dusterbd13
09-03-2010, 06:41 AM
ok, ill open a can of worms here.....
I'm looking to get my 70 duster to handle a little better. its currently equipped with
.89 T-bars
rubber LCA bushings, poly upper
poly strut rod bushings
adjustable strut rods
73 steering linkage
1 1/8 sway bar
firm feel stage 3 power steering box
boxed LCA's
KYB shocks
17X8 wheels, tires with a 260 tread wear rating
rear is 340 springs
poly bushings
7/8 rear sway bar
1 inch lowering blocks
kyb shocks
the battery is moved over the axle centerline, front end has been lightened with fiberglass hood, aluminum heads, intake, water pump.
the car handles pretty decent right now.
where I'm trying to go:
my daily is a full on FSP prepped S10. tall ball joints, revised control arms, etc. incredible truck. think spec miata.
i would like to get my duster handling about the same. i think i can get there with a budget approach.
there is currently no noticeable body roll in either direction. i lose traction of the rear tires before body roll starts. so the sway bars are probably stiff enough.
it rides pretty good, and has no aggressive tendencies for squat on acceleration or brake dive. has a little bump steer, but tolerable.
my thoughts are going along the budget route of:
tube UCA's for alignment purposes. and tall upper ball joints.
based on the charts from mopar muscle, i think the tall AFCO ball joints would be a good investment to increase my negative camber gain. they are billed as being .200 taller than stock. the F/M/J spindles are about 1/4 taller than the a-body's, so...
(charts will not copy to the forum, so the link is
http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/t...dle_specs.html (http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/techarticles/suspension/mopp_0503_swapping_a_and_b_disc_brake_spindles/spindle_specs.html) )
it looks like i would get the roll center benefits and negative camber gain, without the bump steer by going to the tall uppers. correct? maybe not quite as much, but with less expense and negative drawbacks.
on the upper control arm side, i have way too many questions and options.
what geometry benefits are there to be gained from one UCA over another? from what i understand of suspension design, the main purpose of the UCA is to control the spindle. the motion ratio controls the camber gain and caster change. that's about it. if I'm wrong, please tell me.
so, the options available are
CAP
RMS
Magnum force
SPC
Speedway
FFI
control freaks
XV
Hotchkis
just suspension
with prices ranging from 150-600. if there is no real benefit other than alignment specs, why spend more? if there is, is there a way to tell what the geometry improvements will be with one arm over another?
I'm really trying to figure this out before i spend money on the front suspension again, so help me out here.
michael
I'm looking to get my 70 duster to handle a little better. its currently equipped with
.89 T-bars
rubber LCA bushings, poly upper
poly strut rod bushings
adjustable strut rods
73 steering linkage
1 1/8 sway bar
firm feel stage 3 power steering box
boxed LCA's
KYB shocks
17X8 wheels, tires with a 260 tread wear rating
rear is 340 springs
poly bushings
7/8 rear sway bar
1 inch lowering blocks
kyb shocks
the battery is moved over the axle centerline, front end has been lightened with fiberglass hood, aluminum heads, intake, water pump.
the car handles pretty decent right now.
where I'm trying to go:
my daily is a full on FSP prepped S10. tall ball joints, revised control arms, etc. incredible truck. think spec miata.
i would like to get my duster handling about the same. i think i can get there with a budget approach.
there is currently no noticeable body roll in either direction. i lose traction of the rear tires before body roll starts. so the sway bars are probably stiff enough.
it rides pretty good, and has no aggressive tendencies for squat on acceleration or brake dive. has a little bump steer, but tolerable.
my thoughts are going along the budget route of:
tube UCA's for alignment purposes. and tall upper ball joints.
based on the charts from mopar muscle, i think the tall AFCO ball joints would be a good investment to increase my negative camber gain. they are billed as being .200 taller than stock. the F/M/J spindles are about 1/4 taller than the a-body's, so...
(charts will not copy to the forum, so the link is
http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/t...dle_specs.html (http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/techarticles/suspension/mopp_0503_swapping_a_and_b_disc_brake_spindles/spindle_specs.html) )
it looks like i would get the roll center benefits and negative camber gain, without the bump steer by going to the tall uppers. correct? maybe not quite as much, but with less expense and negative drawbacks.
on the upper control arm side, i have way too many questions and options.
what geometry benefits are there to be gained from one UCA over another? from what i understand of suspension design, the main purpose of the UCA is to control the spindle. the motion ratio controls the camber gain and caster change. that's about it. if I'm wrong, please tell me.
so, the options available are
CAP
RMS
Magnum force
SPC
Speedway
FFI
control freaks
XV
Hotchkis
just suspension
with prices ranging from 150-600. if there is no real benefit other than alignment specs, why spend more? if there is, is there a way to tell what the geometry improvements will be with one arm over another?
I'm really trying to figure this out before i spend money on the front suspension again, so help me out here.
michael