MonteCarloSS.com
MonteCarloSS.com

CELEBRATING 20 YEARS!

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#918607 - 02/16/12 05:52 AM drop spindles and bump stear  
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 131
Furgie Offline
Member
Furgie  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 131
Rustbeltville,MA
What set up has less bump stear
the drop spindles for replacing the g body spindles
or
the b body drop spindles?
thanks for any help. try'n the search, but I tend to suck at key words


Oh when your body starts to shake,It's time to loosen off the brake ,and slam the hammer down
#918616 - 02/16/12 10:18 AM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: Furgie]  
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 81
MADMIKE Offline
Member
MADMIKE  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 81
C.V. CA
If the G body drop spindles are made correctly those should have factory geometry. Only the location of the spindle/caliper mount should be different.
The B spindle has the worst. Where you would want the spherical bearing for the outer tie rod mount is where the steering arm is located.
I recall someone, I think on P-T.com, claiming if you use a Howe Tall lower BJ with the B spindle that it brings the geometry back to acceptable levels, at the cost of wheel choice. IIRC a 15" wheel doesn't work with it, the B uprights spindle is farther from the LBJ boss than the A/G/S spindle.
If you plan on running a 17" wheel you probably will not encounter clearance issues.


-Michael
Where the hell is JMD?!
#918621 - 02/16/12 12:40 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: MADMIKE]  
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,224
SickSpeedMonte Offline
15+ Year
SickSpeedMonte  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,224
MD
Agreed, the belltech G body drop spindle preserves the factory bump steer, the B body makes it noticably worse.

The G body drop spindles limit your wheel choice to some extent as well, as the steering arm is lower. Wheels with deep backspacing and/or small rim diameter may interfere. My front IROC wheels interfere without a thin spacer.

#918659 - 02/16/12 04:41 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: SickSpeedMonte]  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,396
MAP Offline
15+ Year
MAP  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,396
Yuma, AZ
Hi Folks,

Amazing that the designers of the drop spindle didn't make the dirt-simple correction of fixing the factory bump steer. They could have fixed Ackerman too, but I suppose the thinking was "Let's leave well enough alone." Even when well enough isn't really enough well for the serious enthusiast. But then again, a serious roadhandling enthusiast wouldn't be thinking in the realm of drop spindles in the first place.

Never mind.

Best,
MAP

Last edited by MAP; 02/16/12 04:42 PM.
#918663 - 02/16/12 04:56 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: MAP]  
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 131
Furgie Offline
Member
Furgie  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 131
Rustbeltville,MA
Originally Posted By: MAP
Hi Folks,

Amazing that the designers of the drop spindle didn't make the dirt-simple correction of fixing the factory bump steer. They could have fixed Ackerman too, but I suppose the thinking was "Let's leave well enough alone." Even when well enough isn't really enough well for the serious enthusiast. But then again, a serious roadhandling enthusiast wouldn't be thinking in the realm of drop spindles in the first place.

Never mind.

Best,
MAP


these drop spindles are for one use, LSR (LAND SPEED RACING) and drop spindles are the best way to lower the nose.. ,yes I can add a airdam but that ups the frontal area.. bump stear at high speed is not wanted.. channeling it over the frame is o u t out..(car is a street car not a race only car) so.. this serious roadhandling enthusiast would be asking the realms of a drop spindle in the first place..
ASSUMING, you know what that does.. OH, NEVER MIND

Last edited by Furgie; 02/16/12 05:01 PM.

Oh when your body starts to shake,It's time to loosen off the brake ,and slam the hammer down
#918665 - 02/16/12 05:03 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: Furgie]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,129
SS Ninja Offline
15+ Year
SS Ninja  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,129
Stoughton, MA
I've been talking with one of the design guys at UMI Performance about this and made a case for non-drop spindles that would positively affect bumpsteer and Ackerman at a lower cost than the AFX spindles.

My thought is that the "Avergage Joe" car guy should be able to have better handling without having to purchase over $1000 worth of billet aluminum spindles and steering arms. I don't need my parts to look pretty as long as they perform well.

No reason why Belltech or similar couldn't find a cost-effective way to get this done given that not much would have to change from their current drop spindles that only sell for $200-300.


Anyone else want to join me in emailing these companies? I've already covered UMI since they seem willing to take suggestions, but the more voices heard the better.


