Classic Mustangs List Archive

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Guillaume Desmarets (email redacted)

Hi,

I went through the same questions a while ago, and finally ended up
talking to the guys at Mustang Plus (very helpfull). Basically the idea
is that you DON'T need the negative wedge kit when lowering by 1" your
upper A arms. You CAN add it, and get even better handling
charasteristics (better cornering) BUT it will make you go through a set
of front tires way faster. Basically your tires will not be in their
optimal position when going straight.
I can't personnaly testify in any direction, since my car is still
waiting for its engine to come together... kind of hard to test your
suspensions in that configuration.

Please, someone correct me if I'm wrong (or didn't understand anything
:-) ), since that would help me too!

Guillaume Desmarets
(email redacted)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
archive please visit:

antler.webworks.ca/cm

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Watkins, Paul (email redacted)

That's right, you do not have to put the negative wedge kit and I can
only speak about Global's setup. With that said... Factory alignment
specs are not suppose to be used with the altered suspension setup. You
will need to use the specs provided by the company, otherwise you will
go through tires very quickly.

My first alignment was done to factory specs (even though I told them
what specs to use - I guess they thought I didn't know what I was
talking about). I was back at the shop in two weeks and watched them
align my car again (although they were whining and saying it was not
going to be right). Since then I've not had any problems...

Paul
> ----------
> From: Guillaume Desmarets[SMTPemail redacted)]
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 1998 5:00 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: [CM:8970] negative wedge kit.
>
> Hi,
>
> I went through the same questions a while ago, and finally ended up
> talking to the guys at Mustang Plus (very helpfull). Basically the
> idea
> is that you DON'T need the negative wedge kit when lowering by 1"
> your
> upper A arms. You CAN add it, and get even better handling
> charasteristics (better cornering) BUT it will make you go through a
> set
> of front tires way faster. Basically your tires will not be in their
> optimal position when going straight.
> I can't personnaly testify in any direction, since my car is still
> waiting for its engine to come together... kind of hard to test your
> suspensions in that configuration.
>
> Please, someone correct me if I'm wrong (or didn't understand anything
> :-) ), since that would help me too!
>
> Guillaume Desmarets
> (email redacted)
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
> archive please visit:
>
> antler.webworks.ca/cm
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
archive please visit:

antler.webworks.ca/cm

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Chuck Colvin (email redacted)


-----Original Message-----
From: Guillaume Desmarets <(email redacted)>
To: Multiple recipients of list <(email redacted)>
Date: Friday, January 30, 1998 2:07 PM
Subject: [CM:8970] negative wedge kit.


>Hi,
>
>I went through the same questions a while ago, and finally ended up
>talking to the guys at Mustang Plus (very helpfull). (BIG snip)

Aren't the guys at Mustangs Plus great!!! And the nice thing is that you
know that they have a lot of "On Track" experience behind their suggestions
too!!

They have a lot of useful Info on their website (www.mustangsplus.com) about
different upgrades (disc brake, susp. etc.....) also, not to mention the HOT
pictures of their different cars and they put out a newsletter that is very
informative and entertaining with sale specials on their products.

Best yet they even help us Torino guys:-)

Chuck Colvin
Torino Nut Home Page
members.aol.com/TorinoNut/index.html
Pink Sedan Home Page
members.aol.com/PinkSedan/index.html
CoolRides Classic Car Corner
CoolRides.com
Keeper of "The Orphanage":-)
Fairlane, Ranchero & Torino Mailing List
CoolRides.com/chat.html#Mailing




---------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
archive please visit:

antler.webworks.ca/cm

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Bill Holman (email redacted)

When lowering the upper A-arm the alignment specs to use are the same as
those for a Shelby mustang. There is a good article on this in the Tony
Branda catalog. The alignment specs for lowered A-arms are:

2 degrees positive caster, 1 degree negative camber and 1/8" toe-in for all
years 65-70.

