ATS Spindle Thread Split

[TitoJones]

This thread is to explain all the design features, and questions we've recieved regarding our new upright, called the AFX Spindle.


Features include:

Fits A, F and X body cars (68-72 Chevelle, 67-69 Camaro, and 68-74 Nova)

Ultra light (2.9lbs), exceptionally strong forged 6061 T6 aluminum

1.4" taller than stock* for improved handling (gives greater camber gain with minmal tire wear)

Revised steering geometry for near zero bumpsteer (utilizes a bolt on steering arm. This means you can use this spindle with any of the aftermarket rack and pinion kits, including Flaming River, BRP, and others.)

7/8" drop for a lowered look, without causing rim to steering arm clearence issues related with dropped spindles (usually happens with over 1.5" drop)

Uses a sealed C6 Corvette hub assembly with integrated wheel speed sensors perfect for retrofitting an anti-lock braking controller to the chassis, or for installing an advanced traction control device. (A few additional features of using these bearing packs include bigger bearings for open road racing, as well as the ability to use a C5/C6 Corvette rear bearing pack for someone crazy enough to attempt an all-wheel-drive conversion.)

Multiple brake options including Baer's new 6 pistion mono block calipers. (Any brake manufacturer that sells a C5/C6 Corvette package can be used on this spindle. Anything from factory Z06 style, all the way to AP racing calipers will bolt on with zero mods.)

* also available in stock height for use with any geoemtry and control arm configuration. (This means you can use our 'stock' style spindle with the G mod, the DSE coil over mounts, and any tubular control arm, ie GW, DSE, ST, ect.)

These are not remade SED spindles. We started with a clean slate to make this product. It was executed so well, that we got the Mark Stielow seal of approval, and he will be testing a set on the re-aquired Thrasher Camaro.

Available in late June, and should be within the price range our our competition.

Tyler

[Marcus SC&C]

They already know about it. They`re aiming their product at folks who want a quick and simple mod to lower the car and improve the handling some without doing lots of other mods. They should be just fine for that. If they were shooting for the hardcore crowd it wouldn`t be a drop spindle. ;) Marcus SC&C

[wally8]

Actually from the measurements I've taken off my car (65 LeMans) and the ride height that I want, I am going to need a drop spindle.

2 inches might be a little much, 1.5 would be better. The worst part of a stock spindle that I can see is the pin height. Everything else I could feasibly work around but you can't get around the pin height.


Wally

[TitoJones]

In regards to Fat Man's new spindle:


They already know about it. They`re aiming their product at folks who want a quick and simple mod to lower the car and improve the handling some without doing lots of other mods. They should be just fine for that. If they were shooting for the hardcore crowd it wouldn`t be a drop spindle. ;) Marcus SC&C

Our spindle is aimed at a similar market. We also require no mods to the car for a successful installation. While our main focus is more to improve the terrible factory geoemtry without the need for aftermarket control arms, ours will also lower the car slightly. We have found that a 2" drop causes more clearence issues than it solves, and there are much better ways to lower the car than raising the king pin height. We had to lower our spindle to fit the C6 Corvette bearing pack, but we managed to keep it under 1".

Here is a spy shot of the spindle:
https://www.pro-touring.com/~tylerb/Spindle.jpg

Tyler

[Steve68]

Come on June, go Tyler go, !!!!

[dennis68]

Hey Tyler, does that hurt???

[TitoJones]

Dennis-
If referring to the braking system, then yes, it hurts. Badly. These things could detach your eyeballs from your skull with some hydroboost hooked up to them.

Tyler

[dennis68]

Actually I meant reaching your arm back that far for your pat on the back. :rotfl:

I like the teaser pic. I have even spread the word of the upcoming unveiling.

[TitoJones]

:lol:
Nice. You got me. :)


Tyler

[jeffandre]

Tyler,
Shoot me a PM when you get a minute, I am interested in what it costs to get the same rotors and calipers with pads. What is the measurement from the center of the rotor (spindle king pin) to the outer edge of the caliper? I cannot seem to get any piston size specs from the Baer site, any chance you could shoot me those too? If I am in the market to buy I will contact you before I come out to Vegas in late June. Thanks,

[Steve68]

Tyler, When are you going to post a picture? I might need more parts from ATS, I have to call a guy today about a T-56, Steve Waiting on June,

[Rybar]

How much of a drop do your spindles have Tyler?

[dennis68]

Hey Ty, Fatman is pushed back at LEAST 60 days. Too bad for him....that is going to put his release at the same time as yours. Let's see, OE design spindles with a 2" drop and 2" taller OR all new design, state of the art aluminum uprights with bolt in sealed bearings. :hammer:

[USAZR1]

Tyler,what applications will your new spindles fit?
Aluminum? No problem running these on the front of a 3600lb street car?

[TitoJones]

Clint-

The spindles are forged aluminum from 6061 T6 aluminum, made at the same facility that makes OEM items such as the aluminum suspension parts used on the new C6 Z06 Corvette. If that does not satisfy your needs we have also done extensive FEA (Finite Element Analysis) stress testing to make sure the design holds up to load inputs taken from strain gauge readings from GM's test grounds. They will be more than sufficient.

Steve-

Patience young Jedi. I did post a pic of the spindle. It is behind that solid 2pc 14" rotor. Use your imiagination.

Tyler

[Steve1968LS2]

Damn.. you go and come out with bitchen spindles now that I have an aftermarket subframe with a Mustang II suspension..

