Ridetech Camaro A-arm, stock spindle with Gmod

[juggernaut]

Hi,



Would anyone know if 1st gen Camaro ridetech UCA will work with a stock spindle?

Also, do the crosshafts clear the frame when lowered to the Gmod mounting point?

I'm looking to achieve an autocross alignment by using tubular A-arms and gmod. I like the ridetech arms because they have built in caster + caster slugs and I could upgrade to coilovers/Truturn in the future.

Also, I like the low commitment Gmod with tube arms because the UCA mounts don't need to be trimmed.

[Rod]

Hi,

Would anyone know if 1st gen Camaro ridetech UCA will work with a stock spindle?

yes

Also, do the crosshafts clear the frame when lowered to the Gmod mounting point?

yes

but even with the Guldstrand the camber curve isnt enough to offset the short spindle, you will need at least a .500 tall upper balljoint

[Wall]

Seems like the only affordable alternative would be to use the CPP C5 tall spindles, from what I understand they are not a drop spindle or at least not enough of a drop to cause issues with the tie-rod.

[Rod]

Seems like the only affordable alternative would be to use the CPP C5 tall spindles, from what I understand they are not a drop spindle or at least not enough of a drop to cause issues with the tie-rod.

alternative for what? and the CPP spindles still aren't less expensive than drilling 4 holes and two tall ball joints, I did a lot of comparision and test fitting and track work on several spindles the CPP still isnt tall enough it must be combined with the gmod

here you can see the steering arm hole on the stock and the CPP are in the same location the Fatman/ridetech spindle the steering arm is dropped some to reduce bump steer, all three at sitting inline on the lower ball joint surface




CPP vs Stock



stock spindle height



CPP height




the CPP is a nice peice its a little heavy but preformed well and I do like using a bearing pack, its a cast part and surface rust easly even after it was painted a cast grey

[Wall]

alternative for what? and the CPP spindles still aren't less expensive than drilling 4 holes and two tall ball joints, I did a lot of comparision and test fitting and track work on several spindles the CPP still isnt tall enough it must be combined with the gmod

here you can see the steering arm hole on the stock and the CPP are in the same location the Fatman/ridetech spindle the steering arm is dropped some to reduce bump steer, all three at sitting inline on the lower ball joint surface




CPP vs Stock



stock spindle height



CPP height




the CPP is a nice peice its a little heavy but preformed well and I do like using a bearing pack, its a cast part and surface rust easly even after it was painted a cast grey

You said "but even with the Guldstrand the camber curve isnt enough to offset the short spindle, you will need at least a .500 tall upper balljoint"

If he needs more than a tall ball joint and the Guldstrand mod can give him then the most affordable option would be the CPP tall spindle as opposed to a ATS tall spindle or the ridetech drop spindles. From what I understand you need to run the tru-turn with Ridetech spindles otherwise you have to run a very narrow front tire due to tie-rod to wheel/tire clearance.

[Rod]

You said "but even with the Guldstrand the camber curve isnt enough to offset the short spindle, you will need at least a .500 tall upper balljoint"

Correct, the guldstrad moves the car from a no camber/positive gain to a netrual/negative gain, and is good for a 225-235 tire, but the wider the foot print the more camber gain the tire needs, and at that point, a 245-255 starts to need more dynamic camber gain, and that can not be gained with static camber settings ....so ...tall balljoints become needed...and so as it goes when moving up to a 265-275 and up....the cycle is repeated the need more dynamic camber gain, and that still can not be gained with static camber settings so now tall spindles come into play, (without the tall ball joints)

[Wall]

So what's better?

Guldstand mod + Tall upper ball joints.

Guldstand mod + CPP C5 tall spindles.

Guldstand mod + CPP C5 tall spindles + Tall upper ball joints.


I have wondered if you could do all three without causing any issues but haven't looked into it.

[Wall]

Good info, thanks.

When I asked which is better I was referring to which setup would give you the most dynamic camber gain without causing any issues but you answered that. I realize there's only so much you can do with the stock subframe since the upper and lower control arm pivot points are too far from each other.