SPC Adjustable Control Arms

[Razziel24]

Hi, I did search, but didnt find the appropiate answer....

Are this control arms any good ? any reviews ?

http://www.spcperformance.com/PROD_DIR/SPCPerf_PROD_SEARCH_DYN.cfm?cmd=Cam&cmd2=72110&cmd3=

I read somewhere that SPC makes the adjustable control arms for UUC, so are they the same ?

Thanks

[Razziel24]

Another question... since were on the topic.... from what Iive read this couple of days on several threads, one of the functions of the trailing arm is to bent in a crash to protect other parts.... (mine didnt work then, it bent and I also had damage on my output shaft and trailing arm) so how good it is to have one of this "stronger" aftermarket control arms..... from my experience id say, that an stronger control arm woud have actually protected my axle and trailing arms from bending also, maybe the only damage would have been for the rim itself....

[M52 POWER!]

Look just like the bav auto ones...

[bjl4776]

Those arms look just like my UUC arms. The UUC units are extremely strong but I do not find that to be a problem in case of an impact. I recently and unfortunate incident that involved me and a 6" curb at around 60+. And i bent the rim pretty bad but no visible damage to the rear suspension. I wont no for sure until i get it up on the alignment rack. But i do agree with your assumption that the stronger harms just help protect anything except for the rim. The stock units bend a little too easy in my opinion

[Razziel24]

UUC Adjustable Control Arms:
Co-developed with OE-supplier SPC Performance, the combination of OE engineering and UUC's enhancements make these arms truly "ultimate".

Taken from the UUC website.

[BSH]

I have these:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/SPC-REAR-CAMBER-KIT-CONTROL-ARM-BMW-E36-E46-325-328-M3_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ33581QQihZ013QQitemZ 230149258749QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW

[BealeAss]

I've got em, SPC basically makes 90% of the kits out there so you'll be good.

[Razziel24]

So is this SPC adjustable control arm the same than the one UUC sells ?

[ELIBEEMER]

i have the welded steel version...SPC

they work great. never had an issue.

SPC now makes a Billet Alluminum version...looks super beefy..

Either of those are superior to the non-adjustable, Stamped sheetmetal version that came on the car.

[malter]

if and when they bend, stronger arms will take out a lot of expensive, suspension parts

go with stock, unless you are tracking/racing and don't mind extra cost of possibly higher repairs in future.

[Rob Levinson]

So is this SPC adjustable control arm the same than the one UUC sells ?

No.

SPC makes the chromoly steel arms exclusively for UUC, they are not available anywhere else.

http://www.uucmotorwerks.com/CHROMOLY_ADJ_ARMS/


if and when they bend, stronger arms will take out a lot of expensive, suspension parts

I think we can finally stop spreading this myth.

We recently had a customer put this to the test, slid the car into the curb.

With the UUC Chromoly Steel arms, absolutely no damage happened to the subframe, hub, or any other suspension component. The UUC lower control arm bent exactly as designed.

The huge advantage to our chromoly arms is that unlike aluminum or mild steel, chromoly will not suffer from stress fatigue. Stress fatigue is an ongoing weakening of a material from repeated stress, which is why you see the mild steel OE arms and aftermarket alumimum arms "spontaneously" fail without impact.

[Razziel24]

Thanks for clarifying that out Rob, thats what I think also, cause my stock one bent, and because of that, my axle and my trailing arm were damaged also, I think a stronger control arm would have prevented that, only the rim and tyre would have been torn apart....

[malter]

I think we can finally stop spreading this myth.

I will not get into piss contest over this, mostly because I don't have any raw data or sources to prove and support my argument.

I am just going based on the fact that hit force (ex. from hitting the curb) has to be transmitted somewhere in the body. Cr-Mo is very strong alloy and if the force from the hit doesn't bend the arm, it has to go somewhere. Weakest link is obviously the joint, which is attached to other, more expensive suspension pieces.

Do you agree with this?

[Rob Levinson]

I will not get into piss contest over this, mostly because I don't have any raw data or sources to prove and support my argument.

I am just going based on the fact that hit force (ex. from hitting the curb) has to be transmitted somewhere in the body. Cr-Mo is very strong alloy and if the force from the hit doesn't bend the arm, it has to go somewhere. Weakest link is obviously the joint, which is attached to other, more expensive suspension pieces.

Do you agree with this?

No pissing match required, we're discussing this based on actual real-world proof. With proof, there is no longer any argument.

