Kirk! We're under attack!! Suspension help.

[moore_rb]

Originally Posted by RedHawk

So cant answer that question becasue the hacks wont respond to my requests. They have my parts that were removed. I've been making progress myself so it will get done. Issue is getting toe and caster right. The tie rod on drive side is maxed out so considering buy new tie rods and cutting them so I can have more adjustment. Right now toe is off and caster is off. Once I have solution I'll post it.

That really sucks. Steering is the most challenging system on a car to get absolutely right, and (I'm sorry to say it) but 90% of the shops out there are little more than "R&R" (remove and replace, or "drop and swap") style shops.

The second you start changing suspension components, you REALLY need to have the car in the hands of a qualified suspension specialist- Someone who understands all the inter-connected trigonometry, and the engineering involved. Someone who can can look the car over, and do the entire job in their head, before they ever take a wrench to your car.

Regarding the tie rods being maxed out- When you say "maxed out" does that mean that all the threads are exposed? or does it mean that the outer tie rod can't screw in anymore because it's bottomed out?

The Classic Roadsters assembly manual specifies that you are supposed to cut 7/8 inch of thread off of both inner tie rods. Is it possible that one of your inners is cut correctly, and the other one isn't? This would create a big difference in the exposed thread counts from side to side.

Also- I'm not sure if this would still even be necessary with your new control arms, because I don't know if the length, or the pivot point of the new control arms has changed, which would thereby change the entire sweep angle of the suspension, therefore requiring all new calculations for the corresponding tie rod lengths and sweep angles.

Lots of math to do when you start re-engineering the front end of a car.

Even if you get the basic alignment measurements into spec, you have to be sure that the tie rod sweep angles are correctly matched to the control arm sweep angles, or else bump steer will result...

Rob- Great writeup on the string alignment technique... Very old-school.

Most of the time I have to go over to the HAMB (and suffer through all of the associated verbal abuse, hahah) to get high quality feedback from the old-school hot rodders...

[rbgray1]

Originally Posted by moore_rb

That really sucks. Steering is the most challenging system on a car to get absolutely right, and (I'm sorry to say it) but 90% of the shops out there are little more than "R&R" (remove and replace, or "drop and swap") style shops.

The second you start changing suspension components, you REALLY need to have the car in the hands of a qualified suspension specialist- Someone who understands all the inter-connected trigonometry, and the engineering involved. Someone who can can look the car over, and do the entire job in their head, before they ever take a wrench to your car.

Regarding the tie rods being maxed out- When you say "maxed out" does that mean that all the threads are exposed? or does it mean that the outer tie rod can't screw in anymore because it's bottomed out?

The Classic Roadsters assembly manual specifies that you are supposed to cut 7/8 inch of thread off of both inner tie rods. Is it possible that one of your inners is cut correctly, and the other one isn't? This would create a big difference in the exposed thread counts from side to side.

Also- I'm not sure if this would still even be necessary with your new control arms, because I don't know if the length, or the pivot point of the new control arms has changed, which would thereby change the entire sweep angle of the suspension, therefore requiring all new calculations for the corresponding tie rod lengths and sweep angles.

Lots of math to do when you start re-engineering the front end of a car.

Even if you get the basic alignment measurements into spec, you have to be sure that the tie rod sweep angles are correctly matched to the control arm sweep angles, or else bump steer will result...

Rob- Great writeup on the string alignment technique... Very old-school.

Most of the time I have to go over to the HAMB (and suffer through all of the associated verbal abuse, hahah) to get high quality feedback from the old-school hot rodders...

moore_rb,

Thanks for the note, I completely forgot about the original build directions of shortening the inboard tie rods by 7/8" since I originally did this 26 years ago. Just referred to my original CR1 build manual and it clearly states removing 7/8" from inner ends of 74-78 Mustang II, 73-79 Pinto, or 75-79 Mercury Bobcat on page 3-12 of the original build manual. Hard to remember everything I did last night little lone 26 years ago.

This might be part of Redhawks problem, I would just like to see him check A-arm bushing to ball joint dimensions, and overall ball joint widths (on the ground) versus our stock set-up to see if ball joint widths have changed by much more that 1/8 inch.

Regarding the string alignment process, thanks for the "old school" comment. I've used this rough set-up for years and it works, you can't argue with something that still works. As a matter of fact, old racers used this process at the track just to double check toe and make minor changes when alignment equipment wasn't available. You can even buy aluminum plates now with slots in them where you just measure side to side front and back of front tires with a tape measure to set initial toe in before a full professional alignment.

