When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I use them on the race trucks. Work great, but we never put more then about 500 miles a year on them between practice sessions and races. Seem to hold up fine. The ones you need are the exact same part numbers we use for the S10 a-arms in the race trucks.
Use the .5" longer ones to raise the front roll center of your car. It will balance much better, trust me. part # 1210-209P
Also Rick, I used the Coleman racing "monoballs" on my old camaro. I did not have the car long after I installed them but can tell you the Qa1's seem to be a better design.
Last edited by SlickTrackGod; 08-18-2016 at 01:44 AM.
Thanks Dean.Just 500 miles, do they wear out too much past that?
I was looking at the 209P, but wasn't sure what the taller stud was for.
No, they are fine, the Race truck Ronnie had he went probably 4 or 5 years on them before I came aboard. they were still fine when he recently sold the truck. They get about 500 miles of extremely hard abuse each racing season and had no wear. I was not real keen on the Monoball units (Coleman units) I bought for my car. The pics Mike showed me of the car sitting in storage these years shows that several parts were replaced off it. She must of had some shady mechanic. I remember her in court complaining no one would work on that car- no one knew where the hell to get parts for it...lol Im sure those monoballs started knocking so someone replaced them.
THe two absolutely best things you can put on 3rd gens is extended front ball joints (to get the front roll center up) and the Jegs panhard relocator to give provisions to adjust the rear roll center down. These allow for the use of lighter sway bars to give each wheel more mechanical grip and independent travel as well as giving the chassis attitude more of an even sideways roll rather than cantering more onto the front wheel in side chassis roll.
Here is what the Coleman monoballs look like. Not as beefy as the QA1 units. I did mine about the time the QA1 were coming out- I did not know about them yet so I used the Coleman ones.
THe two absolutely best things on 3rd gens is to get the front roll center up and to adjust the rear roll center down. These allow for the use of lighter sway bars to give each wheel more mechanical grip and independent travel
What would be the result if the above mods were made (ball joints and panhard) AND the larger sway bars remained installed? I have the 36/19 combination IIRC.
I understand that by lowering my car, I may have an invited a number of handling issues. What I can say is that on the highway on ramps or the back roads, it feels stable enough. The current shocks are Monroe Sensatracs. Not high performance I know but the ride is comfortable enough for me.
What would be the result if the above mods were made (ball joints and panhard) AND the larger sway bars remained installed? I have the 36/19 combination IIRC.
Here's the skinny:
The distance between the Center of Gravity and the Roll Center is called the "moment arm" - think of it as a lever. The further apart the CG and RC are, the more leverage exits to make the car roll. Excessive chassis roll is the enemy; because, it overworks the outside tire and underworks the inside tire. You need to find the optimum balance between working the tires and roll angle. You want to work the tires more evenly thereby increasing cornering speeds and exit speeds.
Now, it is not just static RC, but dive RC - but that's beyond the skinny explanation. What are (or can be) your tuning tools to change angles:
1. Spindle heights and/or distances from spindle pin to ball joint surfaces - Drop Spindles
2. Ball joint pin heights - extended BJ's
3. Control arm length - adj ones.
4. Adjustable control arm mounts on the chassis - much more involved.
5. Also, obviously, any changes in ride height.
By lowering the rear RC, it increases the rear roll angel and works the front tires more.
When making these mods (and increasing the spring rates), you can reduce the sway bar rate which allows for more independent action of the wheels. Stiff bars do not allow much independent movement. This also helps keep better tire patch, less harsh ride. And if combined with unsprung weight improvements, is a significant improvement, as one doesn't need harsh rebound to control the wheels.
There's more to be said, but that's the skinny, skinny z.
There's more to be said, but that's the skinny, skinny z.[/FONT]
Much appreciated.
I can see further suspension modifications in the future for this ride. I've resisted the temptation to morph to a more drag racing orientated approach however the impairment to driving on the street keeps me from making a move in that direction.
That said, changes to the ball joints and panhard bar location wouldn't impact my straight line performance to any degree and with four corner double adjustable shocks and struts I may be able to live a little in both worlds. Considering that the drag strip and road course are about 20 minutes from my front door, it motivates me to make my ride more of a race car than a street car although admittedly, at my present performance level, it would be easy to entertain all three venues.
Not the lowest 3rd gen out there but certainly lower than stock.
Good question.
When I purchased my Dana 44, it had previously been installed on a SCCA road racer. The panhard bar mount (on the axle) was adjustable to the tune of about 2 or 3 inches. The mount was very bulky (a saw tooth plate that would fix the bar mount firmly by way of a slotted hole and bolt) and I removed it during the swap. Perhaps it would have been worthwhile to keep?
Drag suspension is a different animal.
Street and RR/AutoX are compatible together (different tweaks w/in setup).
The Jegster is just the axle side. There are others (both side brackets), but I believe it is best (for our purpose) and the cheapest - IMO. KISS principle. I drilled and bolted, then welded:
To simplify visuals for the novice think of the roll centers as two fixed points off the ground between each set of wheels front and rear. Just leave then in the center of the car side to side aspect for now(this makes the head hurt less) We are more interested in their heights off the ground- and then the relation of the imaginary line drawn between them in which everything chassis weight wise rotates laterally on this axis. Think of it like a BBQ skewer going trough the car as it spins on a rotisserie rolling left and right.
Now when lateral or sideways force is applied, the distance of the center of gravity height of the chassis weight applies force that rotates around this axis causing roll. The higher the center of gravity (or "cg") is to the roll axis (as Brain described the movement arm) the easier this weight rolls the car left or right...THUS... the need for larger sway bars to compensate. Too little of this movement arm and the outside wheels will not load properly also- so there is a down side.
(I will stop here and describe loading the wheels for a minute. Anyone that snow ski's, rides motorcycles, bicycles etc pretty much learns the importance of weighting the outside peg or ski in order to get grip in a turn. Too much weight on the inside will cause the friction surfaces under you to slip laterally. loading weight onto anything including a tennis shoe makes for better grip... until it reaches critical point then anything gives.
Now when loading tires, remember that tires have bounce to them like a basket ball. When they are loaded they will want to recoil. More weight and they recoil more and thus the footprint of the tread will deform if overloaded. So here is where we do testing to see how much heat is in the tires and how much the tread is deforming via shoe polish marks on the edge of tread sidewalls. There is a TON of trial and error in this, and then simply changing a brand of tires can then call for new suspension setting because the tire is different sidewall and rubber stiffness compounds.)
So now back to the roll centers, roll axis, and chassis cg. Lets say the roll centers front and rear are 4" and 8" and the cg is 12" at about 40% distance from the front rc. This would put the movement arm pivot point at about 5.5" off the ground along the roll axis. Thus 12-5.5" would make a lever arm of 6.5". Think of this as a breaker bar removing lug nuts. The longer the bar the easier it is to move the breaker bar and move the pivot point. The shorter the bar the harder to move it.
Now if we added the jegs unit in the rear and brought the rear rc down from 10 to 8 in order to get the roll axis more level in roll, we also made to movement bar longer. Here's the real catch with most cars including 3rd gens. When you lower the car, the front rc goes down more then the rear rc does- thus the need for corrections to the roll axis to make the lateral roll more even as not to canter weight onto the outside front wheel in corners. Once the car is lowered, the rear jegs unit is needed to help bring the rear rc down to match the front rc drop. This takes about 2-3" yet the cg does not drop as fast in the lowering process so the movement arm increases.....
...this is why 3rd gnes need extended ball joints up front especially when the car's ride height is lowered and the geometry changes (thus geometry changes cause rc drop).
So now we install the extended ball joints. We have the cg at 12" like stated above in the 1st example (note this example already had the car lowered in ride height) But instead of having the front and rear rc's at 4" and 8", we now have the front at 6 and rear at 10". the movement arm pivot on the same car that was at 5.5" is now at 7.5 " off the ground and the cg is still at 12". The movement arm is only 4.5" long and thus the chassis weight will not act as harshly upon the roll axis so the car can use lighter sways bars to achieve the same roll angle of the chassis in a turn to load the outside tires.
It still gets muych more complex then this,, but so much for this novel already....sorry
Possibly the most concise explanation of a complex subject that I've read.
Thank you both gentlemen.
A steering gear rebuild is in the works this off season (or possibly next). Looks I'll be changing a couple of my catalogue selections. It also seems that I should have kept the adjustable lower panhard bar mount. In any case, TEDs (Brian?) mod looks simple to execute.
Now, if only I could convince myself to go road racing with my automatic transmission.
TEDS is my alma mater - I am a graduate of TEDS. Yes, I'm Brian.
If you're looking to be competitive, you'll need the manual, AND you'll have to meet class rules.
I have a 4l65e behind an LS2. I'm out on track to have fun, learn car control and weight transfer. We are only out on track for 30 minutes at a time - need a trans cooler, though. I did not build a track car. I need/want to use the car on the street to drive the value out of the car. Otherwise, all my investment in it was a very poor decision. I just received the aftermarket cruise control with my DBW/E40 ECM, yesterday!! I remember taking my father on a vacation to Glacier Ntl Park - 110 mph on cruise control with the AC on across Montana.
One never knows what the aftermarket will come up with - paddle shifting an auto. My G37XS is a 6 speed paddle shift, and a lot of fun. For me, the fun and learning factors are the key. I don't let other people's class rules or sacred tranny choices stop me. Have fun, and learn something along the way, and participate.
Thanks for the part#. I looked into the HRT kits, but didn't really see much diiference from DDs.Least not with the stalk piece.
Well, it looks like the jegs piece is discontinued.
Jegs probably got sued because of the allowment in the instructions for only bolt-on application. This should always be welded and is under high strain.
As for transmissions, I am putting a 6sp manual into my Brabus Mercedes grocery getter because I am sick and tired of the 4sp auto it has. I love built 700r4's, but not crappy Merc transmissions. Racing Joe dirt neon last year reminded me how fun throwing gears was. been doing the paddle thing too much the last decade.
Possibly the most concise explanation of a complex subject that I've read.
Thank you both gentlemen.
A steering gear rebuild is in the works this off season (or possibly next). Looks I'll be changing a couple of my catalogue selections. It also seems that I should have kept the adjustable lower panhard bar mount. In any case, TEDs (Brian?) mod looks simple to execute.
Now, if only I could convince myself to go road racing with my automatic transmission.
You want the best guy around for a built 700r4? Jimmy G at Racetrans.com. Tell him Dean sent you. Jimmy took over Darryl Young Racing Trans and I have known and been using him for 25 years. Jimmy is the absolute best in the business. Dave McClellends son Kevin designed a prototype convertor I have in my Vetruck behind the 700r4 Ive had in it for 25 years. It basically is a 700r4 with 4l60E built internals though. lots of Sonnex parts and Gm 5 planets- everything the latest and greatest every time something revolutionary comes out. He keeps me in tip top shape and is a good friend. Dave son Kevin is a wizard (jimmy's words) I barely know Kevin but know his father well. I use to have a built racetrans 700r4 in my Camaro also. I've driven Bowties, jet performance, etc. none of them compare to Jimmy's work.
Thank you for the compliment by the way. I always try to put things into laymans terms.
What would be the result if the above mods were made (ball joints and panhard) AND the larger sway bars remained installed? I have the 36/19 combination IIRC.
The explanations notwithstanding, (and again thank you both Brian and Dean) I'd still like to know what I might expect if I were to add the extended ball joints, relocate the panhard bar mount AND keep the larger sway bars.
Would I improve the current setup or make it worse?
These changes are bound to be incremental for me in that, I'll look for sway bars while the suspension changes are ongoing. That may include fully adjustable shocks and struts as well.
Originally Posted by SlickTrackGod
Thank you for the compliment by the way. I always try to put things into laymans terms.
I've a background in mechanical engineering so the geometry concepts are easy enough to grasp. It's putting them into the context of these car's suspensions that I really appreciate.
And again, thanks.
Skinny,
You will still be miles ahead with the ext BJ and phb mods. By limiting the leverage of the moment arm, you are mitigating the force at its' origin. Always better! That's why these are the two best suspension mods, IMO. You will improve your current set-up.
I am running 36/19 myself (#850/#250). I am looking to reduce the front sway bar, but I'm not in a hurry. I'm waiting to move up to 17" wheels (lighter than 16's), then I'll make the switch. My wheel assemblies are very light already. I'm also waiting for RideTech to come out with a matching strut - I have their rear coilovers, and am impressed.
Keep your sway bars and their bushings. It's a good learning experience to swap them and ride around a little to understand the differences.
I missed this reply. Thanks Brian.
I've probably got several thousand miles on my existing steering gear (including a reman and leaking steering gear box). I'm not sure I'm ready for replacements as everything still seems pretty tight. I do have an alignment issue, even after I brought updated specs gleaned from this forum, that have resulted in the outside edges of the front tires wearing away prematurely....still. ( I fairly certain the shop simply dismissed my request). Something I'll address yet again and before I install my new BFG Comp IIs.
Does anyone even make a proper panhard bar lowering setup anymore? Neither the jester unit or unbalanced eng's are available any longer and every other kit I've seen is the upper panhard bar for exhaust clearance, not what we're after. That's kegs unit was only $80 too, dang!