1987 Monte Carlo SS: The toy
Click here for my build thread
1987 Monte Carlo LS: Daily Driver
Build thread for the LS
#918666 - 02/16/12 05:03 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: SickSpeedMonte]  
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,644
Hey-O Offline
10+ Year
Hey-O  Offline
10+ Year
Member

Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,644
St. Charles Mo
Originally Posted By: SickSpeedMonte
Agreed, the belltech G body drop spindle preserves the factory bump steer, the B body makes it noticably worse.

The G body drop spindles limit your wheel choice to some extent as well, as the steering arm is lower. Wheels with deep backspacing and/or small rim diameter may interfere. My front IROC wheels interfere without a thin spacer.
x2 IMO .


... " HEY - O " ... LET THE HORSES RUN

#918668 - 02/16/12 05:09 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: SS Ninja]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,129
SS Ninja Offline
15+ Year
SS Ninja  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,129
Stoughton, MA
Snippet of one of my emails with UMI in case anyone wants to keep the message consistent:

Quote:
Hey guys,

Hope you had a good holiday!

I saw earlier today that you guys are making some good progress on the pro-touring rear sway bar, which is good to hear!

Anyways, Ramey mentioned the last time we talked that you have a board with a bunch of future potential projects listed on it, a Watts link being one of them. Is there any chance that UMI would be interested in also developing a budget-friendly spindle for the A-body and G-body similar to what ATS offers?

Basically, the AFX spindle and steering arms are supposed to give you all of the benefits of a tall spindle while also eliminating much of the bumpsteer that people encounter when using stock spindles or B-body spindles.

Here's a link to the spindles and steering arms:

http://scandc.com/new/node/53


While they work great, I have to admit that the price isn't exactly "competitive" for your average car guy. That said, my thought is that a similar spindle and steering arm set made out of more conventional materials (Such as ductile iron) that used a less expensive hub (Like the stock Monte or later-style S10/Blazer) would be a really good thing for the market. As awesome as an "all forged aluminum" spindle is, I'd rather have a part that performs just as well that's made out of materials that mere mortals can afford. smile

While I can't speak for the A-body market, I know that the Belltech 2" drop spindles sell VERY well for the S10 and G-body crowd at around $200 or so a set, so there's definitely a calling for a spindle and steering arm in that price range that will actually make a difference in the performance of the vehicle, not just make it look pretty by lowering it.

I know that it wouldn't be a stretch to sell me on a set at $400 or so. smile

The only caveat is that a "flat" style upper control arm would need to be used as well since the spindle will in fact be taller than a stock A or G-body spindle.



If anything, I'd push for a spindle design similar to the later model S10/Blazer spindles for dual-piston brakes as those would allow for ease of adapting later model brakes via a simple bracket.


1987 Monte Carlo SS: The toy
Click here for my build thread
1987 Monte Carlo LS: Daily Driver
Build thread for the LS
#918671 - 02/16/12 05:31 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: SS Ninja]  
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,224
SickSpeedMonte Offline
15+ Year
SickSpeedMonte  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,224
MD
Originally Posted By: SS Ninja
Snippet of one of my emails with UMI in case anyone wants to keep the message consistent:


That's a great idea, I'm on board and I would buy a set with the blazer hubs. I'll compose an email later on.

#918672 - 02/16/12 05:33 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: SickSpeedMonte]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,129
SS Ninja Offline
15+ Year
SS Ninja  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,129
Stoughton, MA
Bernie, think it's worth a shot getting a bunch of people to email Belltech as well?

They might have more money available to invest in tooling and whatnot.


1987 Monte Carlo SS: The toy
Click here for my build thread
1987 Monte Carlo LS: Daily Driver
Build thread for the LS
#918673 - 02/16/12 05:35 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: SS Ninja]  
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,224
SickSpeedMonte Offline
15+ Year
SickSpeedMonte  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,224
MD
Sure, if we could get the support. I definately think there is a gap in the market just waiting to get filled.

#918678 - 02/16/12 05:55 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: SickSpeedMonte]  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,396
MAP Offline
15+ Year
MAP  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,396
Yuma, AZ
Hi Folks,

Furgie - sorry you took that personally. It wasn't clear that you were after a good roadhandling package - in general folks change the ride height for all kinds of reasons, many of which are more related to art than to roadhandling per se. But for a G-body with anything like a stock front-end geometry, getting the front end to be lower (within reason) by dropping the spindles is generally inferior to using lower, stiffer springs. Naturally, stiffness parity at the rear will need to be maintained.