Bill Holman
66 Fastback-GT K-code



>That's right, you do not have to put the negative wedge kit and I can
>only speak about Global's setup. With that said... Factory alignment
>specs are not suppose to be used with the altered suspension setup. You
>will need to use the specs provided by the company, otherwise you will
>go through tires very quickly.
>
>My first alignment was done to factory specs (even though I told them
>what specs to use - I guess they thought I didn't know what I was
>talking about). I was back at the shop in two weeks and watched them
>align my car again (although they were whining and saying it was not
>going to be right). Since then I've not had any problems...
>



---------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
archive please visit:

antler.webworks.ca/cm

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Myjak (email redacted)

Bill Holman writes:
>[...]
> 2 degrees positive caster, 1 degree negative camber and 1/8" toe-in
> for all years 65-70.

That's agressive for the street. That much positive caster will make
the car very sensitive. As for 1 degree neg. camber, for normal street
driving, that would cause premature wear on the inside of the tire.

-Michael

---------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
archive please visit:

antler.webworks.ca/cm

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Keven D. Coates (email redacted)


> That's agressive for the street. That much positive caster will make
> the car very sensitive. As for 1 degree neg. camber, for normal street
> driving, that would cause premature wear on the inside of the tire.

It kind of depends on how you drive (how fast you take corners) and what roll
stiffeness you have. I drive pretty normal, an occasional fast corner, but
traffic makes me drive slowly usually. I have had a lot of highway miles
lately too, and I run about -3/4 degree camber with no inside edge tire wear.

I made my own neg wedge kit, and I run that on my '68 stang, so -1 degree isn't
too aggressive. I'd just be sure to keep an eye on tire wear with a depth
gauge and decrease camber if necessary.

I don't know on castor. I can't run much castor, probably <1 degree since I
have to put my upper a-arm shims back in, and until I do, I can't run much
castor (I'm at the end of my strut rods). Maybe that's why I can run more
camber.

IMO, I would run more castor (more than what I have) to increase the dynamic
camber and run less static camber. That way your braking and tire life should
improve.

Best Regards,
Keven Coates
DSP Datacomm

---------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
archive please visit:

antler.webworks.ca/cm

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Keven D. Coates (email redacted)


> Basically the idea
> is that you DON'T need the negative wedge kit when lowering by 1" your
> upper A arms.

True.

> You CAN add it, and get even better handling

Not entirely true. The neg wedge kit doesn't make your car handle better, it
only aligns the ball joint so you can lower the upper a-arm 2" instead of 1".

The lowering is what makes your car handle better. You could lower the upper
a-arms 2" without the kit and get the same benefits in handling, until you hit
a bump and the upper ball joints bind and break, then you crash (not
recommended). That's why you need the neg. wedge kit.

> charasteristics (better cornering) BUT it will make you go through a set
> of front tires way faster.

This is untrue. I don't know exactly what circumstances this would be under,
but as I understand the question, this is not true. If you put the neg wedge
kit on a car with only 1" lowered upper a-arms, it won't make any difference in
tire wear or anything since it only aligns the upper ball joint (and it
wouldn't be aligned any better in a 1" dropped car since it is made for a 2"
drop). It would be a waste of money and time. You could half the wedge
thickness and use it for a 1" drop then. It would align the upper ball joint
slightly better, but you don't need to, the range of movement is enough not to
need it.

If you use the neg. wedge kit and lower the upper a-arms 2" then you will still
not go through tires faster (assuming you get the alignment specs right). I
have run 2" drop for four years and I go through tires a lot slower than I did
before. I don't round off the outer edges anymore.

> Basically your tires will not be in their
> optimal position when going straight.

Only if you get the alignment wrong.

I guess you could align it aggressively for the autocross or other event, and
if you didn't drop the upper a-arms at all then the above statement would be
true.

Standard mustangs with non dropped upper arms could handle well in an autocross
if tuned with a lot of neg. camber. This would keep the tires more in contact
with the road on the turns when the body sways, but then you greatly reduce
tire life, and you wouldn't want to drive it that way on the street. Braking
would be reduced also. That is the only situation I can see the above being
true in.