Damn!! ;)

Still gonna bug you about a 6 speed install though :D

[MuscleRodz]

What offset will be required to run the new spindles? Stock or deeper offset.

Mike

[TitoJones]

Steve-Ditch that frame, go back to stock.

Mike- Same as stock, track width was not changed.

Tyler

[Steve68]

Master, I have patience, I will study the picture, I can see through object, the force is with me, ahhaah Steve

[BrianP]

Do the ATS spindles have an offset hub centerline similar to the vette spindles for increased caster?

[TitoJones]

Do the ATS spindles have an offset hub centerline similar to the vette spindles for increased caster?

Wow, you've been registered since Sept of '04 and have never felt the need to post until now? :lurk:
My engineer Shane Wagner will be fielding that question.

Tyler

[nkopper]

Sounds like you guys at ATS have done some serious engineering on these uprights! The Stielow stamp of approval doesn't hurt either. Can't wait to get my hands on a set.

Nathan

[427v8]

Tyler,
What are the chances of your new spindle fitting on a '69 Corvette?

The Vette has absolutely zero support for suspension mods...

[CamaroAJ]

so if i already have my baer brakes on the car and wanted to upgrade when they come out is that going to be a problem?

[TitoJones]

The 69 vette question is a good one-
I have been asked if this will fit a handful of other vehicles.
My conditioned response is no, they will not fit what they weren't designed for.
However, there is enough material in the AFX Spindle to allow a ream of the ball joint tapers to possibly allow it to fit other applications such as a G body or Y body. I can't make any promises as to better handling, but don't let us stop you from trying to make it work for your custom application. We will not offer the machining of the ball joint taper, so this would be a project you would need to tackle yourselves.

As far as people already having a set of C4 PBR Baer brakes and upgrading to this spindle-
We are working with Baer to possibly offer a new abutment that will adapt the C5 caliper mount to the C4 PBR caliper. We don't want people to have to ditch their entire setups to change to our spindle, so we are trying to make every possible provision for our clients.

Tyler

[Ralph LoGrasso]

Hey Tyler,

I split this thread from the fatman thread and renamed it for ya.

[wickedmotorhead]

KQM,

Good question. I assume you are refering to mechanical trail that was designed into the C4 knuckles to induce more relative caster to the relatively low initial caster. The C5 ditched this and realigned the hub center to the SA and built in more caster to the geometry. Our design is based on the later technology and our caster with the stock UCA will be dialed in by a different method due to the universal use with aftermarket control arms. Hopefully this answers your question. Thanks for the inquiry.

Shane

[Mean 69]

It would be REALLY, REALLY nice if you guys forged these units with some extra beef for alternate KAI's, spindle heights, etc. Really nice. REALLY nice.

And by the way, I have seen the CAD drafts, and these units are about as nice as you can imagine. No clue what the FatMan dudes are doing, but it had better be spectacular if they hope to outdo this unit.

Did I say REALLY nice?
M

[protour_chevelle]

Will I be able to run my baer 12 inch brake kit on it? (2 piston calipers)

-Matt

[Blown353]

Tyler,

What balljoint tapers will be offered-- i.e. will us A-body guys currently running B-body spindles be offered a version that will bolt right in without balljoint changes?

Troy

[protour_chevelle]

Oh ya, on the topic of balljoints. Will the tall balljoint swap be of a benefit with these spindles?

-Matt

[dennis68]

I can field that one Matt. Based on the numbers presented so far, yes. The new uprights could still use a little more height so taller ball studs would be advantageous.

[baz67]

The problem with adding the taller BJs is that it may shorten the FVSA too much. It may also have adverse affects to the RCH.

[dennis68]

Not in the case of the A body. Shorten FVSA a little, sure. FRCH will still be in hell somewhere. I increased my design 4" to get FRCH above ground level. The tallest BJ stud Howe offers is only 1/2", enough to make a change but not enough to to make TOO much change. Of course ultimately it is up to the end user to verify all the numbers before deciding, ride height changes evrything.

I'm sure this is why Ty and Shane used the heights they did, to compromise all the applications it was designed to fit. Not too much on one and not too little on the other...somewhere in the middle.

[USAZR1]

If I could add these spindles without spending a lot of funds to adapt my Baer C4 calipers (Track kit),I'm very interested in a pair.

Do you have a ballpark figure for an introductory price?

[TitoJones]

I have been fielding a few questions in my PM inbox, that I thought I'd share here as well, but to answer those who responded:

protour_chevelle- We will either offer an adapter bracket to allow the use of C4 PBR stuff to our spindles, or Baer will have a new abutment (caliper basket) made so you can swap them over. We will keep the board updated as we get more into it.

Blown353- The ball joint tapers offered from us when purchased will match the stock configuration. I'm not too versed on the B body swap, but if I recall, the lower balljoint is the one that is changed correct? The tubular A arms that go with the swap still use a stock upper ball joint if I remember correctly. We can offer you a machining diagram to have the lower ball joint taper reamed out to a certain spec, or you can swap back to a stock lower ball joint.

protour_chevelle- (part2) As far as taller ball joint mods, I think the
A body guys can benefit from this as Dennis68 had stated, but the F/X body cars would not.

USAZR1- We hope to offer a lower cost bracket or adapter to allow the use of current brake systems, as I know a bunch of us here on PT.com have a set of Baer brakes on the car. You will have to change to rotor to a C5 unit for offset reasons, but I think we will be able to get a set of C4 PBR calipers to bolt up with minimal changes to the end user.
Cost wise, I don't want to put the cart before the horse as we haven't been quoted our price per part, but hope to offer them at under $550 a set.

