Hey everyone,
Looking for a side by side picture of the two control arms, or maybe dimensions of each. I am trying to understand the difference in dimensions between the two.
Thanks,
Luke
-Luke
EFFEKTIV Motorsport #189 GTS2 - Ground Control / Motorsport Hardware / Hawk Brakes
Visit us @ https://www.facebook.com/EffektivMotorsport
96+ arms are about 1/2" longer when you measure from the center of the outer balljoint to the center of where the lollypop bushing is mounted.
Which would give you more castor, if you used 95 LCABs (possibly pushing the wheel too far forward). Using the proper LCABs with the proper arms results in roughly the same castor. Using 95 arms with centered LCABs would result in less castor. Static camber should not be affected in any case (much).
Thanks! This should help with tackling the mystery geometry on a car I just picked up. Figure I will replace with the 96+ lemforders anyway (and use all 96+ parts, but maybe play with offset LCAB to see how it works/feels), but for the mean time I'd like to know what the hell is going on under there.
-Luke
EFFEKTIV Motorsport #189 GTS2 - Ground Control / Motorsport Hardware / Hawk Brakes
Visit us @ https://www.facebook.com/EffektivMotorsport
-Luke
EFFEKTIV Motorsport #189 GTS2 - Ground Control / Motorsport Hardware / Hawk Brakes
Visit us @ https://www.facebook.com/EffektivMotorsport
-I have the 2X Caster setup (96 arm + 95 bushing).. SOOOO smooth in high speeds The PO had it set this way, I am defiantly switching back to the centered bushing. CASTOR PLUS.jpg
-BUT, in A.X. I suffer: Low turning radius, heavy wheel, & tire rubs a bit when turned to lock under heavy breaking.
So, WTB: CENTERED LCAB!!!
I run offset bushings with Turner Al control arms which are of the 95 geometry. I bought an extra set of stock arms for the trailer and when I crashed I had to change one. It turns out the stock ones were of 97 geometry. That wheel ws sooo much further forward that the other it was noticable by eye. I had to change both, but it resulted is such a sloooow turn in it was not funny. At least 1/4 more of a turn on the wheel to get the same outcame. This was at NHMS so it is is a tight track and extremely noticable. For what it is worth.
Thank you! This is exactly what I needed to hear for a car that competes in autocross when its not being thrown around the track. Losing noticable turn in effort would have been very disappointing.
I have become interested in running 95 or AL control arms with some nice lcab replacements such as the treehouse ones, but am unsure on strut hats. Not ready for camber plates yet, will swapped 96+ hats give me negative effects or will I still benefit from some camber?
-Luke
EFFEKTIV Motorsport #189 GTS2 - Ground Control / Motorsport Hardware / Hawk Brakes
Visit us @ https://www.facebook.com/EffektivMotorsport
-Luke
EFFEKTIV Motorsport #189 GTS2 - Ground Control / Motorsport Hardware / Hawk Brakes
Visit us @ https://www.facebook.com/EffektivMotorsport
Wow I was always told if you have camber plates to try and max out the castor, meaning push the wheel as close to the front of the car as possible but it sounds many are saying that too much isn't the best setup. What are most of you guys running for castor? I just have the 95 arms with offset bushing so I am probly around 7.5 castor.
Ummm .... no. That's the whole point. The wheel does NOT move when adjustting castor with the camber/castor plates. At least not a significant amount. The pivot is the oute ball joint, which is very close to the center of the wheel. Draw a line from the pivot through the hub, and up to the upper mount. Now move the upper mount backa and forth ... what happens to the wheel? Not much. Now do the same by moving the lower point (the lower balljoint, as the 96+ arms do). What happens to the wheel now? It moves quite a bit. that's the difference. Same castor effect, but acheived in different ways, with the latter doing more harm than good.
You guys mentioned swapping strut hats.
I have read on the forums before that swapping the strut hats gives you more castor, as well as camber. Can anyone attest to this being fact or fiction?
Thanks.
Has anybody just tried to swap hats on their 95? I only ask this because I am aiming to keep the car SCCA Solo Stock.
Yes, use the camber/caster plate to maximize caster angle at the top and it doesn't affect the wheel centering issue (within the wheel arch) as drastically as using offset LCAB bushings in a '96-99 M3. That always causes tire rub issues, unless you break out the SawsAll.
And shimming an E36 strut to get more negative camber has drawbacks, namely - loss of inboard tire clearance (the wheel moves closer to the strut), and a change of the Kindpin angle (KPI), and scrub. "Shimming" should only done if you are 1) are totally broke and you cannot afford adjustable camber plates or 2) cannot get enough negative camber even with proper adjustable camber plates (this is extremely rare).
As for a picture of the various control arms, here's one. The E30, early E36 non-M, late E36 non-M and a '95 M3 arm are all identical with respect to the geometry. I am awaiting another '96-99 M3 arm then I'll retake the picture to include that, but its longer.
Terry Fair @ Vorshlag Motorsports
Fair, what is the length of "B" on the E46 arm.
E30 Vs +96 M3
They look almost identical other than at the outer ball joint.
Last edited by e30-323ti; 02-16-2010 at 08:56 PM.
Bookmarks