But any spindle worth its salt, dropped or not, should fix bumpsteer and Ackerman. SC&C's AFX spindle does both, but it's pricey. SS Ninja - great communication with UMI - let's hope it spurs them to action. I would go back to them and raise the Ackerman issue, however.

Best,
MAP

Last edited by MAP; 02/16/12 10:08 PM.
#918773 - 02/17/12 01:06 AM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: MAP]  
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 131
Furgie Offline
Member
Furgie  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 131
Rustbeltville,MA
Originally Posted By: MAP
Hi Folks,

by dropping the spindles is generally inferior to using lower, stiffer springs. Naturally, stiffness parity at the rear will need to be maintained.


Best,
MAP


I'd like to know how and where you came to this.. as the superspeedway cars are sprung softer, not harder.. upsetting the weight transfer and shocking the underpinning are not welcome at 120-180mph+ smooth soft works better to keep traction and grip..

Herb Adams used soft sprung gear with big/huge anti roll bars. and wiped factory teams . with his garage built car..

Last edited by Furgie; 02/17/12 01:10 AM.

Oh when your body starts to shake,It's time to loosen off the brake ,and slam the hammer down
#918778 - 02/17/12 01:25 AM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: SS Ninja]  
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,024
rons87mcss Offline
Member
rons87mcss  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,024
PA
Originally Posted By: SS Ninja
Bernie, think it's worth a shot getting a bunch of people to email Belltech as well?

They might have more money available to invest in tooling and whatnot.


Let me know when china counterfiets it so I can afford a set *using your sign* > couch <
I'm guessing I've already bought a set of 2" DS (off ebay) made in china. Oh well, even my wheels were built there (maybe even the falken tires?) eek

#918853 - 02/17/12 10:23 AM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: rons87mcss]  
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 81
MADMIKE Offline
Member
MADMIKE  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 81
C.V. CA
Although the idea of a tall spindle to correct the upside down camber curve of the 78-88 A/G and 82-04 2wd S trucks would be nice, there are other components that would need to be addressed. It would not just be a simple spindle swap.

There would need to be new FUCAs built or modification of the existing units, due to the upper BJs misalignment.
What kind of brakes would be used? Stock or larger?
Should it be a drop spindle?
What wheel fitment should the new spindle(and FUCA) be able to accommodate? 14", 15" or larger?

It's a slippery slope.

The AFX spindle address' most of these concerns and it costs what it costs.
SC&C has probably the easiest product to fix the ailing front end issues with little drama.

Originally Posted By: Furgie
Herb Adams used soft sprung gear with big/huge anti roll bars.

NASCAR is one of the weirdest motorsports there is.
Herb Adams ideas are used today in NASCAR, but that's it. What other motorsport has you riding on the bumpstops at all times?
The soft springs are to gain minimum height, then at speed the aerodynamics of the body cause it to ride on the bumpstops, dropping the car even lower. The suspension is in coil bind. At this point I wouldn't even call it a suspension.

You would not apply those techniques used on a 'stock car' on a street car.


-Michael
Where the hell is JMD?!
#918867 - 02/17/12 01:05 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: MADMIKE]  
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,224
SickSpeedMonte Offline
15+ Year
SickSpeedMonte  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,224
MD
I don't really think land speed racing or even super speedway racing are in the realm of "road handling" anyway.

Mike, what is the UBJ misalignment? I am not familiar with the specifics of why the front geometry isn't that great, other than sort of high-level reasons like the camber curve.

The spindles should be compatable with the SC&C/SPC arms, ideally.

I would personally be interested in having the S10 hubs so that larger rotors are easily retrofitted. I guess if that required the use of brackets removable mounting to get the caliper located, it would allow you to have some options for both brakes and wheel sizes.

Personally, I would like the spindle to be located in a position such that the front ride height is about 26" to the front fender with the suspension is at the intended ride height. (i.e. the camber/caster and steering kinematics cannot be optimized at all ride heights, so the ride height at which the suspension is designed around should be about where my car currently sits as it's about as low as you can get without hitting the K member on the road and I like the way it looks.)