Here is a PM I recieved last night that might clear up some confusion as well:


Hey Tyler, I know you're really busy so i'll make this question quick...


* also available in stock height for use with any geoemtry and control arm configuration. (This means you can use our 'stock' style spindle with the G mod, the DSE coil over mounts, and any tubular control arm, ie GW, DSE, ST, ect.)


Does this mean that the 7/8" lowered spindle is actually designed to work more with stock suspension parts, rather than aftermarket arms? Or would we still benefit the most from having aftermarket arms as well?

Also, I have already purchased a new Ididit column and Unisteer R&P for the front end. Do you see any issues I might run in to geometry-wise? Just figured i'd ask while I was at it.

Thanks for any help you might be able to give me.


You are getting the info confused a bit there Doug.
Both spindles have what is called a 'drop', that lowers the ride height of the car, regardless of springs. Ours drops your ride height by 7/8".

When we refer to the height of the spindle, we are talking about the upper to lower ball joint height. We have one that is stock in height, and one that is 1.4" taller.
The stock height spindle will not change the geometry of the suspension, so it is best suited for those who have already modified their front suspension with the guldstrand mod, the DSE coil over mounts, and/or any aftermarket control arm.

The modified height spindle (1.4" over stock) improves camber gain with minimal tire wear, and doesn't need any aftermarket control arms or upper A arm relocation to get equal results to those who have them.

Both spindles still have a 7/8" drop in ride height.

I don't see any adverse effects of using the unisteer rack and pinion with our spindles, but check the bumpsteer after installation to make sure it is dialed out as much as possible.

If anyone has any other questions, please feel free to respond here or PM me. This stuff can get confusing, so don't feel like you shouldn't ask if you need clarification on anything regarding these spindles.

Tyler

[parsonsj]

Dude! Well done ATS!

Sounds like you'll sell thousands of these. Good luck, and remember us little guys!

jp

[Fuelie Fan]

Is there a minimum wheel size?

What are the options for brakes? Stock? LS1 camaro? Or only corvette stuff?

[Marcus SC&C]

Tyler,what I meant about FatMan going after the less hardcore market it that theirs is a simple bolt on replacement that takes all stock brakes (even drums) and they`re fairly cheap. Just the C5/C6 hub/bearing assys. cost more than their spindles. I`m not knocking them,we`ve been using C5 (and now C6) knuckles and components in our products for several years now! It`s really nice stuff but it`s usually not cheap. The best things in life seldom are. :) Out of curiosity what camber and caster settings are you running on your test car? Is it spring lowered also? Marcus SC&C

[TitoJones]

Is there a minimum wheel size?

What are the options for brakes? Stock? LS1 camaro? Or only corvette stuff?

The brakes and wheel offset is more of the determining factor in wheel selection. If we can find a way to use a 12" rotor with a C4 PBR caliper, and the front wheel backspacing does not exceed 4-3/4", a 16" wheel would be the minimum. Any 16" wheel is going to ba a tight fit with this spindle, and I recommend a good set of 17's, and if you can swing it, 18" rims would be a great addition.

Brake wise-
No stock brakes will work with these spindles. All rotors must be for a C5 corvette (any diameter) and all brake calipers must be able to bolt to a C5 spindle.
Wilwood, Baer, SSBC, AP Racing, Alcon, Brembo, GM, Stoptech, and a load of others make a brake kit that will fit this spindle.

Tyler

[baz67]

Thanks dennis, I made a big mistake and ASSumed he was talking f body. I see that his user name plainly states chevelle.

For BS, when I get home or if Shane stops by my house we will mock up my 17x8.5 with 5.375 BS the check the fitment. That would be as deep as one would want to go. Too deep I fear and I think I may need to use a spacer. I will let you all know.

[protour_chevelle]

Sure starting to add up for us C4 guys which is a major bummer. To run this spindle I would need the new mounts for the C4 calipers, new C5 rotors(4, because the rest wouldn't match then) and then it would be a guessing game if my 16's will clear. They clear really nice right now but by the sounds of it, its gonna be tight.

-Matt

[dennis68]

Hey Matt, I have a system that will clear your 16" wheels, provide you better brakes AND vastly improve your geometry.

1K and a bunch of GN parts. C'mon, I need a guinea pig.

[protour_chevelle]

Oh I'll be a guinea pig alright. PM me the info.

Now, I have no clue if your being sarcastic or not. How many bones am I going to need to spend?

-Matt

[TitoJones]

Alright, you guys have flooded my PM box, some asking for pre-orders, others asking for pics.

Here is an SED spindle, that we intended to re-make, after Stielow gave the 'thumbs up' on a reproduction:

https://www.pro-touring.com/%7Etylerb/SED.jpg

While it worked well at improving geometry, it used a weld on steer arm that made bumpsteer less than optimal. Stielow recommended a 1.5" drop of this arm for better results.
There were lots of you wanting this spindle, but my gut feeling said 'lawsuit' if any of our TIG welds ever failed. We looked at re making this much like the spindles on II Much, out of a solid block of metal.

Shane suggested we look into forged aluminum, and we got a few quotes for the tooling required to make a spindle.
At this point, if we have to re-design the spindle to make a raw forging, we thought why not see wht else we can tweak out of a scratch built spindle design. Right away we decided on a C5/C6 Corvette bearing pack as they are still in production and cheaper to buy from Timken than the C4 units. We also wanted to get the steer arm just right so we made it adjustable in height.

