Well, I got some new Spohn A Arms, Moog Springs, Spohn Steering kit, some poly sway bar bushings all installed.... everything looked good, car sits right, etc...

Until I tried to turn the wheel, now my front wheels rub the back of the fender, which before they didn't...

I can fit 4 fingers inbetween the front of the tire and front fender and about 2 fingers on the back of the tire / rear of fender...

So the A arm moved the wheel back to change the angle, because it didn't rub before... anyone else experience this?

Rafael

 

Its been covered many many times in other posts... The design is faulty, not to say sh!tty and it appears that it has never been corrected. Id return them and go with UMI. Perfect design and fit.

 

for the sake of it, did you move the strut mounts? are the arms the adjustable ones with rod ends or delrin/delsphere joints? those ones are adjustable and may be set wrong.

this wheel setback seems to come up from time to time, some people dont have it some people do. Maybe something sloppy with their jig setup?

is it both wheels or just one?

 

Non Adjustable... both wheels... had an alignment done...
You know, I'm not rich... and I have to save $$$ for a long time to get "nice" parts...
And I had to pay $100+ to get this all installed, plus $90 for an alignment....???

I just want something nice... I didn't want to pay $450+$100+90 to now have to chop my stock fenders up (more $$$) to make work as advertised...

I've been a member here on this board a long time, and I've never heard of this issue, and I do searches... did one before this post....

I sent then an email....We'll see what they say...

Rafael

 

Just a few reference questions to weed out any other suspicions-

Did you change front brakes in any way? (Like from stock to 1LE or such)

different spindles?

Different wheels? wheel spacers? New tires?

Anything else you installed different up front from when they did not rub?

Is car lower than before? Or same height? Arch in wheelwell will come closer to contact Jjust from lowering the car** (Most people do not realize this and blame the A-arms.

Might want to try measuring you wheel base from center wheel fronts to center wheel rears on BOTH SIDES WITHOUT MOVING THE STEERINGWHEEL IN BETWEEN MEASUREMENT* (Important note, hence the capitalization)

 

I've seen were the posters where wrong.

As for UMI arms? You've got to be kidding me, they have no spring index,. Whoever designed those have no clue about part dynamics and vehicle design. Just a few guys good at fabricating metal that do not always understand what they are making obviously. I am sure they are finally learning, but they have made some big blunders. I would not go around slamming someone like Steve Spohn for someone like UMI who knows far lass about vehicle dynamics and the parts he makes.

These cars lowered down on factory offset 16" wheels without the proper 16" factory steering stops in place in the steering box will hit the back fender walls every time. FACT!!!

 

Did you change front brakes in any way?
Nope...

different spindles?
Nope...

Different wheels? wheel spacers? New tires?
Nope...

Anything else you installed different up front from when they did not rub?
New moog stock height springs... though I didn't measure, the car did not look any lower... I have 15" turbocast wheels with 245 somethings... that before these A arms did not rub on the back of the fenders... new spohn steering kit... some ploly sway bar bushings...

Is car lower than before? Or same height? Arch in wheelwell will come closer to contact
just from lowering the car** (Most people do not realize this and blame the A-arms.

Nope... new stock height Moog springs all around....

Might want to try measuring you wheel base from center wheel fronts to center wheel rears on BOTH SIDES WITHOUT MOVING THE STEERINGWHEEL IN BETWEEN MEASUREMENT* (Important note, hence the capitalization)

Have to measure tomorrow... as I said, without a measuring tape, I could fit 4 fingers in the front and 2 in the back.... and it wasn't a problem before the a arms were installed.

 

Yep, I'm very close myself after Spohn A-arms and RC spindles. I'm thinking I'll probably roll the fenders as body and paint is next anyway. Here's a pic of how close:

 

Since no refence to what you had prior to the changes, and considering the new bushings alone will reset the a-arm position- in all fairness it is best we wait until you can post that important wheelbase informantion unstead of relying on the finger test aft and no befroe.

Your wheelbase should be 101.0 inches considering you do not have any altered rear LCA length.

I will await your measurements...Good luck.

 

It clears my Hooker 2055 y pipe... I just want it to be nice... and after spending so much $$$ and wanting nice parts for so long, just bummed...

 

I do have aftermarket rear lower control arms, but they are non adjustable either...

So what will this measurement do? The wheels are obviously set back from where they were, they are rubbing the rear fender when before they were not... and who knows if the rear lower control arms are stock length...???

What can I do to fix it... I'm taking the car to a body guy in a month, do I need to pay him extra to take care of the fender problem, or is there a mechanical fix I can do up front...??