It is now proven, empirically concluded. Direct accident damage does not cause subframe or hub damage... you can use whatever theory you want for hyothetical discussion, but the real-world data proves no damage.

Maybe you missed what I wrote - as designed, the chromoly arm bent when subjected to the side impact.

The shop putting the car back together put the car on a frame machine and showed everything was straight... they also put it on an alignment rack and aside from adjusting the replacement arm normally, found that everything was normal.

That's pretty much the end of "the big question" that's been bouncing around Bf.c for awhile. Zero damage from curb impact with UUC chromoly arms.

- Rob

[bjl4776]

I think from the initial point of impact inwards the weekest point is the wheel/tire. The stock arms just aren't strong enough to take the weight. I had my reserves about impacts and the stock arms but have been proven wrong through experience. My stock arms bent pretty bad from just touching the curb barely enough to scratch the rim at 140k on the stock arms. Even think about the power being transfered completely through the car at that kind of speed. I hit the curb hard enough to split my windsheild in 2 places as well as trash both of my front struts and tie rods. I also managed to bend the back rim to the point were im surprised it still holds air and no noticable damage to the rear suspension. If all of your bushing are in proper condition and everything is torqued properly the rest of your suspension is pretty strong. I haven't gotten it on an aligment rack but I can tell you that I have -2 degrees camber, and 1/8in toe in on the rear before i hit the curb. Ill tell you some time next week what it is now.

[Razziel24]

Ok, im speaking from personal experience....
Check this thread out...... its my accident... a few days ago

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=780987

From those pics, you can clearly see, that the control arm bent, and that helped the damage to replicate on the other parts (axle and trailing arm) Maybe if it had some more structural strenght, the whole thing would have remained in its place, and only the rim and tyre would have dissipated the impact (and be destroyed of course), im not an structural engineer, I can just assume, but its seems logical to me, that this impact wasnt strong enough to rip off the whole rear suspension, taking the diff and drive shaft with it.... so stronger control arms would not harm, but actually protect the whole thing.

[BealeAss]

Ok, im speaking from personal experience....
Check this thread out...... its my accident... a few days ago

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=780987

From those pics, you can clearly see, that the control arm bent, and that helped the damage to replicate on the other parts (axle and trailing arm) Maybe if it had some more structural strenght, the whole thing would have remained in its place, and only the rim and tyre would have dissipated the impact (and be destroyed of course), im not an structural engineer, I can just assume, but its seems logical to me, that this impact wasnt strong enough to rip off the whole rear suspension, taking the diff and drive shaft with it.... so stronger control arms would not harm, but actually protect the whole thing.

I believe that is actually quite false, these are usually not recommended on a road car b/c of the increased stiffness in case of an accident they will not bend therefore ripping the subframe. Your factory arms are designed to do just what they did, bend. That way it saves far more damage.

[Rob Levinson]

I believe that is actually quite false, these are usually not recommended on a road car b/c of the increased stiffness in case of an accident they will not bend therefore ripping the subframe. Your factory arms are designed to do just what they did, bend. That way it saves far more damage.

Have you had the opportunity to read any of the five previous posts? I think the discussion has moved beyond that false point.

[BealeAss]

Have you had the opportunity to read any of the five previous posts? I think the discussion has moved beyond that false point.

Does that falsity apply to any product other than that produced by UUC?

[Rob Levinson]

Does that falsity apply to any product other than that produced by UUC?

I'm claiming that there aren't any documented cases of subframe damage caused by "too strong" a lower control arm from any company - thought that was the common sense concept behind this discussion so far...?

The completely baseless comments in several threads have been Chicken Little-style paranoia about "subframe damage". Seemed to be the bandwagon of the month, although without every any proof - and now proof of the opposite.

[malter]

Well, I wouldn't go so far to call it chicken little style paranoia. Thats somewhat arrogant stance coming from a vendor with how many personal cars? I am sure you take more or less free labor and discounted parts for granted, because you are not the end user here.

If M3 is your only car, there is nothing wrong with being paranoid or inquisitive about getting a right aftermarket part. Assuming there are no documented cases of ripped subframes you cannot deny there was a lot of discussion regarding this. Now, where it stemmed from is questionable and you may be completely right that it is formed on baseless argument. All we are doing here is QUESTIONING. Maybe irrelevant to this conversation, but what do you think was the reason BMW designed aluminum arms? Cost or actual engineering data?

Not to discredit your proof, but on how many cars was this accident tested? One? Is that enough proof to make a claim? Depending on the angle of the hit, damage to suspension could vary?