#918868 - 02/17/12 01:09 PM Re: drop spindles and bump steer [Re: MADMIKE]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,129
SS Ninja Offline
15+ Year
SS Ninja  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,129
Stoughton, MA
Originally Posted By: MADMIKE
Although the idea of a tall spindle to correct the upside down camber curve of the 78-88 A/G and 82-04 2wd S trucks would be nice, there are other components that would need to be addressed. It would not just be a simple spindle swap.

There would need to be new FUCAs built or modification of the existing units, due to the upper BJs misalignment.
What kind of brakes would be used? Stock or larger?
Should it be a drop spindle?
What wheel fitment should the new spindle(and FUCA) be able to accommodate? 14", 15" or larger?

It's a slippery slope.

The AFX spindle address' most of these concerns and it costs what it costs.
SC&C has probably the easiest product to fix the ailing front end issues with little drama.



Given that this proposed spindle would be the same height as a B-body spindle or AFX spindle, why would you need to reinvent the wheel in regards to a new front upper control arm? There's already 3 or 4 companies that I know of that manufacture the correct upper control arm for a tall spindle. Problem solved.

If it's based off of the dual-piston S10 spindle that I was originally referring to, use those brake mounting points. Those 11" brakes aren't bad to begin with, and they're inxpensive to replace, which is the budget option. It's also relatively inexpensive to mount LS1 or other larger GM brakes to those spindles with a simple bracket and people have been doing so with great success for years. Or, base it off the stock Monte/older S10 brakes and do the same thing with a bracket. No need to reinvent the wheel here, so less money spent for R&D.

Based on what we've been discussing in regards to wheel fitment, I wouldn't suggest making it a drop spindle. Design it as stock height and lower the "correct" way: Springs. I noticed that the AFX spindle drops about 7/8", so my last statement is up for debate. I still wouldn't go the route of 2" drop as is typical for an aftermarket spindle.

Based on the brake sizing we discussed above and my experience with the B-body swap, I'd say that 16" wheels would work depending on the brakes used. 17" wheels are probably more realistic if someone decided to swap on LS1 or larger brakes with a bracket as mentioned. Not a big deal considering that anyone doing this swap would also realize that good tires are needed and the number of good street tires in 16" or smaller is almost zero these days...

The AFX spindle "costs what it costs" due to the materials used (Honestly, there's no REAL need for an aluminum spindle with cheaper materials are available) and to recoup the manufacturer's original R&D costs.

I think it's time for the market to develop some competition at a lower cost as it typically does.


If push comes to shove, I'm buying tall upper and lower ball joints with a tall spindle upper control arm and getting most of the benefit at roughly 1/3 the cost.



1987 Monte Carlo SS: The toy
Click here for my build thread
1987 Monte Carlo LS: Daily Driver
Build thread for the LS
#918870 - 02/17/12 01:19 PM Re: drop spindles and bump steer [Re: SS Ninja]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,129
SS Ninja Offline
15+ Year
SS Ninja  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,129
Stoughton, MA
Bernie, you beat me to it! lmao


1987 Monte Carlo SS: The toy
Click here for my build thread
1987 Monte Carlo LS: Daily Driver
Build thread for the LS
#918892 - 02/17/12 05:29 PM Re: drop spindles and bump steer [Re: SS Ninja]  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,396
MAP Offline
15+ Year
MAP  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,396
Yuma, AZ
Hi Folks,

To sum-up as succinctly as possible, drop spindles take the existing (poor) front-end geometry and simply lower the front of the car. By dropping the front end by using shorter springs, camber gain is improved, which is the equivalent of saying that the front RCH is moved upward - and it could stand to be moved upward a bunch.

In both cases, if the front of the car is lowered and the rear isn't, then positive caster will decrease, possibly to the point where it should be reset. Increasing positive caster helps reduce bumpsteer for a stock A/G body front-end, incidentally.

The disadvantage of lowering the front by tweaking the springs, is that the suspension will ride nominally closer to the bumpstops, so suspension upward travel is reduced. In the compliance-controlled regime (i.e., low frequencies,) this problem can be cancelled by using stiffer springs. In the mass-controlled region (i.e., high frequencies,) stiffer springs can't overcome this problem. Stiffer spings also push the transition frequency between the two (roughly 2Hz?) upward, which is good. Achieving "performance" alignment specs may also become unattainable as one or more shim packs may get too thick to clamp, but there are effective ways to deal with that.

