Upper & Lower Control Arm discussion

[MrSmithsTB]

Bill, have you given any thought to the UCAs manufactured for the lowered vehicles? We east coasters had a set laying around and played a little bit. It looks like they will do the job of correcting the ball joint angle if they are inverted and put on the opposite side. I plan on getting a set of them to test once I finish up some service and get back to work. They might also allow for more suspension lift....


Nice tires, I read up no those things and they are simply bad ass.

[Zero]

I have a custom 4x4 shop up here taking a look into upper control arms for us. I have to see him tomorrow. If I am not in too much pain from my accident.

[OregTrailBlazin]

Icons are giving me a taller rest height in the front, even with the adjusting collars all the way down. So the camber is out of spec and can't be brought back in without fabbed upper control arms..

Really!!! You can't get those in spec!! Did you put on a top-spacer like you were talking about? I assume when you say the collar is all the way down, you mean up?!!?? Maybe I should trade you until I can get those things dialed in right..
I just sent another request to Camburg Racing for control arms. Hopefully I will hear something back this time.

[fishsticks]

I have a longtime friend who does all the suspension and chassis fab for a place that builds scale Formula 1 cars. I actually talked to him about UCAs last weekend. He's willing to take the project on during his off time. I need to pick up an extra set of UCAs to work off of. Also would love input from the folks in the know here.

(I sense a new thread coming.)

[HARDTRAILZ]

Both my rear ones are dented. Anyone thinking about something for the rear to push the axle back an inch or 2?

Tecore had some discussion of the control arms. Alek has some research involved already if he is willing to share.

[fishsticks]

Both my rear ones are dented. Anyone thinking about something for the rear to push the axle back an inch or 2?

Tecore had some discussion of the control arms. Alek has some research involved already if he is willing to share.

We looked at the rears too, since my rear wheels sit so far forward in the wheel well. He said those would be easy. Hopefully I'll have a longer set to try out soon.

[MrSmithsTB]

Rears should be a simple thing to fabricate, since the geometry is easier to accommodate. But about the front, has anyone seriously looked at the DJM arms sold for lowered trailvoys?? As intended, they will correct the angle for lowering in excess of 2". Inverted and flipped, they should do the same thing for lifts in excess of 2". Since they are made for out platform, there is really nothing more to do than bolt them up.

Check out this thread on the OS. This is what they looked like on a vehicle lowerwed 2", with the arms installed upside down and on the wrong side. No picture that setup 5" higher. Ball joint issue corrected.
   TrailVoy Thread  

[fishsticks]

That's a possibility, but DJM's website says they won't sell individual parts.

No way am I paying 600 bucks for a box full of lowering crap that I'm throwing away.

[MrSmithsTB]

The owners of the TBSS owners site sells the arms individually. $350 shipped.

He also sell adjustable upper and lower rear control arms.

It also wouldn't hurt to check the classifieds on their site, as a lot of people are starting to trade in and sell these parts off.

[fishsticks]

Ugh my head hurts after reading that thread.... but it looks like he'll sell unmodified ones for 310 shipped.

We don't need the notching and I have a drill press that I can make the bolt hole bigger with.

[The Roadie]

I have a spare set of OEM UCAs, after I replaced mine with Dormans. Bushings are shot. I think I loaned one to Teebes. Gotta search the takeoff parts pile this weekend. If Neil isn't going to do it, they're available for the next most worthy applicant.

[MrSmithsTB]

If I can find a local fab guy with some time, I may have interest in that. Spent some of the night investigating the DJM arms. They will work, but they would need to be modified. They are 1" longer than stock arms to keep the camber in spec as the LCA is pushed out. In order to keep the camber in spec for an equivalent lift, the arms will need to be 1" shorter than stock, or 2" shorter than the DJM arms. Finding an inexpensive set and sectioning out 2" would do the trick, and the ball joint angle should be right as rain.

[fishsticks]

In order to keep the camber in spec for an equivalent lift, the arms will need to be 1" shorter than stock, or 2" shorter than the DJM arms.

Negative ghost rider. We can use the extra 1" of length on the UCA. The tops of our wheels get pulled in as the suspension extends, similar to what happens to the lowered guys. The balljoint end of the UCA is past the fulcrum in the opposite direction for us.