At this point we had the first design of the AFX spindle:
https://www.pro-touring.com/%7Etylerb/AFX1.jpg

We could change track width, change steering arm locations, and ackerman all with different machined spacers. Once we found a setting we liked, we made a 3D model of the spindle. At this point we had a rapid prototype made to do final testing on the vehicle. It turned out sweet, but I can only show you this:
https://www.pro-touring.com/%7Etylerb/AFXtop.jpg

That is enough teasing for one day. Who knows, I may only leave up the small spy shot for a few hours.

Shane is going to kill me :)

Tyler

[Steve68]

Tyler, with all the interest, All the "I want a set" how long will it take to get a set, how many will the forger be able to produce in a run? just checking before I get on the band wagon, I'd hate to put my order in around June and then ATS tell me " where out and the next batch will be done in August" let me know thanks Steve

[enthusiast]

Tyler,

That rapid prototype sounds neat. How did you find somebody that does that kind of stuff? I may need some work like that done in the future.
Thanks man!

[Rick Dorion]

What are the logistics in offering a C4 version for all of us running that setup? It's a big(ger) nut to buy new brakes/rims/tires to go with the C5 setup.

[TitoJones]

Tyler, with all the interest, All the "I want a set" how long will it take to get a set, how many will the forger be able to produce in a run? just checking before I get on the band wagon, I'd hate to put my order in around June and then ATS tell me " where out and the next batch will be done in August" let me know thanks Steve
As many as I ask for. We will be doing a 'small' initial run of 400 spindles (100 sets stock, 100 sets modified) but if the first 50 sell out in under a month, we step up production runs by 3 fold.


Tyler,

That rapid prototype sounds neat. How did you find somebody that does that kind of stuff? I may need some work like that done in the future.
Thanks man!

My Engineer Shane can answer those questions. We usually like to keep our vendors to ourselves but this is a rarely used source, so I'm sure he'll post up.


What are the logistics in offering a C4 version for all of us running that setup? It's a big(ger) nut to buy new brakes/rims/tires to go with the C5 setup.

Rick- I wish it was as simple as changing the machining of the raw forged part, but there are other factors. First would be rotor and hub offset, followed by the raw part having too much space for the C4 caliper abutment (basket) to just bolt up. Fear not, the owners of a C4 style caliper will have an adapter available to them.

Tyler

[Steve68]

Ty, whats the difference between stock and modified, is it the 7/8 drop?? or? I don't remember, I probably know, Steve

[Rick Dorion]

Tyler - you answered my prayers with the availability of an adapter. Now there's a legitimate migration path. Thanks.

[B Schein]

Tyler, Thing sure have changed alot since I talked to a month or two ago. Glad to see you guy decided on the forgings instead of making them from solid "billet" Blanks. This will pay off in the long run price wise compared to the cost of the machine time from solid. I never took very good records of my time when I made the spindles for II Much But I figure it was around 40 hours apiece. That time could be drastically cut if I had production level machinery and made some special tooling. But with your forgings I don’t think you will have more than one-hour machine time into them if that. I have set of cast stainless up rights for the JPIFS that I have yet to machine and I cant see why it would take any more that one hours machine time a piece to get these done.

Good luck I cant what to see them

Brian

[chevymike]

Hey Tyler, I see it keep being metioned that you need (or should) use C5 calipers and rotors. Are these the same at the LS1 F-bodies? I know the calipers are the same but what about the 12" rotors or does the C5 have a different offset? Let me know. Thanks. :cool:

[baz67]

Ty, whats the difference between stock and modified, is it the 7/8 drop?? or? I don't remember, I probably know, Steve

Steve the differance, if I understand you correctly, is the modified spindl is one inch taller than the stock spindle. That way if you have done the Guldstrand mod you can have the benifits of the C5 bearings and brake packages without messing up geometry. The one inch taller spindle messes with the geometry too much when you use it with the Guldstand mod.

[wickedmotorhead]

What baz is meaning to say is the tall spindle is actually 1.4" taller from lower ball joint mount to upper ball joint mount than the stock spindle.

Both spindles have a 7/8" drop (in other words the bearing pack is raised 7/8" to effectively lower your car)

Also as an example for those that do have the Gulstrand mod. It would be an aggressive mod for most and thats one of the reasons we are also doing a stock height spindle. As Brian said to get the added benefit of the C5 bearing pack, brake options, and lets not forget unsprung weight. So in other words, depending on what you want to do with the car we can get you the correct setup. We have tried every geometry that is on the market and know which product does what with both a stock and tall spindle. Let us know if you have any further questions. Thanks.

Shane

[chicane67]

OK....... questions........ goody.. . .

What color are they going to be?? :screwy:

To also further the "messing" comment, it doesnt quite mess up the geometry as it mearly increases the rate of change from a given point. The rate of change in some geometries, is and can be, more or less too aggressive......or not aggressive enough. What we have accomplished with two seperate spindles, is to cover both sides of the coin. On one side there is enough rate of change for something near stock (or a very spirited street car) to the other side being that of a full blown race geometry. In one product.

With two spindles, we cover all the options and have found our little sweet spots with each of them. We are giving you, the end customer, the ability to do what you want...... with what you have...... no matter what your modifications are to this point.

Brian basically meant to say that the rate of increase is pretty darn aggressive, in the consideration of certain components when used together.

