Suspension and Chassis Questions about your suspension? Need chassis advice?

LCA Question

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 31, 2006 | 02:06 AM
  #1  
irocstang's Avatar
Thread Starter
Member
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
From: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Car: 86 IROC
Engine: 5.0
Transmission: 5 speed
LCA Question

Which is better and why: adj tubular rear control arms or boxed lower control arms with poly bushings?

Plan on purchasing lcas for my camaro that has 2 inch drop springs.

Can anyone help me out with what I need. Also are rear lca relocation brackets that necessary? If so why?

Please post if you can help me out

Thanks


ps i know i need adj panhard bar/ relo brackets and adj torque arm as my camaro is lowered.
Reply
Old Jan 31, 2006 | 07:03 AM
  #2  
92MaroRS's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 953
Likes: 0
From: Waterloo, Iowa
Car: 1992 Camaro RS 25th Aniversarry Edition
Engine: 305
Transmission: TH-700-R4
Axle/Gears: 10 bolt with 3.23's and SLP Posi.
Adjustability is always a good thing, just get them with poly bushings if its a street car.
Reply
Old Jan 31, 2006 | 09:25 AM
  #3  
ShiftyCapone's Avatar
Supporter/Moderator
25 Year Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 13,758
Likes: 560
From: Cincinnati, OH
Car: '90 RS
Engine: 377 LSX
Transmission: Magnum T56
Re: LCA Question

Originally posted by irocstang



ps i know i need adj panhard bar/ relo brackets and adj torque arm as my camaro is lowered.
You do not need an adjustable torque when lowering your car.
Reply
Old Jan 31, 2006 | 09:57 AM
  #4  
Sonix's Avatar
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,763
Likes: 4
From: Calgary, AB, Canada
Car: 1982 Trans-Am
Engine: 355 w/ ported 416s
Transmission: T10, hurst shifter
Axle/Gears: 10 bolt, true-trac, 3.73
adjustable tubular are much more expensive than plane jane boxed with poly bushings, for a reason....

lowered car = relocation brackets, just that simple.
If you need an in depth explanation as to why, do a search, this comes up wayyyy too often.... I forget who, but someone did a nifty picture using paint showing how it works...

adjustable panhard might be a good idea.
Reply
Old Jan 31, 2006 | 10:10 AM
  #5  
Naed's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Re: Re: LCA Question

Originally posted by ShiftyCapone
You do not need an adjustable torque when lowering your car.
I would like to hear an explination from you as to *why* one would not need to an adjustable Torquearm when they lower a car as per your statement above?
Reply
Old Jan 31, 2006 | 10:16 AM
  #6  
sofakingdom's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
Community Builder
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 27,918
Likes: 2,448
Car: Yes
Engine: Usually
Transmission: Sometimes
Axle/Gears: Behind me somewhere
Because the torque arm is so long, its angle changes by only a very tiny amount when lowering the car. Less than the production tolerances from one car to another, basically. And the rear end's rotational angle therefore changes by an almost unmeasurable amount. Not worth trying to correct for, by itself.

The LCAs however are a very different story. They are quite short, and their angle changes DRASTICALLY when you lower one of these cars. But, adjustable LCAs aren't the answer to that issue; relocation brackets are.

Which is not to say that an adjustable torque arm is undesirable, or unnecessary; only, that lowering the car does not trigger a need for it.

The Panhard bar often does need to be adjustable when lowering; or, better yet, a relocation bracket for it could be installed, so that it remains level at the new ride height. I don't know of anybody that makes that though, but it wouldn't be too tough to fab up.

So, if all you've done is lower your car, get the LCA RLBs first, and see how the car works after that. You can make all these changes one at a time and get their effects sorted out, it doesn't have to be done all at once.
Reply
Old Jan 31, 2006 | 10:32 AM
  #7  
MrDude_1's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,550
Likes: 4
From: Charleston, SC
Car: 91 Camaro Vert
Engine: 02 LS1, HX40
Transmission: 2002 LS1 M6
Originally posted by sofakingdom
Because the torque arm is so long, its angle changes by only a very tiny amount when lowering the car. Less than the production tolerances from one car to another, basically. And the rear end's rotational angle therefore changes by an almost unmeasurable amount. Not worth trying to correct for, by itself.

The LCAs however are a very different story. They are quite short, and their angle changes DRASTICALLY when you lower one of these cars. But, adjustable LCAs aren't the answer to that issue; relocation brackets are.

Which is not to say that an adjustable torque arm is undesirable, or unnecessary; only, that lowering the car does not trigger a need for it.

The Panhard bar often does need to be adjustable when lowering; or, better yet, a relocation bracket for it could be installed, so that it remains level at the new ride height. I don't know of anybody that makes that though, but it wouldn't be too tough to fab up.