About soft versus stiff springs: soft is normally better in the mass-controlled region of chassis operation, since the variation of contact force between wheel and ground will vary less as a function of ride height. So, if you're taking a high-speed turn and encounter a sudden dip in the road, the softly-sprung car may retain composure while the stiffly-sprung car may kiss the guard rail. But, a soft suspension needs more attention for good articulation since the generally larger suspension excursions tend to be more revelatory of any motional flaws. Stiffer springs, on the other hand, do a better job of "hiding" suspension flaws, and there's a bunch to hide to be sure in the A/G body design.

Stiff sway bars are nothing more than a device to increase difference-mode stiffness (roll, for example,) while leaving common-mode (purely vertical motion only) stiffness alone. Reducing roll for the stock A/G body is very good, but it would take way too long to get into the reasons why - again, do a search - basically, we come back to flaw-hiding. High difference-mode stiffness with low common-mode stiffness may still generally yield a comfortable ride with low angles of roll in a turn, but returning to the high-speed turn scenario: with soft rates at all four wheels, if you encounter a sudden dip while turning, the car will likely retain composure. But now suppose only one side of the car sees the dip. Again, soft rates at all four corners means that the car will likely remain stable.

However, if you use soft springs with stiff sway bars, then if one side of the car sees a sudden dip and not the other - again assuming a mass-controlled regime - then the two wheels that see the dip will see a high vertical rate because of the difference-mode dominance, and so the effect would be similar to the case where the car is stiffly sprung again - so back we go into the guard rail. Perhaps the saving grace here is that in roll, the transition between the compliance-controlled and mass-controlled response regions is much higher (maybe 10 Hz?) so, statistically more of the vibration spectrum occurs in a frequency region where high difference-mode stiffness won't make things go awry.

But still the basic point is that soft springs with stiff sway bars, which Herb Adams espouses, is not quite the magic cure it's sometimes made-out to be.

About the last few posts - good nuggets here!

Best,
MAP


Last edited by MAP; 02/17/12 06:16 PM.
#918898 - 02/17/12 07:21 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: SS Ninja]  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 968
ls1_monte Offline
15+ Year
ls1_monte  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 968
Eastern Iowa
Could someone explain why drop spindles arent considered when setting up a "performance" suspension system? I'm looking at a street car that might see a few track days not an all out auto X'er.


'87 Monte SS With a stock 11,000 mile '98 LS1/T56.

#918902 - 02/17/12 07:41 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: ]  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,396
MAP Offline
15+ Year
MAP  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,396
Yuma, AZ
Hi LSS1,

They can be; it's just that the spring approach is normally better. Drop spindles certainly are the easiest way, if not the cheapest, to get the job done provided that there are no interference problems as a result.

If you want a precise answer to your question, it's mostly in the third post up. Concentrate on the first sentence.

Best,
MAP

Last edited by MAP; 02/17/12 07:46 PM.
#919104 - 02/19/12 01:01 AM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: MAP]  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 968
ls1_monte Offline
15+ Year
ls1_monte  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 968
Eastern Iowa
Interference with respect to the rim/tie rod or...?

I currently have belltech's that have been on my car for some time. I'm looking at the SC&C stage two if they will work with these spindles, I'm thinking they will but still need to do more research on it for sure.


'87 Monte SS With a stock 11,000 mile '98 LS1/T56.

#919529 - 02/21/12 05:34 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: ]  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,396
MAP Offline
15+ Year
MAP  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,396
Yuma, AZ
Hi LSS1,

There are too many variables to predict interference, or the lack thereof, with much certainty. The probability of tie rod interference definitely increases with a drop spindle.

The only way to be sure is to mock-up the whole geometry with a wheel template, and test through the whole range of suspension and steering inputs.

Incidentally, Marcus (SC&C) could probably offer you good advice here.