 

Brian. That picture if I am correct is with the car jacked off the ground and the front suspension assembly drooping. The radius of the fender will increase clearance slightly as the tire touches the ground and comes upward a little in the wheel well. As it goes up further it will start to decrease again and potentially rub. Mine rubbed with factory wheels and factory a-arms.

Dean

 

not to be down on the design or to accuse people of anything BUT there a-arms work perfect with there k-member i had no issue BUT when i had the stock k-member i had the same issue which leads me to believe that they make it so they can in a way try to force you buy both parts just my feelings

 

I am trying to help you weed out if its the arms or if that is the normal rub. You have no picture so I have to go off what you tell me.

The "factory" wheelbase on these cars is 101.0". If those a-arms are built incorrect then with all new bushings in the car the wheelbase will be more of less than the measurement range of 100.75 to 101.25" give or take a 1/2" for build tolerances and alignment value differences.

Get that measurement ON BOTH SIDES so we know the wheel is not turns one way or another and throwing off the distance measurement. Get the steering wheel as visually straight as possible then measure both sides from centercap to center cap (two person job), add the two together (exactly down to the 1/16th of and inch) and divid by 2. It should be within +or- 1/4" of 101.0"

 

Correct, Dean.
Dont' want to jack the thread, but I'm watching & learning. Till I'm properly aligned, I want to watch & learn on this issue. I'm very close - things can still work out.

 

I understand about the measurement... but it was not normal rub a week ago before I got the parts installed...

I do appreciate everyone's thoughts n time...

Rafael

 

I am not saying something is not wrong yet, I am trying to find out accurate info before I can assit you in blaming a product or not. If it is wrong, then I will be the first to say Spohn made a mistake, Right now I will not say that becasue we have no facts and no pictures to go off of- just hearsay that you say it did not rub.

These are very unlikely senerios, but lets just say it is possible though far fectched the the stock a-arm was bent from an accident once, or something else, or multiple problems. This could have fixed them and now pu the tire to rub which IS POSSIBLE AND COMMON with factory specs as I decribed above. My car would rub the same way with factory wheels and offset but withou tthe factory 16" steering stops. My car was originally 15" specs from the factory even though I outfitted it with factory 16" wheels- It would rub.

Now tendacy to think it is at fault is easy even for me if you say it didn't prior to the addition of these arms- Why? Worn bushings will almost always set the balljoint position back and inward in geometry. new bushings will 'generally increase negative camber and postive caster over replacement of old bushing. BUT I DO NOT WANT TO GO THERE YET- The simple chock is to measure the wheelbase. If thats wrong then either the car was smashed and altered suspension mount points, OR we have a problem with an incorrectly made aftermarket part. We do not know this yet without you measuring. Pictures would be great evidence to see the condition of the car and the measurement figures.

You can;'t just accuse someone of something without proof- Its why I ask for the facts.

 

I worked alone on the car today, upgrading to HID lights, so no one to assist and measure... Also, my turbocast caps are ziptied to the wheels, so I'll have to find the middle of them as reference point for measureing...

I'm sure the a arms were stock.... and the new ones had new bushings and ball joints, so theoretically, it should of moved it forward, as you said... but it's rubbing in the back now, because it's closer to the back... I'll measure and take some pics tomorrow, I even have the alignment sheet from Goodyear which has all the numbers so you can see...

Hearsay, I guess you could call it that, by definition, since you did not see my car before or after... I just want it to not rub... it didn't rub before... getting a new set of a arms from who ever would be a waste of a lot of $$$ for me, it seems the easiest way to fix this is to have the fenders bent / moved or what ever the body needs to do to remedy the situation.... I am a supporter of this board and I know many here have good advice... more tomorrow...

 

Spohn Del-Sphere A-arms set to stock length
Spohn K-member

3.5 fingers front and back, perfectly centered, wither stock wheels/tires.

TEDSgrad, something is really wrong there. That looks like less than 1".

 

Well, my friend that I was gonna ask for help to measure is working today... and I don't keep the car at home, so I'm taking it back to store it...

So, have other people had this problem with these A arms?

Has it turned out to be the car was previously wrecked?

I did not buy the car new, it had 150k on it...

More as I find out....

 

i had the same issue with them but i ended up installing the tube k-member and it fixed the issue i think the a-arms might be made for the aftermarket k-member because i had the same issue you did but i installed the aftermarket k-member a week later solved my issue

if your car was wrecked you would see a lot of damage for it to sit back that far and it would be odd to see it = on both sides

 

So $500+ for a tubular K member...
And I assume that doesn't just "bolt on"...