[MoeBawlz]

looks awesome... I love rapid prototyping, but what kind did you use? is that an SLS? or is it a plastic prototype, SLA or FDM? although that doesnt look like FDM, but i could be wrong.

Ive noticed that with FDM which is what ive used a lot, there is non-uniform shrinkage that ive had to battle with. Im currently collecting data to try to figure out how much shrinkage goes on from X,Y, and Z exactally. And if you would be willing to share some critical data like hole sizes from the CAD model to the actual prototype that would be greatly appreciated.

sorry for the hijack... :offtopic:

Aside from that though, it looks great.. I cant wait to see more of it.

[baz67]

I guess I should not have said messing. I was thinking more in a street form and the taller spindle and Guldstand mod may be too aggressive for a street driven car. Once again that chicane67 guy explains what I want to say better than I do.

[wickedmotorhead]

That is indeed an SLS DuraformGF (glass filled) rapid prototype. If you go to quickparts.com they have a lot of information for material specs and tolerances for each of the different processes. You can also get an instant quote with an STL file for all the different operations. We made all the machine operations undersized so that we could machine it ourselves with better accuracy. And yes rapid prototyping rocks! I pulled this information from their site....

SLS Highlights:
Ideal for durable, functional parts with a variety of applications. Capable of producing snap fits and living hinges.
Maximum dimension for instant quote: 11”x13”x17”
SLS Material choices include Duraform, DuraformGF and Somos 201.
Standard Tolerances of +/- 0.005" for the first inch, and +/- 0.002" for each additional inch for Duraform and DuraformGF. For Somos 201, tolerances are +/- 0.04" for the first inch, and +/- 0.002" for each additional inch.
In the z height (vertical), standard tolerances of +/- 0.01" for the first inch, +/- 0.002” on every inch thereafter.
Standard Resolution: 0.004”

[makoshark]

Where do I sign up for a set of these things!? Is it first come first serve when they become available?

[BA.]

Well, I'm absolutely sure that I want a set as well, so I'd be interested in when the order taking will start too!

ASIDE FROM THAT, I do have this serious question:
If someone wanted the best suspension possible; one that offers better geometry for a 69 F body that is driven frequently, aggressively and an occasional short track/SCCA meeting, which would be the better option:

1. the new 1.4" taller spindle and 'stock geometry' UCA/LCA and good springs
2. the new 'stock height' spindle, with some aftermarket, geometry adjusting arms and say, the DSE coil-overs.


All thoughts/opinions welcome!

[baz67]

BA.,

That is a tough question because there is no really "best" combo out there. FWIW I am using your second combo. The final details of the exact geometry will be finished sometime soon.

Lets look at your options in what the differences are.

Option 1:
-all bolt on parts
-cheaper

Option 2:
-requires fabrication
-has more static caster options
-easier ride height adjustment
-easier spring rate changes
-more expensive

Remember any rules you may need to comply with to run SCCA.

[MoeBawlz]

That is indeed an SLS DuraformGF (glass filled) rapid prototype. If you go to quickparts.com they have a lot of information for material specs and tolerances for each of the different processes. You can also get an instant quote with an STL file for all the different operations. We made all the machine operations undersized so that we could machine it ourselves with better accuracy. And yes rapid prototyping rocks! I pulled this information from their site....

SLS Highlights:
Ideal for durable, functional parts with a variety of applications. Capable of producing snap fits and living hinges.
Maximum dimension for instant quote: 11”x13”x17”
SLS Material choices include Duraform, DuraformGF and Somos 201.
Standard Tolerances of +/- 0.005" for the first inch, and +/- 0.002" for each additional inch for Duraform and DuraformGF. For Somos 201, tolerances are +/- 0.04" for the first inch, and +/- 0.002" for each additional inch.
In the z height (vertical), standard tolerances of +/- 0.01" for the first inch, +/- 0.002” on every inch thereafter.
Standard Resolution: 0.004”


Excellent, thanks. Yah SLS is real strong, Ive only done FDM here and its fairly strong, I think SLS is the most if not one of the most accurate prototyping methods. We use a program here to estimate build time and cost. luckily my school has the FDM machine and im not paying out my rear end for each prototype i make.

and again thanks for the info.

[Steve68]

Brian and Shane, Yes, I understand, to answer the previous posts I read these the other day, and answered myself but forgot to reply, so when will we be ready to order?? Steve

[Marcus SC&C]

Wow,there`s a LOT of disjointed tech flying around here! There are no magic bullets,geometry is geometry. The 1.4" taller 7/8" drop spindles yield some very good numbers. I ran it with 1" drop springs also for a 1 7/8" total drop. Nice RC height (around 3" depending on several variables), pretty stable laterally (not great but good). Camber gain is mild,roughly -.5/in. *average*. Adding the G mod is not a good thing, it raises the RC too much,and shortens the FVSA dramatically although the camber gain gets pretty juicy (around -.85/in *average*). The numbers on the tall spindle with SC&C tall UBJs are better. RC height about 4" (you really don`t want to go any higher than that as a rule) with about 30% less lateral migration. Camber gain avg. about -.75/in. FVSA is a little short at about 95" but should work fine.
About UCAs. In stock form the UCAs droop,they`re low in their curve. Raising them moves them outward increasing + camber until you reach the apex of their curve,then it goes -. Raise them far enough past their apex to get back where you started and the UBJ will be in bind at ride height because the UCA was designed to keep it level when the UCA was drooping (in stock form). That`s why doing the B spindle swap on A and G bodys practically requires a shorter UCA. I say practically because people will hack just about anything together and drive it. ATS tall spindles will also require a shorter UCA IF you want full alignment range (especially on the - camber side) and full range of travel without UBJ stud bind. It`s not a shortcoming or flaw,just simple geometry.