Best,
MAP

Best

#919546 - 02/21/12 07:54 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: MAP]  
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 81
MADMIKE Offline
Member
MADMIKE  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 81
C.V. CA
Originally Posted By: SickSpeedMonte

Mike, what is the UBJ misalignment?
I should have said 'run out of BJ misalignment range'. That was in reference to using a stock FUCA with a tall spindle. The stock FUCA would need to be shortened, it would also need to have the UBJ mount pad angle changed to allow full useable range of the UBJ without bind.
Originally Posted By: SickSpeedMonte
I am not familiar with the specifics of why the front geometry isn't that great, other than sort of high-level reasons like the camber curve.
I cannot say without a doubt as to the why, but I can speculate.
Positive camber allows for easy steering, even on rough or unpaved roads. Off the top of my head I can't remember the kingpin/scrub radius relation. This would affect how easily/quickly the (steering)wheel would turn back to center.
Originally Posted By: SickSpeedMonte

The spindles should be compatable with the SC&C/SPC arms, ideally.
They more than likely would use the SPC FUCA, or some variant of a B swap FUCA.
Originally Posted By: SS Ninja

There's already 3 or 4 companies that I know of that manufacture the correct upper control arm for a tall spindle. Problem solved.
Glad that was so easy.
Originally Posted By: SS Ninja

No need to reinvent the wheel here, so less money spent for R&D.
I hope no-one here is thinking of just copying the AFX spindle in iron.
Constraining oneself by not doing the R&D on a part is foolish. Who knows exactly what changes would need to be made. Everything may look dandy on paper, but unknown problems arise when a part is installed and used in the real world. Don't be so dismissive of R&D. Not installing the new part on a jig to stress cycle it a few thousand times is just silly.
Originally Posted By: SS Ninja

The AFX spindle "costs what it costs" due to the materials used (Honestly, there's no REAL need for an aluminum spindle with cheaper materials are available) and to recoup the manufacturer's original R&D costs.
Yes it 'costs what it costs' because 'it is what it is'. A quality forging that uses wheel bearings and brake components off a later model Corvette for easy replacement of parts, while allowing better geometry for the corner carver.
Originally Posted By: SS Ninja

I think it's time for the market to develop some competition at a lower cost as it typically does.
Lower cost to what? Innovation is not cheap. Sounds more like you wish someone would copy the ATS spindle and sell it cheaper.
How lovely.
I find companies that do this are scum and nothing more than thiefs. There are plenty of stolen designs and badly made knockoffs in the Mustang aftermarket, we do not need this to happen in 'our' aftermarket.
Originally Posted By: SS Ninja

If push comes to shove, I'm buying tall upper and lower ball joints with a tall spindle upper control arm and getting most of the benefit at roughly 1/3 the cost.
So price is your first concern, not performance.
Originally Posted By: LSS1-Monte
Could someone explain why drop spindles arent considered when setting up a "performance" suspension system?
Stock geometry on factory cars is not always ideal for the driving enthusiast. Just lowering the car does not fix the inherent problems with a given suspension. When it comes to drop spindles and attempting to optimize the handling characteristics, not only are the toe and camber settings adjusted, but also caster. In changing the caster you will need to reevaluate your bump/roll steer. Usually this requires a 'bump stack' or stack of spacers between the outer tie rod and the steering arm. With a drop spindle there is less room for any significant bump steer stack.

It's simply an issue of room.

More positive caster does two things. It aides in stability and self centering after a turn. With the wheel turned caster improves the wheels camber angle at turn in. Although at higher caster settings the steering may become heavy and feel vague.

When more caster is added, the spindle is rotated backwards, which changes the height of the outer tierod to the lower ball joint. This also changes the arcs in which the suspension link and the steering link changes in relation to each other. To remove any bump/roll steer the links need to travel in parallel arcs. With the change of the outer tierod height in relation to the lower BJ the link no longer travel in parallel arcs, this induces a change in steering angle output with no change in steering angle input. To fix this a 'bump stack' is placed in between the steering arm and outer tierod. This change in height brings the Bump/roll steer back to where there is, preferably, no unintended change in steering output angle.

A drop spindle(upright) moves the actual spindle up while leaving the pickup points in the same location. Any changes in caster would not allow for correction with a bumpstack as the steering arm will be very close to the wheel.

Last edited by MADMIKE; 02/21/12 07:57 PM.

-Michael
Where the hell is JMD?!
#919564 - 02/21/12 09:17 PM Re: drop spindles and bump stear [Re: MADMIKE]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,129
SS Ninja Offline
15+ Year
SS Ninja  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,129
Stoughton, MA
Originally Posted By: SS Ninja

There's already 3 or 4 companies that I know of that manufacture the correct upper control arm for a tall spindle. Problem solved.
Originally Posted By: MADMIKE
Glad that was so easy.


