67 Barracuda- Brakes and suspension on a 5000 budget- advice needed
There was an issue with 5.25”-5.5” backspacing 17” rims and QA1 UCA’s. The raised area behind the ball joint interferes with inside of rim.
Here:
Qa1 uppers. With 17x8. 67 dart.
I was suggesting running factory strut rods with poly bushings. Then the SPC arms could be used for the added adjustment. And then adjustable strut rods aren’t necessary since you can adjust the UCA so much.
I’m seeing the SPC arms and the QA1’s for same price $349 but you need to buy UBJ’s for the SPC’s ($36/pr Proforged or less $ others on rockauto)
I’m trying to cut to stay within the $5000 budget. $150 here and there...to pay for K-member, rims, and/or rear end.
Actually that thread raises the
question of clearance, but only one member said he had actually done it and it worked with minor clearancing of the large QA1 upper cup, and that was with a full 5.5" of backspace.
I run 17x8 5.5” BS with QA1 uppers. I had to do some minor clearancing of the cup, but nothing that concerned me. Outside of that, fit is great.
Adjustable strut rods
are necessary, especially with poly or delrin LCA bushings, and the reason has nothing to do with adding caster. I would definitely not use poly strut rod bushings, they're counterproductive. First, you have the issue of the strut rods not being the right length because of the differences between the poly bushings compared to the factory ones at both the LCA and the strut rod. Second, they add binding. The strut rod bushings acts in two different planes. You want them to be stiff under braking and acceleration to keep the LCA from flexing forward and backward,
BUT, you don't want them to be stiff when the strut rod is moving up and down with the suspension travel of the LCA. The poly strut rod bushings will actually add binding into the system by resisting the LCA moving up and down with suspension travel. That is why adjustable strut rods are ideal. Not only do they keep the LCA from flexing forward and backward, but they move freely up and down.
And, you can actually make them the right length, which further reduces binding in the suspension. Stock strut rods will
NOT be the right length if you're using poly or Delrin LCA bushings. My adjustable strut rods have been adjusted so there's no binding in the range of suspension travel of the LCA. When I was running factory LCA's with poly bushings I can tell you the length of the adjustable strut rods was different than factory (shorter). With the tubular LCA's I run now with Delrin bushings the length was different again to produce free travel on the LCA.
Well everyone is entiled to their opinion. I just express mine alot less snarky.
Sure its a great list and also true is that you can do pretty well with alot less on the street. As far as track time go back to the Trans Am racing series those teams would get amazing handling with very few trick suspension component's .
Good grief. The Trans Am cars used all kinds of tricks in their suspension. Only the very basic components remained stock, and even those were modified. They did everything they could within the rules to improve the suspension geometry.
And then, yeah,
the rules. What the Trans Am did and didn't do with their suspension was just as much dictated by rules as it was performance. And that was the 70's, so straight back to tire technology too. I love the Trans Am cars, but I wouldn't for a second use them as a blueprint for how to set up suspension for a street car now. Tire technology is better, there are a host of aftermarket parts available that they couldn't use, and frankly if they'd had free reign on suspension components they'd have done different stuff. I mean they
acid dipped the chassis' they used. No tricks my foot. :rolleyes:
