Glad to see more progress man, keep it up.
Drop that spare tire on the ground outside the car. kill the weight.
What's a proline spring?
I think you should also tighten up your front swaybar endlinks some more, I can see too much nipple.
As for your rear bar, that's interesting, it caught my attention. Aluminum A-arms sure do look purdy.........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Sold my beloved J in April 2010 -
The control arms look really good. I just got a set yesterday at the yard and I can't wait to polish them up and have them on the car.
Proud member of Jbody of Kentucky ... Click on sig to go!
Mark, the spare stays, even though it's not a daily driver anymore.
You never know when you'll need it.
Btw, once the car is completed the way I want, I'll have it lightened for track days, autocross, and the 1320.
Thanks Dayton86.
Viper, the Prolines are Eibach. They're the progressive rate springs and not the linear rate Sportlines most use.
Also on the links, I'm not quite finished tweaking everything out. I've still got some camber adjustments to do along with some checking again of the toe-in settings.
For driving the car like I did, I came away very impressed with the setup.
Oh and that trunkbar has really improved the rear of the car. Much more solidity back there and before the bar, would get some squirm which could be felt in on-ramp situations. Now it's solid as a rock going around the ramps.
Misnblu.com
Newbie member since 1999
Thank you Dave and JBO! 
where did you get the control arms?
oh my god. wow.
ive been waiting to finally see some progress on this car, its always been an inspiration to me. and i can honestly say that i dont remember ever seeing pics of it. i really wish you would stick with the auto though, you've proven time and time again you can get it to perform just as good as the sticks can when setup well. and now with HPT, you could get it even better than that.
your rear bar's are just... amazing, completly usfeul and such a great idea. ive never seen such a thing on our cars before, props to you!!!! the control arms, again... amazing, you did an outstanding job man.
ive always wanted to see what the sunfire sedan rear panel/tails looked like on a z... looks good if i may say so myself
really looking forward to more from this project, im definatly subscribed sir.
What need modified for the control arms to fit?
Cool beans on the bar man. Still bustin your balls though for proline
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Sold my beloved J in April 2010 -
Black04Cavy, SO_hardcore, or those wanting to know about the where and hows about the control arms,
here is the article on them.
Zyaaaa, thanks man. Coming from you, that's a great compliment and yeah, don't really flaunt the car much on the JBO.
It's finally getting where I want it to be.
Engine and 5speed tranny swap coming next.
I just found a tranny with all of the hardware for the swapover. Now it's just a matter of getting the brackets from GMPartsDirect and Aaron at TTR.
Thanks again all.
Misnblu.com
Newbie member since 1999
Thank you Dave and JBO!
Very sick, go run some twisties and get good video!!
Misn where did you get your lower ball joints? mine came with the Grease fitting in the wrong spot. and yes they look purtty
i did mine with your directions. 7 months ago.
NightmaresCavy wrote:Misn where did you get your lower ball joints? mine came with the Grease fitting in the wrong spot. and yes they look purtty i did mine with your directions. 7 months ago.
Nightmares, I got the balljoints from AutoZone.
They're the Moog series and spent about 20 bucks apiece for them.
I do like the idea of being able to grease them yourself.
Scorpio, this car is built to live on the twisties.
When it's complete, I'll be doing track days, autocross, and the 1320.
High 13 second to low 14 quarter mile times with the n/a engine build I'm planning and with a little shot of juice, should be a mid 13 second ride.
That's my goal and so it will be.
Thanks again all.
Misnblu.com
Newbie member since 1999
Thank you Dave and JBO!
oh sweet. thanks for bumpin this to the top of my wants now. let us know how it turns out.
in this
pic the bar looks wrong or pointed the wrong direction. shouldn't the end be flat on the sway bar?
_______________________________________________________________________
my carDomain updated 11/5/07 I've got premium. Yes I do. I've got premium. How 'bout you?
It's the angle of the picture.
They're correct and made quadruple sure that they were correct.
Thanks though for seeing that.
I was waiting for someone to notice that because I'd seen that but know that they're on correct.
Misnblu.com
Newbie member since 1999
Thank you Dave and JBO!
on the balljoints... is there a way you can replace the rivet style? those replacement bolts just dont fancy me much...i wanna get things as stock as possible when i put mine on..
The only way to replace them are to drill out the rivets and install the aftermarket 18mm (I believe...don't quote me on this) bolts. I took the time to try this feat...took over an hour and dropping the subframe to accomplish. All this work...and a month later I bought the SMG lower control arms. Go figure.
They're 18mm and seem to be at least a grade 5 bolt.
Believe me, mine are torqued hard so that I won't have any issues with them over the years.
Plus, they'll be easy to replace when needed.
Misnblu.com
Newbie member since 1999
Thank you Dave and JBO!
Misnblu wrote:It's the angle of the picture.
They're correct and made quadruple sure that they were correct.
Thanks though for seeing that.
I was waiting for someone to notice that because I'd seen that but know that they're on correct.
no problem. just wanted to make sure.