Dean, do you know if the extended ball joint stud comes through any further than stock, like it could interfere with adjustment ***** on the bottom of a strut body?
Dean, do you know if the extended ball joint stud comes through any further than stock, like it could interfere with adjustment ***** on the bottom of a strut body?
They don't, I have 1" ext ball joints on my car , it goes thru the same amount as a regular joint just longer between the A-Arm and spindle
What are you guys using for boots in a street application? Do the stock ones fit? Energy Suspension?
I was using the stock ones, they are a tight fit I used a large socket to press it around it , it lasted a while but ended up tearing. I don't have any right now but it is not my everyday car , used for autocross. I just keep them cleaned and lubed up after every race. They don't get too terribly dirty surprisingly and I drive it to all my events some are 4 hours away.
I can see how that would do the job.
I had posted earlier that when I purchased the D44, it had previously lived in a SCCA race car. The lower panhard mount had a serrated surface that mated to a similar serration on the bar's lower mount. The teeth (of the serration) were about an 1/8" in spacing. That part of the mod would lend itself to adjustment and track tuning.
Massive bracket at the lower panhard bar mount. Not visible is the serrated surface of the mount.
Looking back, that's something I should have left intact. Or at least saved. It's long gone now having cut it off and welding in the OEM part.
When using the longer ball joints, is there a point where they get to long?
I know different setups would need different things but Is there a certain length they need to be for a certain distance the car has been lowered or is it something different??????
It is the overall feel of the car and balance. you have a front and rear roll center on your car, these are imaginary points between the front wheels and the rear wheels. Now draw an imaginary line between them and this is what the car rotates or leans into a corner around. Think of it like a rotisserie. You want to get the rear down or the front up. This imaginary line is effected leverage wise by the cars center of gravity height. The cg is higher then the roll axis so weight leverage will cause the car to roll above this thus needing the use of sway bars to counter the roll effect.
When you keep the roll axis higher closer to the cg you will need less swaybar to keep the car flat. less swaybar means more independent wheel travel and thus better mechanical grip...thus, it is better to move the front rc up rather then move the rear rc down in order to balance the car by making the roll axis more flat. Getting the front too high or the rear too low (basically getting the roll axis too flat or even inverted will make the steering wheel very heavy and will make the car tight in a corner(not want to turn). You will know by feel and trial and error playing with the rear settings to balance the car to the front RC height.
To high a RA to the cg will not properly load the outside wheels to get lateral grip. Too much leverage will load too much and take too much grip off the inside wheels- testing and lap times show results. Spring rate changes show results. Basically with these adjustments of front and rear RC's, you can play with various spring and swaybar setups until you feel you have the car optimum for your liking.
For reference, I used an adjustable monoball on my old car (don't own car anymore) so I could shim the front balljoint height for changes in the front RC. I had a very unique and lightweight V6 car that ran 825lb front springs and a progressive rear sping setup that was quite complex to understand but it basically needed high damper rates and helped control rear jacking effects AND wheel hop under extreme braking. My front strut length was very short compared to most to reduce the leverage of the chassis jacking as wwell as my more extreme static and dynamic caster angles fough tthis as well. I ran a 34mm front swaybar and a massive 25mm rear bar. Like I stated, a very unique setup but do not try these figures with a heavier V8 car(not even an LS)
Last edited by SlickTrackGod; 02-03-2017 at 12:35 PM.
Thats a beefy bracket, maybe too much for the street.
My thinking too which is why it was cut off and an OEM mount grafted into it's place.
Looking at the picture, I can see how the LCARBs hang pretty low too.
... it is better to move the front rc up rather then move the rear rc down in order to balance the car by making the roll axis more flat. Getting the front too high or the rear too low will make the steering wheel very heavy and will make the car tight in a corner.
.
Adding the taller ball joint and lowering the panhard bar mount is the to go though isn't it?
Will the addition of just the ball joint be a detriment to handling without the panhard bar modification?
That is, in reference to a third gen f-body. Other platforms would different treatments although the fundamentals are the same.
Adding the taller ball joint and lowering the panhard bar mount is the to go though isn't it?
Will the addition of just the ball joint be a detriment to handling without the panhard bar modification?
That is, in reference to a third gen f-body. Other platforms would different treatments although the fundamentals are the same.
