Tubular control arms vs rebushing
I don't think anyone doubts the ability to achieve self-centering caster setting with stock parts...just that if you're looking to significantly improve cornering capability you can't have that caster and also enough negative camber at the same time.
Just watch how the upper control arm moves when you adjust for one or the other and the need for different geometry (either from different control arms or offset bushings) becomes apparent.
I've been doing it for years. And yes I've plotted the entire curves from full droop to full compression.
Until you've been on a track and watching wear patterns - and better yet measuring tire temperatures, that's when camber and caster needs can get dialed in for a particular tire on a particular combination. Run the car ride height low (both front and rear) to be in the better part of the camber curve, and lower the static center of gravity, and the static roll axis.
For the OP - in his location, and his needs, the stock arms are more than good enough. Additionally, for street use in that area, closer to stock ride height will fine. A local parts store can press in the control arm bushings. I realize there are less and less of them but its not a big deal.
If new UCA bushings are needed, then the moog offset bushings will allow additional caster when installed per autoxcuda's illustration. Another way is to increase the negative camber with shims (washers) between the lower ball joints and spindle. The first thing
extra money should be spent on is increasing front roll resistance. On a car with lots of miles, heavy use, or that's been raced - the other big expense item that is often needed is the rear leafs. Bushings, interleafs and with enough abuse or even use, the leafs themselves can lose rate and even crack. Standard engineering practice is to design springs for a million cycles. Non-abused leafs can go for over 100K miles, heavily used or abused are often less.