_______________________________________________________________________
my carDomain updated 11/5/07 I've got premium. Yes I do. I've got premium. How 'bout you?
Misnblu wrote:Once I dropped the car back to the ground, I took a peek underneath to see that the control arms are nearly perfectly in alignment with the ground, which is a good thing.
Have you thought about camber gain under compression? Mine are parrallel with the ground, but at full compression, I've lost almost 1.5* camber (after doing some quick math). I'm currently designing new arms with a higher subframe attachment point to counter the problem. Have you done any bump steer meaurements? I'm curious to know how much the lower steering rack effects it (my steering arms are at the top of the strut).
The rear bar setup is very nice! Triangulation is where its at!
James, I'm dialing in about 1.5 degrees of negative camber and a smidgen of toe-out to offset anything that may occur with full compression.
Under most driving circumstances, our cars won't undergo full compression unless at speed with elevation changes.
In most situations with hard cornering, the parallel control arms are usually better than an overly dropped ride, hitting the bump stops, creating a spring rate that ramps up infinitely, which causes massive weight transfer and relentless understeer.
With the lower control arms pointing upward, the instant center of gravity starts to drop rapidly and the roll couple greatly increases. The bigger roll couple causes more weight transfer to the outside wheels and more body roll.
Finally, the steering tie rods start to point upward more radically, because they are shorter than the lower control arm and positioned out of place in the lowered chassis. This causes toe-out when the wheels deflect, making the steering twitchy and the car feel unstable.
Bumpsteer is caused by the suspension's control arms moving in different arcs than the steering linkage as the suspension follows its stroke.
In order for a MacPherson strut suspension to have no bump steer, the tie rods must lie in line with the lower control arms with the inner tie rod end in plane with the inner pivot of the control arm
Hence, my preference for the parallel control arms to the ground.
Also, on the roll center issue, the often-overlooked disadvantage to lowering is that the roll center drops more radically than the center of gravity on most cars. This increases the roll couple and can cancel any weight transfer advantage. The huge roll couple created by overlowering will require an overly stiff suspension to control body movement
Maybe that'll answer a couple of questions on why I'm keeping this setup and mentioned the parallel control arms.
Oh and James, I'd love to see these control arms you're fabbing up.
I'm not sure how you're doing this so please let us know about how it's going to be done.
And thanks for the compliment on the rear trunk bars.
All I'm needing now is a floor bar, harness bar, and some hinge braces which I'll be fabbing up once I get my Lincoln welder.
Hinge braces or fender braces tie the shock towers to the sturdy base of the A-pillar via the door hinges. These make a huge difference.
Misnblu.com
Newbie member since 1999
Thank you Dave and JBO!
Please bear with me, I'm just starting out when it comes to performance suspension design
Misnblu wrote:James, I'm dialing in ... a smidgen of toe-out to offset anything that may occur with full compression.
You said (and the picture shows) that the tie rods are at a greater angle upwards (going out from the vehicle) than the control arms. You also said the tie rod length (pivot to pivot) is shorter than the control arm length. With a MacPherson setup, this would cause toe-out under compression (I believe you mentioned this in your post somewhere), so why would you set the static toe outward?
Misnblu wrote:In most situations with hard cornering, the parallel control arms are usually better than an overly dropped ride
I was actually suggesting having less of a drop (to have the arms angled downward from the car). It sounds like this is James' idea as well with his new control arms (mounting them higher in the car). This also allows negative camber gain through compression.
Misnblu wrote:With the lower control arms pointing upward, the instant center of gravity starts to drop rapidly and the roll couple greatly increases. The bigger roll couple causes more weight transfer to the outside wheels and more body roll.
This is why I was hoping someone had a general idea of the COG location...
Misnblu wrote:In order for a MacPherson strut suspension to have no bump steer, the tie rods must lie in line with the lower control arms with the inner tie rod end in plane with the inner pivot of the control arm
Hence, my preference for the parallel control arms to the ground.
I understand the concept described, but I don't understand how lowering or raising our car will make a noticeable difference. Since the control arms, strut, and tie rod mounts are fixed, the tie rod can not be made more "in-plane". Obviously the operating range within the suspension's range of motion will determine the rate of toe change, but I'm just not sure how to determine where the ideal spot is without calculations, simulations, or experimentation. I believe either James or Dan...one of the 2nd gen guys...did a bump-steer measurement throughout suspension travel, but I've never seen it done on a 3rd gen.
Misnblu wrote:Also, on the roll center issue, the often-overlooked disadvantage to lowering is that the roll center drops more radically than the center of gravity on most cars. This increases the roll couple and can cancel any weight transfer advantage. The huge roll couple created by overlowering will require an overly stiff suspension to control body movement
Which is why I was thinking minimum lowering would be optimal, but without a defined COG...?
Misnblu wrote:Oh and James, I'd love to see these control arms you're fabbing up.
I'm not sure how you're doing this so please let us know about how it's going to be done.
+1
fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster
