New Coil-Over Conversion Suspension
Not trying to pee in Chris's punch on his thread, but since a statement was made regarding improved geometry that painted with a broad brush.....I want to correct.
HDK never has claimed improved geometry. HDK claims the ability be more aggressive with alignment specs, to easily add / subtract caster and camber without putting the upper control arm in a bind, especially when trying to achieve a high positive caster number. Also HDK offers adjustability in and out on both upper and lower control arms giving the choice of the wider selection of rims. HDK is designed to use out of the box spindles and automotive tie rod ends which offers lubrication , dirt / dust protection, increased travel and does not interfere with a 15" rim versus a heim / rod end.
As most of you guys know, especially the racers, when venturing out of the OEM box, it's not only adjustability and adapting to individual customer needs. It is often the little details, like capturing the dust boot so it fits and functions properly, using all grade 8, correct length hardware, shocks that rides on the shoulder of the bolt and not threads, and keeping wheels / tires tucked in......all add up, especially when we are looking for the best options for our hot rods.
Good luck Chris, welcome to the party!
Quite frankly I think you're splitting hairs, but I'll give you that you don't specifically claim "improved geometry" on your website. I changed my previous post. I'm probably recalling a discussion I had with an HDK customer here and that's not the same thing to be fair.
As for adjustability, the torsion bar suspension is a set of adjustable UCA's away from any camber/caster settings you'd like. I've run as much as +8° on my Duster, it doesn't put the UCA's in a bind, I actually check. With SPC UCA's you can dial in extremely aggressive camber and caster settings, specs that would be considered race only and would not be suitable for street use. You don't need a coil over conversion to have substantially more adjustability than the factory offered or to run modern alignment specs.
Personally I do not understand why the companies that make coil over conversions don't publish any suspension geometry plots,
especially if they are making claims of improved geometry like BFS does. If Bolander knows the geometry is improved, then he must have plotted it out, so why not say
how it's improved, and compared to what? Better camber curve? Better roll center? Better toe change? Better than factory specs or a car running the same ride height and alignment specs as the converted car? So that the customer can look at the comparison, look at what's being compared, and decide if the improvement is actually beneficial to them? Because not all geometry improvements necessarily represent something that the average customer will notice, especially for a street car.
Maybe the end result is better geometry than factory, but in this case I think it's pretty clear that the extra tall ball joints and large spacers are actually correcting less than ideal geometry. Maybe I'm splitting hairs now, but that's corrected geometry, not an improved design. Maybe the plot looks better, but having a 1"+ tall spacer at your steering arms has real world consequences that don't show up in a graph. And if someone is comparing corrected geometry vs factory geometry and saying theirs is better, well, there's nothing to stop anyone from plotting out and using corrections on the factory geometry. Just lowering the torsion bar suspension improves the geometry vs factory, that's already been shown. Running a taller FMJ spindle can improve the camber gain, which is an improvement vs factory for cars with wide, modern tires.
I get it, these are marketing claims to sell parts and ultimately it's on the customer to decide if they need the parts being sold. I just don't like seeing all these claims being made without anything to back them up.