|07-14-2006 03:08 PM|
[QUOTE=Bryan59EC] This is the right hand arm and to get pos camber, the control arm shaft is shimmed to the inside of the car.
My big dumb mis-statement should read:
This is the right hand arm and to get pos camber,
Shims are removed allowing the arm to move outward
Shims beween the frame and control arm shaft=neg camber
(had to mill .125" from mounting bosses of shafts to get even close to 0*cam
|07-14-2006 01:36 PM|
|matt167||if you arn't happy with the allignment results then get a castor/ camber gauge that measurs in degree's ( not the bubble leval 1 that sells for $40 ) and a tape measure and a friend, because you can ajust toe in/ out by measuring across the front of the tires and rear of the tires to get a toe in/ out measurement, ajust the tie rods until the front and rear measurements are equal, primative way but it does work.|
|07-14-2006 01:29 PM|
Tony @ air ride e-mailed me and told me he was baffled.
Personally I think the pics I sent him this week showed what my issue was
The pic here is of my stock control arm on top of the tube arm.
it seems obvious to me that the ball joint spot is negative camber (ed) and neg caster (ed). This is the right hand arm and to get pos camber, the control arm shaft is shimmed to the inside of the car.
I have given some serious thought to returning to the stock arms. However, with the 454 there is only about 3/8" or ledss clearance between the front of the arm and the header @ the #1 exhaust port. If my next alignment trip does not make me happy, I will probably put the old arms back in...Just not too keen on the idea of changing a bushing every 6mo due to heat deterioration.
The car in question is the one in my avatar--there is absolutely no rake to it at all (well--maybe 1/4" front to rear at the rockers).
The T/A radials are actually about 5 years old so I am not sure if they fall into that catagory of crappy tires or not. Before I disassembled the car-it drove just fine--but it now has a different frame and has been lowered with spindles.
The front springs are new TRW 6004 (heaviest spring for this app.) and the rear are old sagging original 6cyl belair springs (gave me the height I was looking for)
I had never thought that the rear may be an issue, perhaps it is something i should look into. All bushings and shocks are new. This was a body off project.
Thanks for listening
That ruler stayed in the same place on all pics---(i marked the floor) passenger side of car is level at rocker---ruler is at a 90*angle to the car (plumb)
|07-14-2006 01:28 PM|
|matt167||I'm no expert on alignment but I did have to learn about all the angles, and I'v done a couple allignments at the autoshop class I took with a John Bean system. toe in/ out does not need to be 0, it should be but as long as the 2 tires read the same, they are good, otherwise you will get a pull. caster is a non tire wearing angle that helps the wheels return to center, and camber is ajusted for road crown, so the road don't cause a pull like it will with 0 camber, usally put a couple * negative on the right to compensate for road crown.|
|07-14-2006 01:21 PM|
To Go Straight..***with Driver In The Car***set Cas. @ 0 & Cam@ 0
Tr 1/8 In Total...good Luck
|07-14-2006 12:12 PM|
There are several things to consider.
Ride height, stock suspension?, tire type, anti-roll bar stiffness.
Front end alignment is not just the readings to "the vertical world" but the relationship of the suspension components to the chassis. Chassis rake changes the caster readings. +1* caster with the rocker panels level, then rake the car 2*, and the caster will read negative 1* caster... So if you have a lot of rake and try for 1* caster, the relationship of the suspension to the chassis/frame has changed greatly and bump steer will be affected.
Just remember when you change the caster any great amount you begin to affect the bump steer and roll steer characteristics of the front suspension, because the steering arm changes relationship to the chassis components/ idler/pitman arm. 2* caster with rake might make it drive squirrelly.
(roll steer= Say in a left hand corner as the body rolls to the right, the right front suspension compresses and does toe out, and the left suspension raises and toes in. So as the car increasingly rolls to the right in a corner the steering automatically is turning the tires to the right trying to straighten out the steering. Chassis engineers designed it this way 40-50 years ago. Have you ever watched a car pick the front wheels at the drags? As the wheels come up they camber way in at the top and the tires toe IN, when the suspension compresses the camber comes out at the top and the tires toe back straight or OUT...... that is why so many are squirrelly when changing gears and getting a lot of front end lift and body roll. The toe is always changing..... ye haw. Remember the straight axle gassers from the 60s era? More lift, less weight, and NO TOE IN CHANGE)
Does the control arm manufacturer have any recommendations?
Off hand, I would shoot for 0*+.1* camber, +1* caster, and from 1/16 to 1/8 toe-in. You might try a toe change from zero to 1/8 now as the only change to see how it drives. Most radial tires don't need much toe in, but it depends on the suspension type.
60s Fords with the forward strut type front suspension with that big rubber bushing in it needed more set toe-in because the suspension moved around so much for good ride. The wheels moved rearward 1/4 inch when driving at speed due to rubber compression.
Another thing I discovered is that new poly bushings in the rear end will eliminate MOST of the wierd feelings when cornering. People blame it on the front when it is really the rear end shifting around.
I have had a couple people drive my early 60s Ford in the mountains and they asked me what kind of rack and pinion/suspension conversion I had put in. They are shocked to find the stock front and rear ends with poly bushings= just set up well.
Sorry, didn't intend to turn this into a book.
edited: One final note.... by actual experience. Some tires drive squirrelly and some tires are great (H-V rated performance tires) when tried on the same car. I needed a quick set so I slapped on the identical size S speed rated Radial T/As and it drives like %^&*.
|07-13-2006 04:05 PM|
59 chev alignment
After getting input from so many on how much camber is too much, I'm considering locating another alignment shop to redo my alignment.
The factory specs are calling for 1/2* pos camber & 1/2* pos caster
1/8" to 1/4" toe.
Im going to try to get a bit more caster, but with the tubular upper a-arms I think any chance of getting positive camber is wishful thinking.
Im going to attemp to get less than 1/2* neg camber to 0* camber
My question is---what should I have them set the toe to??
Someone in another thread made the point that these specs were for the skinny bias ply tires of the era.
I am currently running 8" wide wheels with a 8" tread on all four corners. Radial T/As.
Toe is currently set at 0 (according to the printout I received) and I am not thinking that this is correct. The car feels odd in a long sweeping curve @ 60 mph or so--like the two front tires are going in different directions,
ever so slightly and the car can't decide which wheel to follow.(of course this may be something to do with the 605 ps box----I have a t-bird, does the same thing, absolutely no tire wear)
any input would be good