca bushings in.