Funny side story...I bought a factory refurbished Club Car golf cart for my home in Florida last year and when it was delivered, it steered like crap, pulled hard to one side and generally awful to drive. I did the string process in my garage over the course of about 45 mins and several neighbors saw me and asked what I was doing. I explained the process and ...walah, golf cart drives like a new street car. I then had at least 4 neighbors request my assistance with their golf carts and did the same process and they were amazed how simple and how well their golf carts drive in our community. At one point that evening it looked like a street rod meet for golf carts in my driveway and garage. I think I got paid with a few cases of beer and at least one bottle of Jim Beam Black that is long gone by now. I laugh every time I think about it and my neighbors keep commenting how much better their carts are now for this simple 15 to 45 min process.

Since I have my entire front end suspension removed, would it be possible for you to measure your front end ball joint width (center of ball joint grease fitting from side to side) of your lower and upper front end? I can do this, I would just need to temporarily bolt my old A-Arms on quickly and take measurements. I think Redhawk would benefit greatly to know these "before" measurements to understand if his ball joint width has changed from original dimensions.

[rbgray1]

RedHawk,

Whoa.....Whoa.... Whoa....!

Just for the sake of confirmation based on your troubles, I spent the evening tonight bolting up my raw front suspension to confirm before and after measurements of the OEM A-Arms and the Heidts A-Arms.

Here's what I found:

The lower side to side ball joint Joint dimensions with factory A-Arms is 47-7/16 from side to side with the arms just below level by about a quarter inch, enough to measure from grease fitting to grease fitting(I have photos).

With the Heidts lower Arms installed (keep in mind, I'm staying with lower strut rods from the Pinto Suspension), the side to side ball joint measurement is 46-5/8! Almost one inch narrower than factory OEM. Just for kicks, I bolted on upper OEM and Heidts upper A-Arms and they look OK for inclination angles for Caster and Camber, well within adjustable range (I have an inclination level that I can rough in positive or negative angles from the spindle and ball joint angles).

Problem is the shortened lower ball joint dimension and ALSO the fact that the lower Heidts tubular A-Arms interfere with the spring tower upright on the front of the car due to the "sweep" of the tubes not being as drastic as the factory curve. This would cause me to "bend" the angled shock tower steel slightly to provide for clearance of the new lower Heidt's tubular A-Arms through their travel. Both not good.

I'm going to be on the phone with Heidt's first thing tomorrow morning to determine if their A-Arms are intended to be geometrically the same as Mustang II parts or if they are engineered to work with their suspension components, period.

This test does not make me very happy as I didn't need this hassle. Oh well, it's been said that the build, or rebuild in my case both ways, is as much fun as driving it. At this point in time, I don't agree.

At least I didn't paint the parts yet....Ooops, sorry for that, it wasn't meant negative.

[RedHawk]

Originally Posted by rbgray1

RedHawk,

Whoa.....Whoa.... Whoa....!

Just for the sake of confirmation based on your troubles, I spent the evening tonight bolting up my raw front suspension to confirm before and after measurements of the OEM A-Arms and the Heidts A-Arms.

Here's what I found:

The lower side to side ball joint Joint dimensions with factory A-Arms is 47-7/16 from side to side with the arms just below level by about a quarter inch, enough to measure from grease fitting to grease fitting(I have photos).

With the Heidts lower Arms installed (keep in mind, I'm staying with lower strut rods from the Pinto Suspension), the side to side ball joint measurement is 46-5/8! Almost one inch narrower than factory OEM. Just for kicks, I bolted on upper OEM and Heidts upper A-Arms and they look OK for inclination angles for Caster and Camber, well within adjustable range (I have an inclination level that I can rough in positive or negative angles from the spindle and ball joint angles).

Problem is the shortened lower ball joint dimension and ALSO the fact that the lower Heidts tubular A-Arms interfere with the spring tower upright on the front of the car due to the "sweep" of the tubes not being as drastic as the factory curve. This would cause me to "bend" the angled shock tower steel slightly to provide for clearance of the new lower Heidt's tubular A-Arms through their travel. Both not good.

I'm going to be on the phone with Heidt's first thing tomorrow morning to determine if their A-Arms are intended to be geometrically the same as Mustang II parts or if they are engineered to work with their suspension components, period.

This test does not make me very happy as I didn't need this hassle. Oh well, it's been said that the build, or rebuild in my case both ways, is as much fun as driving it. At this point in time, I don't agree.

At least I didn't paint the parts yet....Ooops, sorry for that, it wasn't meant negative.

First of all big Thanks to you and everryone else with the advice. I am a commercial contractor by trade and build buildings. I feel like your speaking chineese when reffering to suspension though. I think I just opened up a can of worms, but followed your advise and I think I got it dialed in with no pull, a little toe in and straight. Atleast long enough to get through the weekend for an alignment scheduled Monday morning with another reputable classic car shop. Ugh!!