> I can't personnaly testify in any direction, since my car is still
> waiting for its engine to come together... kind of hard to test your
> suspensions in that configuration.

True, but I'll be interested in your car, Guillame, when it's done. It sounds
good.

> Please, someone correct me if I'm wrong (or didn't understand anything
> :-) ), since that would help me too!

I am only speaking from my own experience and knowledge, but I have run my car
in many different configurations and have had the neg wedge kit on it for many
years. Your mileage may vary ;-)

Thanks.

Best Regards,
Keven Coates
'68 stang
DSP Datacomm

---------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
archive please visit:

antler.webworks.ca/cm

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Watkins, Paul (email redacted)

I don't understand... what is dynamic verses static camber (camber
change through wheel travel?)? Why would castor influence the camber?
My knowledge of the whole thing is:

Camber is the way the tire stands (ie. straight up and down, slightly
tilted in or out). Castor is adjustment front to back of the front
tires. And toe is if the tires are parallel, pointed towards or away
from each other. Camber can cause tire wear on the inside or outside of
a tire. Castor increases the cars responsiveness and turning effort at
parkinglot speeds. Toe can cause scalloping.

Comments?...

Thanks,

Paul

> ----------
> From: Keven D. Coates[SMTPemail redacted)]
> Sent: Monday, February 02, 1998 11:00 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: [CM:9014] RE: 8970] negative wedge kit.
>
>
> > That's agressive for the street. That much positive caster will
> make
> > the car very sensitive. As for 1 degree neg. camber, for normal
> street
> > driving, that would cause premature wear on the inside of the tire.
>
> It kind of depends on how you drive (how fast you take corners) and
> what roll
> stiffeness you have. I drive pretty normal, an occasional fast
> corner, but
> traffic makes me drive slowly usually. I have had a lot of highway
> miles
> lately too, and I run about -3/4 degree camber with no inside edge
> tire wear.
>
> I made my own neg wedge kit, and I run that on my '68 stang, so -1
> degree isn't
> too aggressive. I'd just be sure to keep an eye on tire wear with a
> depth
> gauge and decrease camber if necessary.
>
> I don't know on castor. I can't run much castor, probably <1 degree
> since I
> have to put my upper a-arm shims back in, and until I do, I can't run
> much
> castor (I'm at the end of my strut rods). Maybe that's why I can run
> more
> camber.
>
> IMO, I would run more castor (more than what I have) to increase the
> dynamic
> camber and run less static camber. That way your braking and tire
> life should
> improve.
>
> Best Regards,
> Keven Coates
> DSP Datacomm
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
> archive please visit:
>
> antler.webworks.ca/cm
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
archive please visit:

antler.webworks.ca/cm

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Myjak (email redacted)

> It kind of depends on how you drive (how fast you take corners) and
> what roll stiffeness you have. I drive pretty normal, an occasional
> fast corner, but traffic makes me drive slowly usually. I have had
> a lot of highway miles lately too, and I run about -3/4 degree
> camber with no inside edge tire wear.

The only modifications (to my '68) I've made in this regard include
the 620# springs and Shelby front sway bar. I run 1/2+ and 1/4+
positive on drivers/passenger side respectively. Theory is that as
you get in the car, the added weight will tend to bring the camber
toward neutral. I don't race, but do enjoy an occasional hard run
while munchin' on the General's products.

> I made my own neg wedge kit, and I run that on my '68 stang, so -1
> degree isn't too aggressive. I'd just be sure to keep an eye on
> tire wear with a depth gauge and decrease camber if necessary.

I've heard of people doing this... in fact, I recall email from you
several years ago about this very thing. Didn't you describe how you
ground the wedge??

> I don't know on castor. I can't run much castor, probably <1 degree
> since I have to put my upper a-arm shims back in, and until I do, I
> can't run much castor (I'm at the end of my strut rods). Maybe
> that's why I can run more camber.

