The look pretty awesome to me. I called him the other day to ask a few questions and I was real impressed with 1) the knowloge he had and was willing to share and 2) how cool he was to talk to. 3) his products look great!


So is anyone using those? I was going to use the landrum adjusters but these may make that obsolute.
Thoughts appreciated.
:beers:

it doesn't say if the ball joint is a 'howe precision' or not. they are adjustable, but i don't see how they'll help the geometry. aren't the lowers just along for the ride?

FYI - The upper arms are "just along for the ride" also. They can't change the geometry either. All the upper and/or lower control arm can do is be designed to allow more caster by moving the upper ball joint rearward or the lower ball joint forward. The increased caster can in turn improve the geometry by the fact that the additional caster tilt lowers the steering arm mount of the outer tierod and reduces bump steer caused by a normally too high steering arm tierod point.

Personally, I think it makes more sense to move the lower ball joint forward using a modified lower arm than to move the upper ball joint rearward with a modified upper. At least on my car, there is much more clearance for the tire to move slighly forward than slightly rearward.

And if I could afford to replace only one of these I would rather replace the lower that carries the weight of the car against the force of the spring rather than the upper one, that truly is "just along for the ride" and only has to deal with horizontal loads and isn't supporting the weight of the car. I mentioned this to DSE way back when their lowers didn't have the caster gain built in and they said they didn't see a reason to build lowers with the additional caster, since their uppers handled that. Funny, I see that they do build the the lowers like this now.

I never did understand why the initial development all the "additional caster" control arms by numerous vendors focused on the lightweight upper arm rather than the lower arm that could truly benefit from the increased strength of a custom tubular arm.

Ray

PS here is the link to these arms: http://www.scandc.com/spclowerarms.htm


www.geocities.com/hrayhouston

I never did understand why the initial development all the "additional caster" control arms by numerous vendors focused on the lightweight upper arm rather than the lower arm that could truly benefit from the increased strength of a custom tubular arm.



i think we've discussed the lower control arm only weighing 11 lbs. pretty hard to beat for the strength and very hard to justify the cost of an aftermarket one. ever watch those wheel-standing competitions? all have stock lower control arms!

So, are you saying the upper arm weighs so much and is so weak it is worth replacing?

DSE's upper arms cost more than their lowers, so how do you justify their cost?

bling factor and static alignment are the only benefits. i can't justify their cost, so i didn't buy them!

I thought I read that one advantage of these control arms is that they allow a lower ride height with coilovers. It might be worth checking with Mark to verify this. I know he spent a lot of time getting these arms designed and he's generally not one to invest a lot of effort just for the sake of bling.

Don