One thing I can happily say is the shocks and spring setup are simply incredible. No more nightmares at the dentist to replace disloged fillings. I can hit bumps, cracks, small woodland creatures, mariachi bands, barn swallows, neighborhood solictors, Kardashian family members whatever with no issues what so ever. WOW!

[rbgray1]

Redhawk,

You're welcome. It's good to share ideas and fixes when we both are doing very similar things to our cars. I know I'll like the final outcome as well, just want to confirm that some of these engineering changes in the parts are for the better and don't cause me headaches down the road. Hopefully I will have pictures in the next few days of all the new suspension, coilovers, and Wilwood brakes on the car. I figured out a great easy way to convert the rear to QA1 coilovers with some very simple and strong brackets I'm welding on the upper frame in the rear and changing the lower shock mount on the rear. I'll send pics when done.

BTW, if you hit a Kardashian.....make sure you put your car in reverse and do it at least 4 more times......then repeat!

[rbgray1]

Redhawk,

One more thing I forgot to mention.

Since you were less than satisfied with your previous shop's performance, I'm guessing they also installed your Wilwood systems?

I ran into something in very small print when I built up all my components for my rear drum to 12.19 rotor conversion from Wilwood. Apparently Ford used at least 10 different axle sizes for the 8.8 rears. The outermost portion of the axle has a raised area that the drum centers on to index in to eliminate runout. There are no fewer that 10 different sizes of these. Wilwood ships with the kits only one set of "rotor hat indexing bushings" with their kits (most common size, 2.83"). My axles are 2.52 indexing hubs and I had to special order these from Wilwood (kinda crappy since they cost $15 each plus shipping).

Reason for my comment is you may want to double check these from your buildup since you were less than satisfied with your previous shop. With the wrong ones installed, the rear rotor hats will have excessive runout during braking as the only thing centering the rotor would be your lug nuts and wheel.

Easy to check. Remove the rear wheel and look at the center of the rotor hat where it meets the axle. You should see a small aluminum "rotor indexing bushing" that centers the rotor hats on the axles. Based on numerous axles used by Ford, odds are not in your favor that the correct ones came with the kit.

Take a close look at the Wilwood instructions. Better to be safe than sorry, especially when it comes to brakes.

[RedHawk]

Originally Posted by moore_rb

That really sucks. Steering is the most challenging system on a car to get absolutely right, and (I'm sorry to say it) but 90% of the shops out there are little more than "R&R" (remove and replace, or "drop and swap") style shops.

The second you start changing suspension components, you REALLY need to have the car in the hands of a qualified suspension specialist- Someone who understands all the inter-connected trigonometry, and the engineering involved. Someone who can can look the car over, and do the entire job in their head, before they ever take a wrench to your car.

Regarding the tie rods being maxed out- When you say "maxed out" does that mean that all the threads are exposed? or does it mean that the outer tie rod can't screw in anymore because it's bottomed out?

The Classic Roadsters assembly manual specifies that you are supposed to cut 7/8 inch of thread off of both inner tie rods. Is it possible that one of your inners is cut correctly, and the other one isn't? This would create a big difference in the exposed thread counts from side to side.

Also- I'm not sure if this would still even be necessary with your new control arms, because I don't know if the length, or the pivot point of the new control arms has changed, which would thereby change the entire sweep angle of the suspension, therefore requiring all new calculations for the corresponding tie rod lengths and sweep angles.

Lots of math to do when you start re-engineering the front end of a car.

Even if you get the basic alignment measurements into spec, you have to be sure that the tie rod sweep angles are correctly matched to the control arm sweep angles, or else bump steer will result...

Rob- Great writeup on the string alignment technique... Very old-school.

Most of the time I have to go over to the HAMB (and suffer through all of the associated verbal abuse, hahah) to get high quality feedback from the old-school hot rodders...

Oh gosh! Cut to the scene of me standing on a ledge!!. "RedHawk you have a family with 3 beautiful children and a wife and devoted dog lola. COME DOWN FROM THE LEDGE."

I'll look at the threads too. You may be right. For now I'm doinking around with thermostat because of the many F'd up things these Monkeys did my car is now overheating and the battery isnt charging. For laughing lying and crying out loud!

Used my multimeter and can see that when car is running with 2000 rpms batrery voltage isnt jumping. It stays at 12.7 or less.

Also, also its now overheating shortly after starting cold and letting idle for a couple minutes. Timing off? Hell I dont know. Thermostat? Probably. They supposedly replaced this too.not sure what temp so I bought a 180 and 195. Was thinking to test the one in there and go with 180 first.
-Upward and onward.