Enter your username:
Do you want to login or register?
  • Forgot your password?

    Login / Register



    Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
    Results 41 to 60 of 67
    1. #41
      Join Date
      Apr 2001
      Location
      Central CA USA
      Posts
      6,108
      Country Flag: United States
      I thought I'd update this thread by posting new data on 2nd gen Camaro tall ball joints: http://www.pozziracing.com/second_ge...o_tall_bal.htm
      I'll post a new thread on it but wanted to stick this link in here too.
      David


      67 Camaro RS that will be faster than anything Mary owns.


    2. #42
      Join Date
      Mar 2010
      Location
      Orlando, FL
      Posts
      266
      Country Flag: United States
      dave, have you tried the gmod and a taller b-joint together? just curious

    3. #43
      Join Date
      Nov 2008
      Location
      Lawrenceburg, TN
      Posts
      4,083
      Country Flag: United States
      Quote Originally Posted by LV42DAY View Post
      dave, have you tried the gmod and a taller b-joint together? just curious
      me too

    4. #44
      Join Date
      Jul 2005
      Location
      Den Helder, the Netherlands
      Posts
      1,148
      Country Flag: Netherlands

    5. #45
      Join Date
      Oct 2006
      Posts
      261
      Wondering if there's any kind of discount code for us PTers?

      Robert

    6. #46
      Join Date
      Nov 2008
      Location
      Lawrenceburg, TN
      Posts
      4,083
      Country Flag: United States
      Quote Originally Posted by neki67 View Post
      G-mod and 2nd gen F-body????????
      the thread started out talking about 1st gen and tall ball joints, some how we got a lot of info on 2nd gens also which is awesome since I have one of those now also!

    7. #47
      Join Date
      May 2002
      Location
      Northern California
      Posts
      10,715
      Country Flag: Bosnia Herzegovina
      Hey Rod, when are you going to start stocking these at Got's?


      Vince @ Dreamspeed
      MrQuick ΜΟΛ'ΩΝ ΛΑΒ'Ε

      https://www.pro-touring.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=4&dateline=1323422564
      Follow us on Facebook

    8. #48
      Join Date
      Nov 2008
      Location
      Lawrenceburg, TN
      Posts
      4,083
      Country Flag: United States
      Quote Originally Posted by MrQuick View Post
      Hey Rod, when are you going to start stocking these at Got's?


      Vince @ Dreamspeed
      we wont stock any protour stuff till maybe summer, Ted and Joe really want to Get a Dragster back on the track! I also need more of your cards so I can send more cars your way!

    9. #49
      Join Date
      Oct 2010
      Location
      kansas city Missouri
      Posts
      53
      Country Flag: United States
      Quick question: Since tall lower ball joints would lower the car by raising the lower "A" arm by 0.5", should not all measurements for the tall lower ball joint tests be re-adjusted upward from "0" ride height since zero actually equalls a -0.5 drop? In other words; 0" = -0.5", -0.5" = 1.0", -1.0" = -1.5"etc.

      The measurement graphs of tall lowers makes me wonder why theres is no additional gain with more "A" are separation?

    10. #50
      Join Date
      Oct 2010
      Location
      kansas city Missouri
      Posts
      53
      Country Flag: United States
      If the above is true, i would think the tall lower is actually superior since it provides the same negative camber in bump AND less positive camber in droop. thus manitaining a higher tire contact patch in both extremes.

      am i wrong? am i missing something?

      joe c

    11. #51
      Join Date
      Apr 2001
      Location
      Central CA USA
      Posts
      6,108
      Country Flag: United States
      All measurements were taken relative to the same ride height, not LBJ position. I started each test with the spindle the same height from the floor. Taller lowers helped a small amount but made bumpsteer worse.
      67 Camaro RS that will be faster than anything Mary owns.

    12. #52
      Join Date
      Oct 2010
      Location
      kansas city Missouri
      Posts
      53
      Country Flag: United States
      Quote Originally Posted by David Pozzi View Post
      I started each test with the spindle the same height from the floor.
      Does that not represent the suspension in droop sinced the tall lowers would lower the car by 0.5" (or raise the spindle 0.5")?

      im in no-way a suspension expert, just trying to convert your test results to my limited knowledege of where the curve would start wth the lower ride height tall ball joints create.
      Last edited by clancj; 02-13-2011 at 08:35 AM. Reason: further claity

    13. #53
      Join Date
      Oct 2010
      Location
      kansas city Missouri
      Posts
      53
      Country Flag: United States
      Quote Originally Posted by David Pozzi View Post
      . Taller lowers helped a small amount but made bumpsteer worse.
      I dont have bump steer now w/tall PPM uppers. Could bump steer be compensated for by returning the ride height after installing tall lowers (if it appears), by taller springs or spring pocket spacers?