So, if all you've done is lower your car, get the LCA RLBs first, and see how the car works after that. You can make all these changes one at a time and get their effects sorted out, it doesn't have to be done all at once.


ok.

an adjustible TQ arm is nice to have, lowered or not for the same reason mentioned by you.


production tolerances are huge, and you can see a traction gain in drag racing by properly adjusting it to match your car, your tire size, and your rear end.



i see a need for adjustable TQ arms on cars.
i see a need for adjustable panhard bars on cars.
i see a need for relocation brackets on cars with improper angles.

the only adjustable part i DONT see a need for on most normal cars, is the LCA itself. it can remain a constant length, and if it cant, then theres usually something else wrong with the bracketry on the rear. only in some extreme cases does it need to be adjusted, and in those cases, if you're asking on here, you shouldnt be driving that car. lol
Reply
Old Jan 31, 2006 | 10:36 AM
  #8  
Sonix's Avatar
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,763
Likes: 4
From: Calgary, AB, Canada
Car: 1982 Trans-Am
Engine: 355 w/ ported 416s
Transmission: T10, hurst shifter
Axle/Gears: 10 bolt, true-trac, 3.73
The Panhard bar often does need to be adjustable when lowering; or, better yet, a relocation bracket for it could be installed, so that it remains level at the new ride height. I don't know of anybody that makes that though, but it wouldn't be too tough to fab up.
I saw one of these recently.... I think "barris customs" aka, Dean, showed a post a few weeks ago with one on his car... I don't remember the company who made it though.
Reply
Old Jan 31, 2006 | 10:41 AM
  #9  
sofakingdom's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
Community Builder
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 27,918
Likes: 2,448
Car: Yes
Engine: Usually
Transmission: Sometimes
Axle/Gears: Behind me somewhere
Really? Cool.

Although, knowing Dean, it's not at all out of the question that it's something he made up himself. He seems to be able to make at least a few such things.
Reply
Old Jan 31, 2006 | 11:12 AM
  #10  
Sonix's Avatar
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,763
Likes: 4
From: Calgary, AB, Canada
Car: 1982 Trans-Am
Engine: 355 w/ ported 416s
Transmission: T10, hurst shifter
Axle/Gears: 10 bolt, true-trac, 3.73
aha

RTFC, got it from jegs

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...hard+relocator
Reply
Old Feb 1, 2006 | 07:05 PM
  #11  
Shagwell's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 4,627
Likes: 3
From: Southwest Florida
Car: projects.......
MrDude_1
Pinion angle makes a HUGE difference getting the car planted at the line/ the stockers twist like hell...(ever seen one pretzel'd?)
Reply
Old Feb 1, 2006 | 10:34 PM
  #12  
Naed's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Note: Naed = Dean backwards- it is me.

And you do need an adjustable Tq arm if the car is lowered an adequate amount because your pinion angle goes into the dirt with the lowering and then suspension travel. the adj TQarm allows you to pivot the pinion back up to -1* at stagnant height.

The relocator was from Jegs- but I welded it on instead of the bolt on design.
Reply
Old Feb 1, 2006 | 11:08 PM
  #13  
Sonix's Avatar
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,763
Likes: 4
From: Calgary, AB, Canada
Car: 1982 Trans-Am
Engine: 355 w/ ported 416s
Transmission: T10, hurst shifter
Axle/Gears: 10 bolt, true-trac, 3.73
Dean backwards- it is me.
uh oh, here comes this ****storm, now you went and said it....
Reply
Old Feb 2, 2006 | 09:24 AM
  #14  
MrDude_1's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,550
Likes: 4
From: Charleston, SC
Car: 91 Camaro Vert
Engine: 02 LS1, HX40
Transmission: 2002 LS1 M6
Originally posted by Naed
Note: Naed = Dean backwards- it is me.

And you do need an adjustable Tq arm if the car is lowered an adequate amount because your pinion angle goes into the dirt with the lowering and then suspension travel. the adj TQarm allows you to pivot the pinion back up to -1* at stagnant height.

for once, i agree entirely with dean. LOL!


btw, if you're running any kind of aftermarket rear, its almost mandatory.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Americanmouse
Transmissions and Drivetrain
10
Sep 7, 2015 12:10 PM
zayne0
Camaros for Sale
0
Aug 24, 2015 07:22 PM
Thirdgen89GTA
NW Indiana and South Chicago Suburb
0
Aug 20, 2015 03:11 PM
redmaroz
LTX and LSX
7
Aug 16, 2015 11:40 PM
NBrehm
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Parts for Sale
0
Aug 5, 2015 07:57 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:29 AM.