I had one bent lower control arm and there was no damage whatsoever to other pieces of suspension, which is in direct disagreement with the guy above who hit a curb and messed up axle and trailing arm. Can I now make a claim that stock arm will surely prevent damage to other suspension part based on my case alone disregarding his case? Of course not.

I replaced mine with stock arm, but I think every arm out there is well designed, just for DIFFERENT purpose.

[DEFKON99]

theres always ground control they are bmwcca ok designed to fold on impact as well

[liilpa09]

i have been more than happy with my SPC control arms...

[Rob Levinson]

Well, I wouldn't go so far to call it chicken little style paranoia.

Sure it is.

From all the people that have been making this claim... have any of them ever shown proof of it happening?

I haven't seen it. Have you? I'd love to see additional data.


Thats somewhat arrogant stance coming from a vendor with how many personal cars? I am sure you take more or less free labor and discounted parts for granted, because you are not the end user here.

Whoa there... who gets free labor and parts? Where can I hire these people and find these manufacturers?

With more than one car, repair costs increase.


Assuming there are no documented cases of ripped subframes you cannot deny there was a lot of discussion regarding this. Now, where it stemmed from is questionable and you may be completely right that it is formed on baseless argument. All we are doing here is QUESTIONING.

Questioning is fine. Funny thing with internet message boards, other people (not referring to you) make baseless claims just to attack certain companies.


Maybe irrelevant to this conversation, but what do you think was the reason BMW designed aluminum arms? Cost or actual engineering data?

BMW original lower control arms on the E36 (and similar E46) are steel, not aluminum. Of course there is "engineering" behind the design, like every other part in the car - including the plastic water pump impellers and gearboxes that won't self-center. The OE arms are literally the cheapest piece of folded sheet steel you can imagine. Cost is a big factor - you don't find parts like that on E39s or E60s, and now that the E90 has gone upmarket, no parts like that either.



Not to discredit your proof, but on how many cars was this accident tested? One? Is that enough proof to make a claim?

It's infinitely greater a sample space than those saying damage will happen with zero proof.



I had one bent lower control arm and there was no damage whatsoever to other pieces of suspension, which is in direct disagreement with the guy above who hit a curb and messed up axle and trailing arm. Can I now make a claim that stock arm will surely prevent damage to other suspension part based on my case alone disregarding his case? Of course not.

I replaced mine with stock arm, but I think every arm out there is well designed, just for DIFFERENT purpose.

Well... except for the brands that have spontaneously failed from stress. Do a search, you'll see the threads where arms from "respected manufacturers" crumple or crack their welds during an auto-x... without hitting anything at all.

- Rob

[Rob Levinson]

theres always ground control they are bmwcca ok designed to fold on impact as well

There is no such thing. BMW CCA does not "ok" any parts, they are not a testing agency.

Assuming you mean BMW CCA Club Racing, feel free to read the rulebook online at www.bmwccaclubracing.org ... the only distinctions between classes regarding rear lower control arms is "stock required" (with welded stengthening recommended!) or bushing material:

(page 47)
SpecE36 class:

G. Suspension bushing materials are free, but spherical bearing may not
be used. Rear lower control arms may not be replaced with aftermarket
parts, but may be reinforced.

(page 30)
STOCK classes:

M. E36's may 'box' via skip welding the lower wishbone (part #
33321092237) in the rear suspension to reinforce the part, in the
interests of safety and durability. It is strongly advised that this
modification be performed.

...or limitations on bushing materials:

(page 38)
PREPARED classes:

G. Suspension bushing material is free. Bushing material does not include
replacement of bushings with spherical bearings or rod ends such as
Heim ends. Solid bushings are allowed if they are fixed in place and
allow rotation only in a single plane or axis. Spherical bearing type front
upper strut mounts are allowed. Spherical bearing type upper rear
strut/shock mounts are not allowed. Sway bar link connectors are free.
Replacement rear lower control arms which include spherical bearings
are not allowed.

And that is all that BMW CCA Club Racing has to say on the subject on rear lower control arms.

Note the emphasis on increasing strength for safety.

- Rob

[DEFKON99]

^ yeh exactly

[DJ OutOfSight]

Um all i can say is that i got UUC arms installed and there fine.

To be honest i guess there was no reason for me to spend the extra money besides the fact that i like uuc and have a few of there products. So basicily i was buying the name and quality.

But they look as if nothing will bend them but i dont want to take sides!!!
I am happy with them and thats it!! Get the REAL UUC not no fake shit!