20 replies to this topic

[Toranamat69]

You will likely need to remove the round spacers from the top control arm bolts on the LX front end and will definitely need a wheel alignment.

[Bigfella237]

G'day Mark,

 

Pictures would be a big help, I assume you're talking about excessive negative camber? Are you just eye'ing it off or are you measuring?

 

Is the K-member installed in the car and not bent? Is this before or after a wheel alignment?

 

Is it only one wheel or both? How much camber are we talking about? How many shims are installed between the UCA and the K-member? Are the shim packs roughly equal on both sides?

 

And just how low is it (if it's sitting on the bump stops the angle of the control arms will induce extra negative camber)?

[76lxhatch]

The springs sound like they would be the bulk of the problem, definitely bring it up to ride height before going any further, whether that means getting the right springs or putting some blocks under the cross member.

[axistr]

Generally speaking when you lower the front suspension the cambers will move towards more positive camber. If you have camber reading of 88.5 you only have 1 1/2 degrees negative.   

[76lxhatch]

I don't follow axistr? With the upper control arm in the lowest position (LX RTS noted above), the arm should be above level at low ride heights and even if the lower is on the same angle due to it being shorter than the lower it also moves inboard more - that would give more negative camber

[axistr]

Yep I agree, in theory the different length in the arms dictate what you said. But in reality sometimes the figures don't indicate this.

The photos show the maximum height, standard ride height, 1" lower and on the bump stops. As I said Generally speaking, but it can depend on many variables.

 

Its a bit hard to see the numbers but at maximum height (top right) it had close enough to zero camber and slightly increased towards positive camber the more the suspension compressed.

Attached Files

•  IMG_20150421_161045_483.jpg   25.19K   10 downloads
•  IMG_20150421_161204_366.jpg   27.68K   8 downloads
•  IMG_20150421_161446_590.jpg   26.16K   5 downloads
•  IMG_20150421_161520_487.jpg   26.73K   6 downloads

Edited by axistr, 21 April 2015 - 05:02 PM.

[axistr]

The easiest way to check If you have a fair amount of bend in the stubs is to visually check the brake disc rotor to calliper alignment.

 

Mark is it easy for you to check the measurement between the two faces that the top inner control arms bolt to, to make sure the K-frame isn't bent inwards at the towers. Are you sure there are no shims or washers between the top control arm mounting bars and the K-frame ?. 

 

Raising the front will also improve the cambers giving less negative camber.

 

Sorry but in my previous post I may not have explained properly and confused people. If the car is jacked up and the suspension is drooping the camber will go towards negative camber. As the suspension is compressed or lowered from this point the camber will increase towards positive  camber to a point where the maximum positive camber gain is somewhere between  the standard Torana ride height and 1" lower. Lowering the car further than this height will see the camber falling again towards negative camber.

If I plotted a camber graph the graph would look something like an "S" In the photos I started with zero camber at full suspension droop (no shims RTS position). At standard ride height the camber was approximately 40 minutes positive. At 1" lower than standard approx 15 minutes positive, and between these two points I got a reading of 55 minutes positive camber.  On the bump stops(bottomed) I had close enough to zero or just a couple of minutes positive camber.  

 

If you feel that you car is a bit to low raising it up a bit will help to improve the negative camber you have.

 

Hope I have explained it better this time around.  

[76lxhatch]

axistr's photos have me a little stumped, appears that the first must be ride height @ +0.8 deg, second full droop @ +1.0 (?), third low @ -0.1 and fourth full bump @ (wild guess) -0.9??

edit: sounds like that last measurement is something else, you are saying that at the very limit of compression it comes back a bit toward positive? Looking at the arm angles that probably makes sense as the lower arm is well past horizontal and starting to head inboard more quickly


But back to the OP, are my eyes deceiving me or are those WB brakes so HQ-WB stub axles...? If so that would be about normal for that height, the KPI difference is a pain

Edited by 76lxhatch, 21 April 2015 - 07:56 PM.

[TerrA LX]

Mine sat the same with HQ stubs and no shims.

[axistr]

Correct 76lxhatch.

I recon you might be right and 1965mjr is actually running HQ stubs this would explain the greater than average negative camber reading.

[S pack]

Mark, can you put up some better pics of the upper control arms and also where the UCA pivot shafts bolt up to the crossmember.

 

Cheers

Dave.

[S pack]

Problem is you only have camber adjustment available in one direction - NEGATIVE.

I was hoping you would take the front wheels off and take pics of both UCA's.

 

I suppose what I wanted to see was if you have the right and left UCA's installed on their correct sides.

 

Cheers

Dave.

[WhiteA9XS]

 Take Axistr advice  , measure the distance between the top control arm mounting holes , this will pinpoint if your Kframe is banana,d . its a common problem when heavy duty springs and potholes are combined. 

 

 Sorry i can,t find my diagram with all the factory frontend measurements , will keep looking and post .

 

 Re Daves comment , just check upper balljoint is offset rearwards not forward , would think this would affect caster instead of camber though , although i haven,t tried this  .