> IMO, I would run more castor (more than what I have) to increase the
> dynamic camber and run less static camber. That way your braking
> and tire life should improve.

When the castor is (way) positive, the pivotal arc is in front of the
spindle centerline. This gives the car a tendency to pull you into
the turns... When castor is (way) negative, the arc is behind the
spindle centerline... and net result is that the wheels have a natural
tendency to track straight ahead. (Not a good thing if your into
roundy-round racing, as it will tend to push you into the wall.)

Either situation will provide you with a more dynamic camber change
than static. And of course in this case, YMMV. :-) I try to go for
longest tire wear and am willing to sacrifice a touch of performance
if it means replacing tires 1/2 as often.

> Best Regards,
> Keven Coates

Same to you, Keven!

-Michael


---------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
archive please visit:

antler.webworks.ca/cm

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Myjak (email redacted)


> I don't understand... what is dynamic verses static camber (camber
> change through wheel travel?)?

Yes. Imagine a king pin situation... the pivot is about the king pin
axis, right? If that pin is precisely vertical, then the camber
changes naught during a rotation of the wheel. With upper and lower
ball joints, the wheel spindle is free to move, in and out (when the
wheel goes up and down) because of the upper/lower unequal length
control arms, and forward and backward (as the wheel rotates left and
right) depending on whether the castor is > or < 0 degrees (neutral).

> Why would castor influence the camber?

As above, when the castor is large(r) then neutral, meaning that the
spindle is leading or trailing the pivot centerline, the amount of
camber (tilt of the wheel relative to vertical) changes. Under hard
driving conditions, what you want is for the camber to go negative as
you pull into a turn, and then return to almost 0 as you enter the
straight. The idea is to keep and maintain the largest contact patch
possible.

-Michael

---------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
archive please visit:

antler.webworks.ca/cm

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Watkins, Paul (email redacted)

Got'cha! Thanks! I really hadn't put much thought into the turning
dynamics as it relates to the castor (guess I need to re-read "How To
Make Your Car Handle" book again - killed those brain cells)!

Paul

> ----------
> From: Myjak[SMTPemail redacted)]
> Sent: Monday, February 02, 1998 2:40 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: [CM:9023] RE: 9014] RE: 8970] negative wedge kit.
>
>
> > I don't understand... what is dynamic verses static camber (camber
> > change through wheel travel?)?
>
> Yes. Imagine a king pin situation... the pivot is about the king pin
> axis, right? If that pin is precisely vertical, then the camber
> changes naught during a rotation of the wheel. With upper and lower
> ball joints, the wheel spindle is free to move, in and out (when the
> wheel goes up and down) because of the upper/lower unequal length
> control arms, and forward and backward (as the wheel rotates left and
> right) depending on whether the castor is > or < 0 degrees (neutral).
>
> > Why would castor influence the camber?
>
> As above, when the castor is large(r) then neutral, meaning that the
> spindle is leading or trailing the pivot centerline, the amount of
> camber (tilt of the wheel relative to vertical) changes. Under hard
> driving conditions, what you want is for the camber to go negative as
> you pull into a turn, and then return to almost 0 as you enter the
> straight. The idea is to keep and maintain the largest contact patch
> possible.
>
> -Michael
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
> archive please visit:
>
> antler.webworks.ca/cm
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
archive please visit:

antler.webworks.ca/cm

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Keven D. Coates (email redacted)

> From: Myjak <(email redacted)>, on 2/2/98 3:20 PM:
> I've heard of people doing this... in fact, I recall email from you
> several years ago about this very thing. Didn't you describe how you
> ground the wedge??

Yes, and I sent those instructions to the original person who asked about this.
If any one else wants them, let me know.

> When the castor is (way) positive, the pivotal arc is in front of the
> spindle centerline. This gives the car a tendency to pull you into
> the turns... When castor is (way) negative, the arc is behind the
> spindle centerline... and net result is that the wheels have a natural
> tendency to track straight ahead. (Not a good thing if your into
> roundy-round racing, as it will tend to push you into the wall.)

