Rear upper control arms, which would make camber and toe adjustable?

 

toe arms are necessary past aroun -8* of camber or something, the stock arms are out of range past a certain point, might be less than -8* as well.

So yes, it is vital if you plan to run a decent amount of camber, toe must be in spec to keep tire wear to a minimum.

Waijai - negative, upper control arms ONLY adjust the upper pivot point for camber. To adjust for more toe, you will need to purchase toe rods as well.

 

So there's camber adjustment from the upper control arm (as in your potential prototype) and from the lower arm (as in the Megan arms). I'm not too knowledgeable on all the suspension components, but what's the benefit of adjusting from upper or lower pivot points?

 

The benefits of adjustable upper and lower control arms is for wheel fitment.

Since the wheel pivots at the center point (the wheel hub) having upper and lower arms that are adjustable allow to run more aggressive wheels and shorten the arm to fit the wheel.



The upper right picture shows the basic layout of how our rear suspension looks, disregard steering rack. If you shorten/elongate the upper arms, the upper part of the wheel will camber in/out of the wheel well for clearance.

Shorten/elongate the lower arm only, the lower part of the wheel will camber in/out, leaving the upper point fixed (to an extent, the change in angle will adjust where the tire hits the fender).

Hopefully that helps you understand, I am not the best at explaining with words.

 

Awesome, thanks for the explanation. It all makes more sense now when I combine it with what "OG" said on VSC.

http://vipstylecars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28662

So with upper arms you're pulling the top of the wheels in, increasing negative camber.

With lower arms you're pushing the bottom of the wheel out, increasing negative camber.

 

Correct! Now to just get more people to hop on

 

hec, i'm ballin' on a budget

 

Well Id be very interested in those arms Mr.Doback. If they do get produced I would certainly buy a set.

 

Mr. Doback,
I had tried to post but this server seems to be worse then ever and it timed out. Anyway, I would be cautious about those arms. The design does not look suitable for a high stress loading and ball joint angle of the lowering you guys are doing. The structure should not rely on the welding in the middle to hold up. It looks quite primitive and not well engineered. The strength should be continuous and the welds should just reinforce the positioning. I would be hesitant to spend anywhere close to $1000 for that design. Just a bit of feedback.

Also for cambering in on the top, unless you offsets are specifically chosen, you might actually start cambering inward too sharply and end up with inward clearance issues. Its an arc length issue and how much the suspension will arc inward during travel not just static stance.

Just my input, at some point maybe I can get parts released.

 

Much appreciated on the feedback, how do you feel about nagisa's design, I have yet to find an arm that is much different than the set above, they all seem to have a similar design.



Is it all relative to where the joints are? Are you saying the design should be more like your 2GS FUCAs, instead of tubular?

 

If you look at the Nagisa arms, they have a continous structure from the front mount all the way to the ball joint. That is correct. The issue I have with the others is that it was 2 sections of tubing welded to a center tubing and that weld becomes part fo the structure vs part of the bracing.

 

Im hoping this will happen sooner than later

 

Just got my Megan arms in...they look and feel pretty quality.

 

bump, still would like some options from FIGS

 

I have a Megan Racing Camber Kit and coil overs I have been playing with the adjustment for a while but I'm still experiencing rubbing on the rear wheels, I'm almost out of adjustment and I think I'm just going to change the wheels all together from 20x10 to 20x9.5