There are several factors involved to answer that question. RC height is determined by 1) how high or low the car is (pertaining to suspension geometry angles) what kind of overall wheel travel you have (pertaining to the change in that suspension geometry- this is based on wheel leverage, shock damper, spring rate, bushing material, sway bar size, chassis flex, and vehicle weight. This is why no one answer fits all.
Having the rear adjustment is smart so that you can taylor the overall roll axis angle to what the car needs based on the front setting. If you change around the front setting you are 1)changing ride weight, 2) changing geometry angles, 3) changing alignment settings- not a goo thing unless a car has coilovers and you can dial the car back to static ride height to maintain exact height after balljoint shimming.
If a car is at stock height, I would only recommend a 1/2" taller ball joint. If it is lowered then try the 1". The 1" were not around when I built my car. I had mine shimmed to about 5/8" but I hate giving figures because my car was so much lower and lighter then anyone else can run for many reasons I have stated in many posts in past years(the main being very light sprung weight and extremely light unspung weight compared to most 3rd gens.) Had I could have gotten 1" I would have to get my A-arm angle a tad better for Camber gain. NOTE that my car only travels on average 1", and on worse case senerio it had a max travel of 1 1/2". Show me anyone elses car capable of that lightness and limited wheel? (24 3/4" ground to fender lip) and never rubbed.
So basically what you are looking at is optimum geometry angle AND ride height. Set these, limit them with spring rate, shorten your strut length as much as possible without grounding out into the strut mount (this is everyone's limiting factor and why mine was unique.) Lean the strut back and control it with light weight wheel assemblies to limit travel without massive spring, and then you can slightly reduce your front swaybar because the car will not roll with as much leverage..... NOW.....Once you have that set to the geometry that will aid in mechanical grip and reduced roll as well as help prevent rear jacking due to caster angle and shorter strut leverage, you then taylor the rear ride height to where you want it and then adjust the rear RC height to balance the car. You now play with shock settings, spring rates, and RC height seeing how you can eliminate wheel hop under braking, but also not cause rear jacking and be able to dial in a lot more rear brakes. Getting all this right is not something you will do in a years time, not even close. It takes a lot of trial and error. I worked out a package on my car that 11 others here locally could not hold a candle to on an autox course- wasn't even close and the car was not near as good as it evolved into 3 years after that. Took 7 years total of changing this, altering that, etc etc until I figured out the car's weaknesses and made mine work- I preach: progressive rear springs, not linear, not dual rate either. Even with that you have to have the heights correct. for the rates to work. It's why I went up to a 25mm bar and literally had to stomp the brake pedal and throw the car into a turn and it would rotate and bite....or just literally yank the steering very fast and abruptly and the nose would turn immediately- that the rear would follow. I even set of the rearend to insude roll understeer on abrupt lateral loading so as the steer the rear axle inward toweard the direction the nose of the car was going. The massive rear swaybar would bring this bake and stabilize the car at steady state so it rotated through and off corners well.
This stuff is very complex that you have to throw a lot of what you have already done out the window in order to duplicate what I had.
Note that I had access to a skid pad and my vast racing knowledge and fab skills.
THis is all a lesson on ride heights, spring rates, geometry angles in static AND dynamic form/ You need every adjustment you can get, but better yet, you need to play with them so you understand them and figure out what every leverage arm and angle and bushing of the chassis is doing at all times and where the weaknesses arrive from. Roll centers and roll axis changes allow you to play with spring rate, shock rate, and swaybar rate changes front, rear or both.
edit to add: I will also note my LCA's were shortened by about 3/4" over OEM to reduce my wheel base/ just as much as I could without a rear spring misalignment.Note how far back in clock rotation my axle sway bar mounts are. The axle is forward. Light weight brakes, drilled axles, carbon fiber sriveshaft. I focused on weight. Even note the exhaust was light in the sprun chassis weight department as well as reducing polar weight form the extremities from the center of the car.
Last edited by SlickTrackGod; 02-03-2017 at 09:31 PM.
I doubt very much that I'll auto-cross or road race the car to the point where I'm deep into the suspension and all that goes along with it. More of all round performer that hopes to take advantage of a tweak here and there like the extended ball joints. Seeing as they're a maintenance item and they're due for replacement, seems a no-brainer to make a move in that direction.
As for the rest, it'll be a matter of where the build takes me next....Having a functional transmission is the next step...!
Hmmmmm dean... think I would benefit even more with the QA1 extended ball joints on mine? And the pan hard relocation is a thinker for me.. my bar is level with the ground right now and laterally parallel with the axle tubes...
08-18-2016, 12:32 AM