I guess I don't know how you are referencing positive and negative, but the
castor should _always_ put the steering pivot arc (the pivot around which the
spindle steers) in front of the tire contact patch to cause a natural self
straightening tendency because the tire patch will pull the wheels straight,
similar to a shopping cart (in theory of operation, not looks). This also
increases dynamic camber in a corner, which helps cornering if not too
excessive.

In answer to the question about "what is dynamic camber", it is the camber
caused by castor when the car is steered. Think about it, if the axis of the
spindle (steering axis) is tilted (that is what castor is, the angle of tilt)
then when the tire is turned left or right your wheel will tilt (camber) in or
out. To visualize this, we'll exagerate and imagine a 90 degree castor
(steering axis horizontal to the road!) Then the steering angle will cause an
equivalent dynamic camber change.

If you have the tire contact patch in front of the steering axis, the friction
of the contact patch will push on the axis of steering, and instead of pulling
it straight, it will progressively try to push it to the whatever side you
steer towards. Like possessed power steering your your car will then try to
steer right or left as soon as you steer just a little. If you want a graphic
illustration of this, try going fast in reverse and let go of the wheel (not!)
The car will start to steer right or left, and once it starts steering it will
steer faster and faster until the steering is at it's limit and your car is
spinning out of control. This is what happens when the tire contact patch is
in front of the wheel steering axis.

There may be some people out there trying a limited amount of castor this way
for dirt racing or some other very unique situation, but I wouldn't try it!
It's very dangerous to have a car that trys to steer itself, especially at high
speeds.

> Either situation will provide you with a more dynamic camber change
> than static. And of course in this case, YMMV. :-) I try to go for
> longest tire wear and am willing to sacrifice a touch of performance
> if it means replacing tires 1/2 as often.

I understand, I'm the same way, but theoretically you can have both. Assuming
toe in is set correctly , the longest tire wear will occur when you have the
most tire in contact with the road the most amount of time. This will prevent
rounding of the edges and short the tire life that results in. This is also
best for performance.

If you don't lower the a-arms you will have a trade off of either excessive
static camber and high cornering performance or normal camber with lower
performance.

One way to beat this is to drop the upper a-arms 2" and use the neg wedge kit.
This will allow you to use modest static camber and will help the tires not
lean so much with body roll in a corner, which will keep more tire in contact
with the road and reduce wear and increase performance over stock a-arm
location. I think it is the best of both worlds. We classic mustang owners
actually have an advantage over the late model folks because our cars came
stock with a better front suspension type, the double wishbone. We aren't
nearly as limited as the stut people. But, our cars came with poor geometry in
the name of safety (for those who don't know how to drive). With a little
modification, we can have good tire life and performance without spending $2K
to convert to double wishbone front suspension.

Thanks.

Best Regards,
Keven Coates
DSP Datacomm

---------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
archive please visit:

antler.webworks.ca/cm

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Keven D. Coates (email redacted)

I guess I should correct one statement I made in haste.

Dynamic camber is just camber that changes with castor, suspension travel, etc.
But, when I was talking about dynamic camber, I was talking about a car that
was not in motion, so I forgot that dynamic camber can be caused by things
other than castor.

Thanks.

Best Regards,
Keven Coates
DSP Datacomm

---------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
archive please visit:

antler.webworks.ca/cm

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Myjak (email redacted)


> I guess I should correct one statement I made in haste.

> Dynamic camber is just camber that changes with castor, suspension
> travel, etc. But, when I was talking about dynamic camber, I was
> talking about a car that was not in motion, so I forgot that dynamic
> camber can be caused by things other than castor.

Keven,

I know what you meant... and thanks for a good follow-up.

-Michael

---------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on Subscribing and Unsubscribing as well as a list
archive please visit:

antler.webworks.ca/cm