      i'm starting to lean toward not installing the talls on the lower. With hotchkiss front springs, i dont think there's much bump going on in flat autocross courses, i just couldnt get enough negative camber last year. This year i went to a 265 18 35 on a 9" rim (from a 245 40 17 on an 8" rim) up front and dont want to eat the outers with insufficient neg camber. im hoping the 245's were rolling over and the 265 18 35 plants better (car is autocrossed 99%) rarely street driven.
      Last edited by clancj; 02-13-2011 at 09:26 AM. Reason: further clarity

    14. #54
      Join Date
      Oct 2010
      Location
      kansas city Missouri
      Posts
      53
      Country Flag: United States
      Quote Originally Posted by David Pozzi View Post
      All measurements were taken relative to the same ride height, not LBJ position. I started each test with the spindle the same height from the floor.
      Nevermind, i'm an idiot: spindle height is set by the wheel. i just hit me.

    15. #55
      Join Date
      Apr 2001
      Location
      Central CA USA
      Posts
      6,108
      Country Flag: United States
      I don't know if I posted a pic, but the way I did the tests was on a 69 Camaro with no front sheet metal, I raised it up on jackstands and set the spindle height relative to the lower control arm on the subframe. I wanted to keep the ride height starting point for "0" the same for each test.

      Adding .5" taller lower ball joints spaces the lower ball joint down .5" raising the instant center height, (the intersect of lines drawn through the upper and lower A arm pivot points. A higher IC is going to reduce neg camber gain curve a little so there is less gain than you would expect from adding the tall lower ball joint. I haven't modeled this, so I'm just speculating what the reasons are here. On a Camaro that is lowered a LOT, the .5" taller lower ball joint will increase bump travel by .5" and that may help prevent bottoming out, but not to say the headers or something else won't bottom out before that is an issue.
      David
      Last edited by David Pozzi; 02-14-2011 at 01:45 PM.
      67 Camaro RS that will be faster than anything Mary owns.

    16. #56
      Join Date
      Apr 2001
      Location
      Central CA USA
      Posts
      6,108
      Country Flag: United States
      Latest news.
      Power Performance has changed it's name to Proforged L.L.C http://www.proforged.com/
      They are coming out with .5" taller outer tie rod ends. I have tested them and incorporated the results into my spreadsheet below.
      The optimum combo is .5" tall upper ball joints, with .5" taller outer tie rod ends.
      To put a little pressure on the boot, you can cut a 1/2" slice of neoprene hose and slip it over the ball joint stud. There have been some issues with the bolt pattern, especially with aftermarket A arms, usually two holes need some filing to fit. I had similar issues with the Howe uppers. If your ball joint won't fit through the hole in the A arm, bolt it in from below.
      David
      Last edited by David Pozzi; 07-18-2011 at 06:09 PM.
      67 Camaro RS that will be faster than anything Mary owns.

    17. #57
      Join Date
      May 2011
      Location
      Central FL
      Posts
      216
      Thanks for the update David. I thought the bolt pattern issue was with both factory and aftermarket A-arms.
      - David
      1967 Camaro - In remembrance of my friend Scott

    18. #58
      Join Date
      Jan 2008
      Location
      Long Beach, Ca
      Posts
      1,564
      Country Flag: United States
      Well, I posted a reply, but its gone now... Weird

      Anyways. David, did you happen to notice how much of the steering arm contacted the steering stop on the LCA with the tall LBJ installed? I have tall LBJ on my Nova and the arm only contacts the uper 1/4 of the steering stop hump; and that is after my LCA relocation, which should make this issue better. I would imagine on a stock subframe the arm may not contact the stop at all?
      Jon Rasmussen
      Ex Team OLJ.
      '72 Nova

    19. #59
      Join Date
      Apr 2001
      Location
      Central CA USA
      Posts
      6,108
      Country Flag: United States
      Quote Originally Posted by MyFriendScott View Post
      Thanks for the update David. I thought the bolt pattern issue was with both factory and aftermarket A-arms.
      It's a little worse on the GW uppers I tried them on. The factory upper I used for the test needed filing on two holes.
      67 Camaro RS that will be faster than anything Mary owns.

    20. #60
      Join Date
      Apr 2001
      Location
      Central CA USA
      Posts
      6,108
      Country Flag: United States
      Quote Originally Posted by Nessumsar View Post
      Well, I posted a reply, but its gone now... Weird

      Anyways. David, did you happen to notice how much of the steering arm contacted the steering stop on the LCA with the tall LBJ installed? I have tall LBJ on my Nova and the arm only contacts the uper 1/4 of the steering stop hump; and that is after my LCA relocation, which should make this issue better. I would imagine on a stock subframe the arm may not contact the stop at all?
      Jon, I didn't look at that issue when testing. I'll check it out.
      David
      67 Camaro RS that will be faster than anything Mary owns.

    Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast




    Advertise on Pro-Touring.com