UCA's only?

[socoken]

Hey everyone,

Im just getting started on my project, and have a couple questions about my 68 firebird front suspension. I have used the search function, and tracked the "suspension" category back some odd 20 pages.

I tore my front end apart this past weekend, and I am now waiting on some parts. Parts I have en route- hotchkis 3" lowering coils, hotchkis bilstein shocks, and 1 1/8 sway bar. I have all new poly bushings for the stock control arms. I have not yet, but was planning on all new steering linkage/ball joints. My question is about upper control arms. I was planning on having my stock CA's powdercoated and reusing them with tall UBJ, but for 100 per set of UBJ plus powdercoating, I can almost justify a set of tubular UCA's instead.

Are tubular UCA's a worthwhile upgrade if the LCA, spindles, and steering remain stock? I have never driven this car on a track, and would like to, but to be honest this will be a road car. Rear suspension is 3" DSE leafs and same hotchkis shocks. I also have not ordered wheels yet, but will be using 18'' hoops to clear the 14'' front brakes (with brackets for stock drum spindles, which is why I want to keep stock spindles)

Is there anything I am missing that I should consider?

My 68 firebird shows 55k miles on the odometer, and the UBJ's were still riveted in, which I am assuming mean OE. Does that mean the car might only have 55k miles, or could it still be 155k?

Im really new to all of this. I had a nice original car sitting in storage when a friend offered me a great deal on a new hot rod SBC. Since then, its been one step forward = two steps back, meaning with every part I take off and upgrade, I find two more I "might as well do, so I do it right the first time!"

Thanks, and I will not be offended if a link to an applicable thread is posted!

Ken

[john31s]

If your just going for a new set of tubular control arms with stock geometry and stock ball joints save your time. The only reason to go with aftermarket UCA is if the move the ball joint or have a taller ball joint. If you just get the likes of a Summit Racing replacement tubular UCA you won't gain anything as far as handling. Should considered the Gulstrand mod, basically moving the mounting points for the UCA down, put a 1st gen guy will probably chime in and set you on the correct path. As far as retaining the LCA with a tubular UCA that is fine.

[cornfedbill]

I agree, if you are only changing the UCA with stock geometry, you are not really gaining anything. Some control arms offer different geometry. Some are designed to work with taller spindles.

I would avoid the low cost control arms that can be found on Ebay or other discount outlets. If you don't have the money for the "good stuff" you will be better off with the stock UCA's. To get a good set of UCA's that will improve the geometry, you will be in for far more than the $100 powdercoating charge.

I suggest the Guldstrand mod and the stock control arms until you have the budget for a set of control arms with the proper spindles as a complete set. I think you will find the Guldstrand mod to be a big improvement. You may be happy with the performance and not see a need to change anything else for now.

[socoken]

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear in my original post. I don't intend to keep original geometry, just mostly original parts. I was looking at quality UCAs in the 5-600 dollar range, just using 200 in powder coat and UBJ as an excuse. I was curious as to the gains I could make in geometry and performance by making only an UCA change. It seems odd to lower a vehicle by 2-3" without necessitating some changes in geometry. I had to remove the drivers side header to get the UCA off without removing the bolt inserts, or whatever they are, so I only want to do this once!

Thanks again!

[cornfedbill]

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear in my original post. I don't intend to keep original geometry, just mostly original parts. I was looking at quality UCAs in the 5-600 dollar range, just using 200 in powder coat and UBJ as an excuse. I was curious as to the gains I could make in geometry and performance by making only an UCA change. It seems odd to lower a vehicle by 2-3" without necessitating some changes in geometry. I had to remove the drivers side header to get the UCA off without removing the bolt inserts, or whatever they are, so I only want to do this once!

Thanks again!

Well that makes everything more clear. Feel free to ignore my previous comments that are irrelevant.

Actually you can lower the car with only a new alignment. But then you still have a car with poor camber curves and instant center locations that will tend to push in corners.

I still believe that, short of a complete system costing thousands of dollars, you will feel the most benefit from lowering the car and moving the UCA mounts as per the Guldstrand template. That, combined with the upgrades you listed, should give you pretty good performance on a tolerable budget.

[Henesian]

You should consider the Pro-Touring F-Body hardware for your Firebird. I have a second gen, and I'm running their UCAs with tall BJs and stock LCAs, and the geometry is fantastic. They have the same thing for the First Gen, but is physically designed a little bit differently. 399.00 for the set with tall UBJs.

http://www.pro-touringf-body.com/control_arms.html

I like them a lot. The only gripe I have is that mine came a tad short, so the closest I can get toward having the tires straight is about -0.5 degrees, but they were designed that way. They have so much negative camber gain, that with the car jacked up at full rebound, it still has a little bit of negative camber. I'm running the stock 2nd gen "tall" spindle, so the first gen will probably be a bit different. But, I would definitely consider them. They give you everything you want in tubular arms at a great price.

[Henesian]

You should consider the Pro-Touring F-Body hardware for your Firebird. I have a second gen, and I'm running their UCAs with tall BJs and stock LCAs, and the geometry is fantastic. They have the same thing for the First Gen, but is physically designed a little bit differently. 399.00 for the set with tall UBJs.

http://www.pro-touringf-body.com/control_arms.html

I like them a lot. The only gripe I have is that mine came a tad short, so the closest I can get toward having the tires straight is about -0.5 degrees, but I bet they were designed that way, so that they're race ready without any shims. They have so much negative camber gain, that with the car jacked up at full rebound, it still has a little bit of negative camber. I'm running the stock 2nd gen "tall" spindle, so the first gen will probably be a bit different. But, I would definitely consider them. They give you everything you want in tubular arms at a great price.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2011/09/IMAG0171-1.jpg

[j-rho]

I'm building my car with stock lower control arms and the SPC adjustable upper control arms. They provide a lot of adjustment potential for camber and caster, without having to use shims.

[Henesian]

But then, with the SPC Adjustable A-Arms...isn't it possible to get it screwed up? Where with shims, you have a certain offset that gives you a certain rate of caster/camber change with a certain shim thickness.

[MrQuick]

If I were to put my money some where it would be in a system that helps improves the geometry. ATS spindles or a Tru Turn system along with a 600 series steering box. Tru turn if you do not wish to upgrade your brakes at this time. Then grab a can of quality epoxy paint for your arms.

Stock arms are fine but if I were to choose between UCA or LCA I would put it in the Lowers. Some brands move the ball joint forward for more clearence between the wheel well and tire when running a lot of caster.