This looks like a very good design. Taylor,will you be taking on dealers any time soon? I`d be interested in marketing them bundled with application specific adj. tubular UCAs with the tall modular UBJs as an option. Marcus SC&C

[chicane67]

FYI to the masses:

For clairification, the above statement, to be more specific, is A and G body related only. We all know the A and G body's have their inhearent geometrical problems. And if I may comment, in relation to the comments of the A and G body's UCA needing to be shorter, I will just say this...... just wait to see what we at ATS have up our sleeves to answer that problem.

That is all.....

[Blown353]

FYI to the masses:

For clairification, the above statement, to be more specific, is A and G body related only. We all know the A and G body's have their inhearent geometrical problems. And if I may comment, in relation to the comments of the A and G body's UCA needing to be shorter, I will just say this...... just wait to see what we at ATS have up our sleeves to answer that problem.

That is all.....

All I ask guys is please do away with the dreaded shim pack, a-la the Pole Position and other arms. I put my car on a frame rack last time I aligned it and rolled the frame way out because I was out of shims, and even after opening the frame up 5/8" I'm still almost out of shims! A means of adjusting camber/caster without the shim pack would be HIGHLY appreciated.

The odd thing is, my car's UCA mounting flanges were within factory spec, although they had closed up a bit from nominal. Guys with super-high mileage or big-block cars will definately suffer from frame sag, and the added adjustability of an adjustable UCA would be a HUGE benefit and also a selling point to you. Lots of people out there are not willing to fix the root cause of their alignment issues (i.e. roll the frame) so if they can't run your UCA's because they will run out of shims you will lose a sale. Design the adjustability into the UCA itself (getting the shim pack out of the picture) and you now have more interested parties as your parts will now work with sagged frames. Might as well put in the taller UBJ while you're at it for a better compression camber gain.

Marcus, the prelim numbers with the tall UBJ's look very promising... all we need now is a longer UCA/LCA combo so you can run more backspacing and improve on scrub radius a bit (hint, hint.)

Things are starting to look up for us A-body guys. Guess I need to sell my front B-Body Baer setup while the gettin' is good... some ATS spindles, new upper control arms with internal adjustment provisions, and a set of those new Baer 6S calipers are looking mighty nice right about now. Now that a good solution for the front is on the horizon, I suppose I need to get more motivated to find an Elky/Convertible boxed frame and start working on the 3-link out back. :seizure:

I don't know why I need this suspension stuff anyways, my car's steering response seems more tied to right foot input than steering wheel input. LOL. :drive:

[wickedmotorhead]

As a word of caution, I just wanted to point out that this is an open forum and there are people that will give input and opinions in which information can get confusing, cluttered, and/or incorrect. Hense the "disjoint" information.

We WILL be doing a full press release on this product and any package deals as soon as it gets close to having them available for sale. All the correct and tested information for different configurations based off of physical and computer analysis will be on our website or we can be contacted personally for any of your concerns or needs.

I do want to assure everyone that we have looked at all the options and will offer solutions for any circumstance (ie the A/G Body setups). Thus far most of the tech information that I have seen is indeed correct and if you need reasurance please contact a member of the ATS team: me, Tyler, or Chicane personally and we would be glad to clear anything up for you.

Well that's my rant. Marcus, good point out, looks like you've pretty much done your homework, but we already have that covered for the A/G Body platform. Also I will have Tyler contact you about our dealer program since I think we could put together something pretty tight. Thanks again for everyone's interest.

Shane

[wally8]

Wow! It's like dueling infomercials here :-)

Blown353,

These would solve the problem you're talking about. They have about an inch and a half of adjustment:
http://www.speedwaymotors.com/xq/asp/strBase_List./hilt./source.2191/base_no.91034380/str_base_no.000%2DCATALOG+RACE%2C91034290%2C910343 00%2C91034323%2C91034364%2C91034371%2C91034380%2C9 1034386%2C91034393%2C91034395%2C91034397%2C9103441 0%2C91034812%2C91082160%2C91088200%2C91089411%2C91 634034%2C91634039%2C91634045%2C91634309%2C/header_title.Race+Products%2DControl+Arms/page_name.prod%5Flist%5Fdisplay.asp/search_type.L1%7E25/search_option./deptsearch./deptSearch_id.2/dept_id.L1%7E25/dept_id_p.2/dept_name./dept_name_p.Race+Products/ShowImages.yes/sq.0/cont.1/intPgNo.1/redirect./qx/product.htm

ATS,

Are you guys going to roll out some detailed numbers (specs)? It's not like everyone can just go manufacture a spindle so you might as well. Marcus's numbers did help some but more is better.

How about strength? I'd like to see how it compares to tubular fabricated spindles. I've raced those so I know what they're capable of. If you can't do that, maybe compared to a typical stock spindle since I also know how those hold up on a track.


Wally

[wickedmotorhead]

We do have all the hard numbers at our disposal. You'll have to wait to see what we present at the press release, I assure you that you will not be disappointed at the thoroughness and attention to detail that went into the design. We are currently doing the FEA analysis based on true track data so I assure you that it will be strong enough. Also several sets will be going on a few frequent track abused cars to beat on as well. I agree that numbers will help and we do have that information, but we do not want to present a little at a time. We want to show it all at once in a presentable and comprehendible manner with all the corresponding components and packages.