 

bolts right in they have like 5 different ones though gotta order the right one for your engine stock steering and right a-arms or do like a few others said and return those and get the umi ones or spend the extra $ for a tube k-member that fixed it for me

i think they have some changes made to try to help it perform. If you dont have both it dont work quite right. Also ive seen a few posts of people with stock k-member and aftermarket a-arms like yours and they snapped which tells me those a-arms are not designed for stock k-member they just dont work right with stock k-member they have a wrong angle or something to much stress causing problems.

now ive been running your a-arms and a aftermarket k-member and it works great got like 6k miles on them but i did have your same issue before i got the tube k-member

 

Just called my mechanic... he said he was on his way to the metal recyclers and I told him to pull my stock A arms out... I'll get some poly bushings and get them reinstalled...

Some spohn black A arms for sale in the future....

 

If you are going back to the stockers, at least upgrade and install the Global West del-alum bushings.

 

A set is on the way!

http://www.globalwest.net/82-02-cama...omponents.html

 

that link goes to a set of 4th gen upper control arms, so hopefully that not what you bought

 

Hmmm... it goes to the wrong page.. I got the 1022 kit...

I tried copy / pasting the link, but it keeps defaulting to the one you see, not the 1022 kit.

 

WOW. you can't simply take a square and mark the ground from the wheel center caps and merely lay a tape measure accros those marks to see if it is 101.0" ?

Talk about jumping into more problems and just throwing more money to the fire.

Good luck to you, I think you'll need lots of it if you keep 'hot rodding' in this fashion. Guess you got money to burn.

 

I was following your advice to have another person help me measure, maybe you should of offered the later suggestion first... I'll measure the both a arms, and take pics of both on car and post that for you...

I see many other people / posts about having the same problem... & if the only thing changed was the A arm, which holds the wheel in place, I'm pretty sure that is the problem... But you can make a final decision after the pics / measurements...

Rafael

 

Vetruck, I'll take your help! I've got the same problem. I mean I have the same problem with my car, not a problem recognizing accurate help when I see it.
Now , Ihave the Spohn k-member, w/ non-adjustable a- arms , and now the wheels rubbing the fenders. But I have made all of those previously mentioned mods( coil-over's,spindle/ 1le brake mod etc) and Im not sure how much of that contributes to the mis-alignment of wheel-to-fender center.

 

Some pics with spohn a arms installed... notice how close the rear is to the fender as opposed to the front... will measure and note in the future...

 

I see four things in this picture causing this rub.

A) The car is too high so B) where the tire hits the rear fender is closer than if it where at normal ride height up into the fender well, The car looks like a 4x4 and has to be at least 1-2" higher than factory height.

C) the caster setting is maxed rearward making the spindle rock the tire further backewards in the wheelwell. My car did this same exact thing and rubbed with massive caster. Just as I suspected.

D) The tire you have on the car is avbout 1 inch larger than factory ALSo making for clearance "B" closer to rub.

I personally think the a-arms are fine.

 

The 1LE brakes will set the the track witdh of the car wider than the standard DelcoMorraine brakes. I used to have the figures in my head (I will guess it to be .316" per side. Thaat wider track will swing the tire in a larger scrub radius and will rotate back into the rear fender easier than the previous brake package. Also as stated above, greater positive caster settings will set the wheel backwards slightly in the wheelwell.

I had a 15" wheel car that would not rub with 15X7 factory wheels anbd tires. Just by bolting on factory 16x8 IROCs and 245/50-16 favotry size tires on those wheels the tire would touch the rear fenderwell. Why? The steering stops in the box as well as the spindle stops on the a-arms were supportive of the narrower 15" wheel assembly. The IROCs from the factory had different stops in the steering box as well as different spindle stops rivited to the a-arms from what I have see in eveidence over the years on these boards. Very common for the wheel to hit the rear fenderwell even with the stock A-arms and stock Kmember.

I will look for a pic of my car with factory A-arms and the wheel sitting slightly rearward in the wheelwell also.

 

Picture of the RF tire on my old Camaro. THis is with factory A-arms and brand new control arm bushings. It sets back a little even with stock A-arms. This is normal with massive caster settings.

ps- I had just let the jack down and set the car on the floor when I snapped this shot. The car was not settled hieght wise and the wheel sets about another 1/8" rearward as the suspension settles down one more inch once I roll trhe chassis back and forth. The lower the car goes the more the caster- thus the more rearward the direction the tire moves. I have extended custom made sturt mounts where as in comparison you do not so yours will set back at a higher ride height.

