[Lance-w]

I just put my upper and lower Speed Tech arms on this morning. Please excuse the nasty rough subframe in the pictures. I figured I'd test fit everything before I had the subframe blasted and painted it. I did the Guldstrand mod to the upper arm mounts also this morning. In the following pictures I'm going to try and show an interference with the upper arm mounting cross bar and the radius where the upper subframe mount curls inboard. You'll see the two 1/8 inch shims on both mounting bolts. Without those shims the cross bar will not sit flat against the subframe ears. It hits/interferes with the radius at the bottom of that mounting ear. Is this the way they always are and I need to modify that beautiful stainless crossbar or cut some material out of the subframe mounting ear?

The next problem I ran into is that the tire and rim in the picture is a 235-60r15 on a factory 7 inch rally. At full steering lock it hits the upper arm! Does this mean that there's no chance of running anything wider than a 235 with these aftermarket super special A arms? I can't move/space the tire outboard anymore or it will hit the fender lip. I think there was actually more clearance on the factory arm! If anything I was hoping to move a larger rim and a larger tire inboard. Am I doing something stupid here........I can't believe that the arms will only support clearance for a 235 tire..............

Is there another brand of upper A arm that will support a wider tire? Ultimately I want to run a 275-40r17 tire on a 17 x 9 rim. I know I will have to notch the subframe. I have a plan for that but it all goes out the window if I don't have clearance at the A arm for the tire/rim.







Very frustrated, Lance

[davidpozzi]

The rear bolt problem is common with any Camaro with Guldstrand mod. Since you have the subframe bare, I'd warm the offending area with a torch and beat it in a bit.

You will have more shims on the rear bolt when the car is aligned, probably more than 3 shims, so if the inboard shim is shortened, you won't have any issues with the shaft hitting as-is. But it is a good time to deal with it via the torch method and then you don't have to worry about always keeping the short shim against the bracket.

The turn angle test you did won't be accurate unless you have your toe set on both sides. In the photo, the RH side controls a RH turn limit of the left side. You will have more shims on the rear bolt of this setup if you set it at the desired 5+ caster. You probably have 3 deg as set in the photo.

The Speed Tech lower arms have adjustable turn stops in them, so you can limit turn angle with that adjustment and prevent any contact with the upper arms. A first gen Camaro has a bit more turn angle total than later cars. Limiting it a bit won't hurt manuverability as much as doing it to a later model car.

The next best option is the Global West upper arm. I have a lot of fabrication experience and tools, so I wouldn't hesitate in modifying the arms if I were having that problem, but I understand why you wound't want to do it. I would do a bit more checking on your mockup and if it still isn't going to clear, you might see if Speed Tech can change the design and trade you for a redesigned set.

It is a good idea to carefully check for clearance in all aspects of travel. It's a lot easier to deal with issues now than later.
David

[Lance-w]

Will do the torch fix. That's not a big deal.

I also have already thought about modding the arms. Just seems very wrong. They're beautiful the way they come from Speedtech. It's gonna be a crime to cut and hack them Plus it's not like they were cheap I'm also checking all this with the arms hanging down in a fully extended position sitting on the bump stop inside the upper arm. I realize that's worse case but what if that combination happens and it smacks the upper arm = not good. Bottom line it needs to clear thru-out the entire travel range.

If I put the 17x9 on it and adjust so that the outside face of the tire is in the appropriate place to clear the outer fender lip..the rim hits the arm before I get much turn radius at all. Far from a turning radius you could just live with. I'll go put that mock up back together and take a picture. You'll be surprised how little turn you get before it hits. It would take a major re-design of that front tube on the arm to get it to clear.

[Lance-w]

Contact at the rim. I think this would be about a 300 ft turning radius I'm going to space it an inch out like it was a 17x8 and see how far it will turn.

[guccieng]

unless you absolutely have to have the speed tech, these spc arms from sc&c are cheaper and will remedy at least most of your problem. no shims, either!
http://s175.photobucket.com/albums/w...t=118_1827.jpg
http://s175.photobucket.com/albums/w...t=118_1882.jpg

[davidpozzi]

CarlC has those arms and has a 275X17 front tire on the car. Haven't heard of any problems like this. http://www.geocities.com/casanoc/
You aren't likely to see that much droop when driving unless you are cornering while airborne, but I agree you want to clear in any position.

Is the upper ball joint stock height?
David

[guccieng]

Originally Posted by davidpozzi

CarlC has those arms and has a 275X17 front tire on the car. Haven't heard of any problems like this. http://www.geocities.com/casanoc/
You aren't likely to see that much droop when driving unless you are cornering while airborne, but I agree you want to clear in any position.