:lol: Infomercial huh?...yeah I'd have to agree.

I wish I could offer them for only $19.95 :hand:

Blown353,

I also will be running long control arms and about 8.25"BS on an 11" rim for the WSS so watch for that. Custom narrowed frame, but hey you already got one foot in, why not jump in the rest of the way!

Shane

[chicane67]

**EDIT** Yeah, what Shane said....... and to add to his comments:

Wally,

Until the release of the product, I dont believe the actual numbers will be disclosed. And you are correct, not everyone can just go manufacture a spindle, but unfortunately, most of the competition is doing just that.

To further this and possibly give you some insight on your other questions concerning strength, the AFX spindle, unlike the tubular, plate construction and other fabricated spindles, have not gone through any FEA analysis or million cycle testing that we are aware of (with the exception of only one company). Our offering surpasses the stringent and even the most critical OEM testing to gain DOT certification as a minimum. To do anything less, would be a gross misjudgement concerning liability.

Trust me, our development chassis is my personal 67...... and I am not very nice to parts. I will abuse any and every part installed onto the chassis so that I may be armed with the knowledge of what parts will and will not take. Not to mention, we will have the emperical data to back our findings as it is instrumented with enough DA to tell me when the sun is shining or not.

I find it kinda funny, that everyone with a suspension program can sit behind a keyboard and bang away at it all day to form their own opinions and theories, but without an actual product and testing it in the real world, these opinions and theories are mearly assumptions. All that can be done with that, is an assertion, without knowing where our 'white paper' starts. The previously stated geometrical numbers for the spindles are just rough numbers. They are not of the final product. But, they are close enough to give some insight to those who understand basic geometry and dynamic kinematics. Thankfully, we do have our fair share of those in our ranks and it is good to see them asking appropriate questions.

It does however, take time to deliver emperical data and until we are comfortable with that information and are confident with this product's public release timeline, I hope that you can be patient with our decision on keeping this information under wraps.

That time is not very far away.....

[dennis68]

I find it kinda funny, that everyone with a suspension program can sit behind a keyboard and bang away at it all day to form their own opinions and theories, but without an actual product and testing it in the real world, these opinions and theories are mearly assumptions.
Quick question Tom, how exactly did Shane come up with the initial design specs for the new spindle? Did he use a crayon and some paper to just throw down some numbers or did he use a very complicated computer program that will quickly compile data and get you really damn close to the end numbers you will eventually unveil?

Just asking as I'm pretty sure all of the big 3 (Chrysler I know for sure) use computer programs to design and evaluate suspension systems and build off those blueprints. I would guess most successful race teams do as well.

I'm sure it wasn't intended as a knock to those who have a pretty good grasp of design theory and know what they are looking at when viewing analysis results, sounded awfully cocky though.

I posted only a few times in this thread to questions that pertain to “A” body geometry as that is what I am most familiar with. It is impossible to design a spindle that will fit multiple applications and optimize each of them equally. It is also pretty egotistical to say that that anyone with an opinion about the specs ATS has released thus far is off base, numbers don’t lie. The ATS spindle is the best thing thus far but is not even close to being the best thing possible.

My congratulations to Tyler and his team for being one of the first to attempt a real fix for 35+ year old geometry problems. I am not knocking what you have done in any way. At the same time I don’t want to see anybody getting slammed for disclosing the results of their own independent analysis. Good luck to you guys.

[wickedmotorhead]

Actually I used chalk and my driveway...all kidding aside. Yes we did use a suspension program as a start. Designing the suspension in a program is a very solid start and from what we found doing the physical testing is it also fairly accurate...but their are factors that are not attributed to the program and that is why we have also done extensive physical testing to back up what the program is spitting out. I understand the Big 3 use programs and design from there, but what Tom is saying is that we also are taking that extra step (as do the OEs) to do real track testing and collecting of data to optimize the setup. Since the AFX spindle is designed for multiple applications it alone is not the "ulitimate" combination for both body styles ALONE, but it still drastically improves both setups to the best of its capabilities and with the help of some components (like in the A body case) it can be obtimized to its full potential.

Obviously we could design a clean sheet spindle that uses custom UCAs and LCAs to reduce scrub and dial in better geometry and make it application specific, but then you get into buying new rims, more components, clearing out your wallet and drastically limiting your market to that one car. Our setup is more than adequate for the ride and handling that most of our customer base is after.

I respect those (like Dennis and Marcus) that do have a good grasp on suspension geometry and how it works and appreciate their input, we just wanted to make it clear that we took every step possible to make sure that real world data matches the computer data and they are not a perfect match. I gave credit to Marcus for his data and I stated that it was close to ours and never implied it was "off base." I also stated that thus far pretty much everything said was legit. We welcome opinions and comments. Thats what this thread is for.

[chicane67]

Actually, it was me with a blue crayon, some toilet paper and a pair of dial venier calipers........

Shane, quit cutting me off. (I just saw Shanes comments, AFTER I wrote all of the following):

:moon: Denny~ I take it you that you felt my comments were directed towards Marcus? Well, make sure you have clean underwear and socks on, because they were not. Just as well as you and I know, Marcus's thoughts and explainations are right on the money. I am not slamming Marcus or any of the big three for using software in their design or analysis process. Nor was anything I said presumed or meant to be read into as being cocky. Yes, we use the wiz bang programs as well. :moon:

Allow me to clarify. You know me. I dont do apples to apples...... unless the second apple was cloned from the first. But there is a trend of all sorts going out and purchasing software, that unfortunately, will not produce the same numbers.