 

I think this thread underscores a couple of things

First off, you can make a lot of money selling powdercoated metal parts for thirdgens regardless of function.

Secondly, stock A arms are GOOD and do not need to be changed.

The last couple of pictures say it all, a 15 inch wheel w/hubcap and junk tire mounted to 450 dollars worth of control arms. This doesn't make sense to me.

You know, just because something is sold for your car doesn't make it good or even worthwhile. But I guess companies like APC would have never made millions if everyone thought this way.

 

I would have to mostly agree. The tubular a-arms and k-member do drop some weight, but certainly nothing someone with Cooper Cobra's will notice. However the real beauty of these parts is looks and particularly for the k-member additional clearance for working on the bottom half of the motor. I have both on my car, and I like them.

 

Whaat a nightmare just like the issues I experienced with my umi a arms. No index point, no steering stops, and I had to add bumpstops..

I did read up on the spohn a arms. Specific modewl placed the wheels closer to the rear.. and something about lowering the vehicle ride height a few inches lower than stock ride. Now I'm confused.. lol

 

 

The caster on the front is closer to the lower range... Is that what you mean?

I'm on a teacher's salary... so when I had to buy those tires (about $350 about 5 years ago), I had just spent $450 on getting the wheels media blasted, edges polished and clear powder coated, so I didn't have much $$$ at the time... I am slowly trying to improve the car... I have Bilstein sturts and shocks, Jet Hot ceramic coated Hooker 2055's and y pipe, spohn subframe connectors, among many other upgrades...etc...

I don't know the stock tire size for a 91 Formula, but I know when I bought the car, it had 16" and 245 somethings... so I got 245's for my 15" wheels and it did not rub... The tires on there now are 245/60/15's.

I know that when I got springs for my other car, the front sat higher than it should for 6 months or so... so I guess I will wait for them to settle then get another alignment... I want nothing more than to keep the spohn a arms... just reporting on what's happened for advice and opinions...

Rafael

 

Then my 17"s makes it even worse?

 

 

26" of ride height.

 

I saw in a few places that a 91 Formula with Manual Tranny and ac needed 5662 springs... I hear some people's haven't settled... what is the next couple of sets down in case mine do not settle... ?

 

Yours won't settle. Springs settle almost instantly. You can either cut the ones you have, run weight jacks, or buy from a place like SSS. They should be able to make any free length you want.

http://www.pagedezigner.com/bluecoil/2009/index2.htm

 

Anyone running the BMR units with the stock spring perches? I haven't seen anyone chime in on them. I bought a set this winter and am in the process of switching them over on my car, what I liked about them was the built in bump stop. I am also putting in the Founders adjustable strut plates that do give you some adjustablity for both the camber and caster which will help some. I use 1 1/2" lowering springs and the new strut plates give you about 1" more travel for the struts. I got the KYB 4 way adjustable units. I run C-5 brakes with 17x8" wheels along with 235-45R-17 tires.

 

Well, I picked the spring that matched my ride and they're too high... so me picking another one to have someone else make, I'm not quite sure...

 

For what's worth, the a-arms probably are about 1" offset towards the rear. I know their tubular engine cradles are offset 1" towards the front.

I was not aware of any of this until I just purchased Hawk's new crossmember. I replaced a Spohn piece that fit fine, but the Hawk's piece was 1" too far towards the rear.

When I called Bruce to ask about it, he said that he has asked Steve to fix the issue with his engine cradle, as it is 1" too far forward. I had to fill in the slots in the Hawk's piece and drill new holes to move the crossmember 1" forward.

I had assumed Sphon's just moved the engine 1" forward, but it appears everything is moved 1" forward. I guess his a-arms are 1" back to compensate. I never noticed an issue since I'm running Spohn arms as well.

Kevin D.

 

Thanks for the hands on info Kevin... I'll be sure to pass on the info to who ever decides to buy my spohn a arms...

As for the springs... I've heard 5662 looked identical to WS6 springs, which my 91 Formula has WS6... but so did the heavier GTA's and Iroc's... And some people have said after just switching to spohn a amrs, there car rode lower... mine is higher with new 5662 springs... Any recommendations for springs that will keep it at stock height for 91 forumula, 5 speed with Ac? I'll check the sss company mentioned above, but again, but unless they have a reference, I don't know what to give them cuz the one I had is obviously wrong....

Global West Del bushings on their way via ups...

Rafael

 

I think spohn just has the wrong measurements because when i first put my a-arms on the tires rubbed in the back and they said that was set to stock. Mine are adjustable and i was able to fix the problem.