Bill, if you're willing to ship (I'll pay) and don't have a better offer, I can send them over to my friend (ironically also named Bill).

[Zero]

i have a set of LCA's if those are ever in need, let me know.

[MrSmithsTB]

In order to keep the camber in spec for an equivalent lift, the arms will need to be 1" shorter than stock, or 2" shorter than the DJM arms.

Negative ghost rider. We can use the extra 1" of length on the UCA. The tops of our wheels get pulled in as the suspension extends, similar to what happens to the lowered guys. The balljoint end of the UCA is past the fulcrum in the opposite direction for us.

Bill, if you're willing to ship (I'll pay) and don't have a better offer, I can send them over to my friend (ironically also named Bill).

That's what I initially thought as well, but did you take a look at your front end before getting an alignment after lifting? I don't know about your truck, but my wheels git sucked under a little bit. Kinda like this:


Now correct me if I am wrong, but an extra inch up top would angle the wheels even more severely making it even harder if not impossible to align. Therefore, one inch less would bring the camber closer to spec, making it much easier to achieve a true and hassle free alignment.



Also, I think this might be a good time to split off the discussion into another thread. Mods? Where are you?

[bartonmd]

That's what I initially thought as well, but did you take a look at your front end before getting an alignment after lifting? I don't know about your truck, but my wheels git sucked under a little bit. Kinda like this:


Now correct me if I am wrong, but an extra inch up top would angle the wheels even more severely making it even harder if not impossible to align. Therefore, one inch less would bring the camber closer to spec, making it much easier to achieve a true and hassle free alignment.



Also, I think this might be a good time to split off the discussion into another thread. Mods? Where are you?

If the upper control arms are shorter than the lower ones (which I think they are on ours), we would benefit from longer ones...

Mike

[fishsticks]

That's what I initially thought as well, but did you take a look at your front end before getting an alignment after lifting? I don't know about your truck, but my wheels git sucked under a little bit. Kinda like this:


Now correct me if I am wrong, but an extra inch up top would angle the wheels even more severely making it even harder if not impossible to align. Therefore, one inch less would bring the camber closer to spec, making it much easier to achieve a true and hassle free alignment.



Also, I think this might be a good time to split off the discussion into another thread. Mods? Where are you?

If the upper control arms are shorter than the lower ones (which I think they are on ours), we would benefit from longer ones...

Mike

They are significantly shorter. Just looking at them on my truck at resting height it's apparent how much we could benefit from an extra inch of length in addition to an angle change at the balljoint.

We should get some camber adjustment back as well. In effect we have the same problem as lowered guys. Their UCAs are angled too far above the fulcrum. Ours are angled too far below. Both scenarios cause the top of the wheel to come towards the center of the truck.

[MrSmithsTB]

Not trying to sound all knowing, but are you guys thinking this through before committing to your theory? Here is how I understand it........ When we lift, we run into positive camber issues that must be corrected by getting an alignment. Fortunately we have enough LCA adjustment to allow for this. Next problem is the ball joint angle. To correct this alone and do nothing else to the UCAs will push the wheel out further still, requiring more camber adjustment(which we may not have). Adding another inch of length to the UCA will push the wheel even further away, requiring MORE camber adjustment. So how is a shorter UCA not the solution?

[Trail X]

I think the definitive answer comes to where are the LCA mounting brackets for alignment. If they are pushed in max for camber alignment, then we could use longer UCAs. If they are pulled out max for alignment, then we could use shorter UCAs. I beleive they are pulled all the way in towards the engine for alignment, which implies we need longer UCAs.

But that goes against what Bill and Bob have said - about wearing on the outside edge of the tires, and about having positive camber after lifting. Bob, your camber may have been positive after your lift because you went from lowered to lifted. Big difference between that and going from stock to lifted (which results in negative camber).

[MrSmithsTB]

I didn't get aligned last time I lowered, Or else I know that would be the issue. I have had positive camber both times I lifted. My alignment shop even told me they had to pull away from the engine. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I'm grown up enough to admit it. But I think I have enough evidence to support my theory.


I guess i'm just going to have to pick up a set of the longer ones and put them on to see whether or not they need to be shortened....