But, for analysis of like models to even be compared, they need to start off of a same, and basic point. Unless all models to be compared are, there will be induced error. For example, if I gave you......say three numbers...... how about 2, 47.962 and 127894. What do you get? The answer is quite simple. You dont know. You dont know because you dont know what I measured or where I measured from for comparison. Unless we share those numbers, anything that you come up with is an assumption. Unless you start from the exact DRH, RH and all associated angles and geometries, it is an assumption. Is it close? I dont know, it may be. But Ill tell you that with the induced error, it may just end up to be like the circle of friends analogy. You wisper a comment into ones ear and by the time it gets back to you, your name is uncle cracker and you just screwed the neighbors cat.

We know that this spindle is not perfect the answer for all. The direction we chose from the get go was to concentrate on the F body. We havent even really gotten started on the final A and G body components yet (component's, yes plural). We also know that the A and G body's require a shorter UCA. Now, if you toss in my eairlier comment about having something else up our sleeves, and the fact that we have Shane in the right environment. He, who is also an A body owner that we wont let outside into the fresh air and sun until our collective minds agree on any final specific component, rest assured the feed back we get from everyone is going into the melting pot.

I too, appreciate all comments. But what you dont know, is that the previously stated numbers for the spindles are just 'rough numbers' and not of the final product. Therefore, anything with those numbers being used is, basically, an assumption. Be it an independant analysis or not, it is still not a like model.

But, Marcus does have this one in the bag and isnt off base at all.........

[dennis68]

I figured it was just a momentary lapse of sanity that made it sound like it did, somebody has to keep you in check.


:bananna2: Stir the pot, stir the pot.

[chicane67]

Why thank you Sir........

[chevymike]

Umm.... with all the talk of geometry this and that, no one answered my question above about brake compatibility. I feel like the red headed step child so here I go again...

Will this spindle work with LS1 ('98-'02 F-bodies) brakes? I know the calipers are C5 ones but will the 12" rotors work or do vettes have a different offset? I already have the calipers, cages and rotors and was going to adapt them over to stock spindles but if these will work, I'll wait for them.

Thanks for the info.... I hope. :)

[Marcus SC&C]

I just re read my last post and some of the others and realized that I didn`t point out that my numbers are based *only* off of stock geometry and the noted changes. The subtle design differences in KPI,offsets etc. are not represented. Don`t anyone take my #s as gospel (at least in this case ;) ). Although it`s good to know I was in the ball park. :)
The comments about the UCAs are based on SLA suspensions in general not this spindle or 1st Gen F cars in particular. For example when I redid the front suspension on a customer`s `46 Plymouth rod and did (among other things) a more radical version of the G mod it was necessary to move the UCA perched inboard more than 1/2" to compensate and keep the camber in the middle of it`s adj. range with 0 camber. You get the idea. Like all rules of thumb there are exceptions though. If the UBJ taper of a taller set of spindles were moved outboard slightly (decreasing KPI) and angled more along the KPI the stock UCAs would work better.
I LOVE outside the box thinking! I`m looking forward to seeing all the little details on these pieces. Marcus SC&C

[wickedmotorhead]

Chevymike,

Sorry we didn't reply back to you earlier. I was waiting to get to the shop today and measure them, but we had a customer in town, so we are going to measure the offsets between the two different rotors and get back to you tomorrow if that's ok. Once again sorry for the delay. Also you are correct about the calipers being the same. Later.

Shane

[chevymike]

OK, great. I just didn't want it to get lost with all the other talk. Thanks and hoping with fingers crossed. :headbang:

[TitoJones]

I've been out of town for a few days, but it looks like my minions have handled the dirty work for me.
Marcus- I'll get with you on the dealer program asap.
Chevymike- Looks good so far, but I'm going to aquire all those parts and mock it up to be 100% sure it will work.

Tyler

[wickedmotorhead]

ChevyMike-
We mocked it up this morning, and I'm sad to say that they will not work. The rotor offset is too deep to clear the brake bracket. If possibly there is a C5 rotor that is 12" in diameter it would work, but not with an f body rotor.

Tyler

[chevymike]

Okay, that's a bummer but at least I know. Thanks for all the time you guys put in to check this. I am still very interested in the spindle so I might just swap rotors and use the calipers/cages I have.

On a different note, so I completely understand correctly, if I have GW upper arms, stock lower arms but have NOT done the Guldstrand mod, the tall spindles will help with the camber/caster curve and not have problems with ball joints, binding or anything else, correct? Thanks again.

[TitoJones]

ChevyMike-
Yep, you have it all correct. Sorry about the 12" LS1 swap fitment, I was hoping it would work out.

Tyler

[pdq67]

Tom,

How much does the front roll center height raise if you raise it say, a 1/2" more?

And is there any way to mount the "pdqCBB" front homemade caliper bracket that mounts the 1988, 'Vette 13" front rotor and big single piston caliper to do this stuff CHEAP!!!

pdq67

[mlr1026]

Ok, I know my roll in all of this. You guys design and I buy. So how much longer is it? Also Marcus, you had replied to my question about what suspension setup I should use on my f-body since I'm going to use these spindles how long will it take to come up with the right combo mixing your products with these spindles? Thanks.

[Marcus SC&C]

mlr1026,we can supply proper adj. UCAs for the ATS spindles right now. How`s that for speedy? :) We`ve been in contact with ATS and may even be doing some collaboration in the future. Marcus