Well I ordered some stock frount LCA's so I could copy them.
I wanted to fabraicate some from tube stock.
What size would make a good tube body?
I was thinking 1'' diameter and .100'' thick.
What about the bushings on the end?
I don't realy have any idea how big to make them.
I was thinking 1 1/4'' diameter stock maybe and at least as thick as the 1'' stuff, but I don't know for sure.
Has any one made there own or bought after market ones and know how thick the steel was?
I was looking at the LCA's on a '64 Impala and that's where I got the idea for thickness. The '64 is the closest car to a 3rd gen camaro I could find over here.
The FLCA's I want to make might not end up being made of steel at all.

 

How hard ae they to fabricate? If you got the measurements even a lil bit messed up I would think etreme allignment troubles...?

Newb here.

 

I think if I rounded up frount LCA's from all different years I would come up with a lot of different mesurements. Not a big difference.
I was going to build a jig to measure all the angles. So I could reproduce them.
I might try and make them out of Titanium.
I have found out that frount suspention is quite ajustable.

 

If you are going to the trouble of front a-arms. I would do a whole k-member, and built it with some better geometry than the factory did. (ie, more camber, and better anti-dive)

 

I don't have the car over here with me, so I have to more or less remake factory ones, but with a hair bit more camber.
I have to get real precise mesurements of the stock LCA's.

 

more camber: I’m assuming that you’re talking about moving the pivot points out? I’m not sure that I see the point, you can get any changes you really need by modifying the factory strut tower tops. Even the early cars that couldn’t get as much caster/camber as the later cars with rather minor changes to the strut tower tops will get you in the -1.5 to -2 range even with the caster in the 5-6* range. How much more do you really want?

“better anti-dive?” I’m assuming by “better” you mean some/more (at least past what you get from increasing caster)? For the most part, anti-dive is a crutch used to maintain the front end height on softly sprung production cars. As they get stuffer sprung and closer to real race cars it tends to go closer to 0, and most race cars have little if any. 3rd gen f-body suspensions need to have their travel somewhat limited to work well, requiring a really stiff spring anyway, and with anything lower then a stock ride height you should have little, if any dive under braking anyway. If you start making changes here you’ll spend the rest of your life trying to fix the bump steer that you’ll end up with as a result.

Really, within the design constraints of the modified macpherson strut front end, the 3rd gen f-body setup is REALLY well done. If you want to see an example of something that looks nearly identical and isn’t even close look at the fox mustang stuff… just lower one and you’ll see how much bump steer they’ve got from the factory (it’s not uncommon for toe to change ¼” after lowering the car 1.5”, that never happens with an f-body), and try to adjust anything but toe and you’ll learn to love the adjustability and range of the f-body setup.

I’m not saying that it can’t be improved upon (I’ve been wondering quite a bit about modifying control arms to change the front roll center), but I’d bet that most of the changes people have considered will in the long run result in a worse acting, rather then a better acting suspension.

 

I can fix bumpsteer no problem.
I did not know that the f-bod was so all most perfect.
Now I guess I will go back to just reproducing the stock LCA but lighter and stronger than ever before.
With the f-bod caster isn't an issue and I'm not doing much thinking about changing it.
People use stiff springs to correct or lessen the effect of suspension gerometery problems they don't under stand.