Is the upper ball joint stock height?
David

the picture shows the extra tall howe precision ball joint without the g-mod, but i belive you can put any stock ball joint in there as well, but you will lose some droop.

[davidpozzi]

He has done the G mod. It's in his first post.
I don't see a need for the tall balljoints if you have done the G mod.
To be fair to Speed Tech, those balljoints were not in production when the arms first came out.
There are also now three lengths of upper balljoints:
1. Stock
2. 1/2" taller
3. 3/4" or 1" taller, I don't know the exact height.
David

[400bird]

I think the whole problem comes from the fact that you are doing all these test with the suspension at full droop
if you set the suspension at ride height you will have tons of clearance (well at least on the upper arm, not at the frame)

[JimM]

Agree with all above.

The shim thing is normal with the g/s mod. another fix option would be to permanently tack the shortened shim to the bracket. I actually used a washer with one side trimmed down.

The SC&C arms will give a LOT more clearance, plus it's really nice not to have to use shims to align.

You do NOT want both the tall joint and the G/S mod. Standard ball joints will give you more clearance.

You don't even want to be looking at this stuff at full droop. Take the springs out, and use a jack to hold her at normal ride ht for clearance checking, raise and lower the jack to simulate jounce and rebound.

[davidpozzi]

A first gen Camaro with G mod will have more neg camber gain than a Second gen, OR a new vette. Adding a taller UBJ in addition to the G mod is going to increase it even more.
David

[killer69]

The problem you are having is that you are hanging the suspension!! the car will only be in that position if the front end is in the air and if that is the case and your wheels are turned i will assume that you have WAYYYYYY bigger problems to contend with than the rim touching the upper arm. like the landing!
if you have any other issues please feel free to call me directly
1-888-467-1625
Blake Foster
president
Speed Tech

[Lance-w]

Originally Posted by 400bird

I think the whole problem comes from the fact that you are doing all these test with the suspension at full droop
if you set the suspension at ride height you will have tons of clearance (well at least on the upper arm, not at the frame)

Yes sir,
I understand your point that at full droop it will maximize the problem. I understand that it will only rarely be in this position. Consider that you are turning right into a steep driveway when entering a parking lot,etc and the right wheel is already on the driveway ramp and the left one is hanging into the gutter. Right there you have full droop with the wheel cranked well on it's way to full lock. My goal is to have a fully functional front end while at the same time maximizing the handling characteristics that 40 years of suspension design have made available to me. At this point I'm not really ready to compromise and have a somewhat functional front end (I might end up there, but I haven't given up on the goal yet).

Lance

[Lance-w]

Originally Posted by JimM

Agree with all above.

You do NOT want both the tall joint and the G/S mod. Standard ball joints will give you more clearance.

You don't even want to be looking at this stuff at full droop. Take the springs out, and use a jack to hold her at normal ride ht for clearance checking, raise and lower the jack to simulate jounce and rebound.

I looked closely at the ball joints that came with the arms and they sure look like standard ball joints to me.

The spring is out. I figured it would be much easier that way to test fit and cycle it through it's range.

Also something I haven't mentioned yet is that I have only taken one side of the car apart so I still have the other "stock" side controlling the "lock to lock" measurement. I have the sub-frame sitting on four jackstand on the floor of my garage (the best way I could think of mocking it up since the body is on a rotisserie next to it).

[Lance-w]

Originally Posted by killer69

The problem you are having is that you are hanging the suspension!! the car will only be in that position if the front end is in the air and if that is the case and your wheels are turned i will assume that you have WAYYYYYY bigger problems to contend with than the rim touching the upper arm. like the landing!
if you have any other issues please feel free to call me directly
1-888-467-1625
Blake Foster
president
Speed Tech

Yes sir,

400Bird had the same response above with respect to the full droop. I answered with a scenario that would cause it without jumping the car .
I would just suck to have the A arm tube get smacked and beat up. I've only just begun (one day so far) to experiment with all these parts and maybe I'll figure out a way to get the combo of parts to work together. I'm going to try to get out there later today and look and experiment with different positions and achieve a greater understanding of my problem and ways to fix it or resign myself to what I can't fix.

Thank you very much for the offer to call you directly. Right now I don't really understand the problem myself well enough to get the most value out of a conversation with someone like yourself. Maybe after I study the problem more and have a greater understanding of it's dynamics I will give you a call.

Lance