Care to explain in a less dismissive tone as to why it ISN'T that easy? Both the SPC and Spohn control arms can be used with the AFX spindle. Given that this proposed spindle would be the same height, why couldn't you use the arms mentioned above?

Originally Posted By: SS Ninja

No need to reinvent the wheel here, so less money spent for R&D.
Originally Posted By: MADMIKE
I hope no-one here is thinking of just copying the AFX spindle in iron.
Constraining oneself by not doing the R&D on a part is foolish. Who knows exactly what changes would need to be made. Everything may look dandy on paper, but unknown problems arise when a part is installed and used in the real world. Don't be so dismissive of R&D. Not installing the new part on a jig to stress cycle it a few thousand times is just silly.


The R&D comment I made was in regards to caliper mounting points, but anyways...

I never said that R&D wouldn't have to be performed, but there's a benchmark that they can aim for and measurements that they can review, which I believe would lower the amount of R&D to perform as they wouldn't be starting from scratch.



Originally Posted By: SS Ninja

I think it's time for the market to develop some competition at a lower cost as it typically does.


Originally Posted By: MADMIKE

Lower cost to what? Innovation is not cheap. Sounds more like you wish someone would copy the ATS spindle and sell it cheaper.
How lovely.
I find companies that do this are scum and nothing more than thiefs. There are plenty of stolen designs and badly made knockoffs in the Mustang aftermarket, we do not need this to happen in 'our' aftermarket.



The two companies currently being discussed are UMI and Belltech, not some fly by night Chinese ebay "company" that we're sending stolen blueprints to. Chill.

Given that logic, I take it you'd have no problem paying an exorbitant price for a light bulb, as only Edison (Or arguably those who invented it before him) should have had the rights to sell one given that they thought of it first.

Let's go back to front control arms for a minute: Given the factory design, there's only so many ways to design the shape of a control arm (upper or lower). Plenty of companies make similar designs at different price points, some of this due to different materials, being made in different countries, etc.

Some may tweak caster a bit, offer different spring pockets, etc.

That said, they're all fundamentally the same with small differencs here and there due to the inherent space and design constraints of associated components.

Unless you have a problem with the above, I don't see how you can have an issue with another company making a taller spindle for the G-body that doesn't have the drawbacks of the B-body spindle. I never mentioned making an exact copy, but it's within fair use to realize a good idea and say "Gee, I think I could make something similar".

Feel free to call up Hotchkis, Global West, SPC, UMI, Spohn... and call them scum for me for "copying" GM's design and then making similar products out of different materials. smile


Heck, even better: Call up every manufacturer that makes an aftermarket replacement part for our cars and call them thieves and scum since only GM should be allowed to create and sell parts for our cars.



Originally Posted By: SS Ninja

If push comes to shove, I'm buying tall upper and lower ball joints with a tall spindle upper control arm and getting most of the benefit at roughly 1/3 the cost.


Originally Posted By: MADMIKE
So price is your first concern, not performance.


Not my primary concern, but given that I don't drive my car at 10/10s (And I doubt you do either unless you professionally race your car), I don't need a forged aluminum casting with Corvette bearings when a ductile iron spindle with "off the shelf" bearings will work for my performance goals.

Let's say you're building a "mild" small block with 350-400 HP. No need to buy a dart block for that when a GM block will do. I guess everyone needs a balls to the walls 800 HP monster to enjoy driving their cars, much like we evidently need to buy $1400 in spindles and steering arms to enjoy taking corners.


1987 Monte Carlo SS: The toy
Click here for my build thread
1987 Monte Carlo LS: Daily Driver
Build thread for the LS
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Random Images
500/thumbs/Mikes_87_SS_insides.jpg
by MikePEI
776/thumbs/Dec05MonteCarloresize_0021.JPG
by mikeasis
500/thumbs/DSC01985.JPG
by msh1987
500/thumbs/Picture_177.jpg
by Big E's 83SS
500/thumbs/Picture_062a.jpg
by Tim3927
Help MonteCarloSS.com


Recent Contributors
kevins88ss
Authorized Vendors
Tell them you saw it
on MonteCarloSS.com!


CustomMonteSSParts.com
Dixie Monte Carlo Depot
GSI Interiors
HRpartsNstuff
Mikes Montes
Savitske Classic & Custom
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0