B or E body Tubular LCA on A body

[408STRKR]

Hey guys,

Purchased the 17 in rally’s from year one for the 69 Valiant. Rears fit great, fronts with 225 wide still rub fender lip at times.
I have read that B and E body arms are shorter by 1/16 to 3/8, will they fit an A body k frame/ spindles?
Basically trying to gain more neg offset on the spindle.

thoughts?

Jay

 

[Kern Dog]

I have measured them and, YES, they are shorter by about 3/8 to 1/2". The shock mount is in a slightly different spot. The LCA mounting shaft/pin is a different diameter for B/E so you'd need to press in the proper A body versions.
Keep in mind though that THIS gives you WAY too much positive camber.
This stuff was done in circle track racing but those guys were willing to drill, grind, weld, cut and modify their stuff to gain that little edge.
I would advise against this.

 

[Kern Dog]

Top picture is an A body LCA. I measured 12 5/8" from center of pin to center of ball joint hole.

B body LCAs are rounded on the bottom, that is one way to tell them apart. They measure about 12 1/8" center of pin to ball joint hole.

 

[408STRKR]

I have measured them and, YES, they are shorter by about 3/8". The shock mount is in a slightly different spot. The LCA mounting shaft/pin is a different diameter for B/E so you'd need to press in the proper A body versions.
Keep in mind though that THIS gives you WAY too much positive camber.
This stuff was done in circle track racing but those guys were willing to drill, grind, weld, cut and modify their stuff to gain that little edge.
I would advise against this.

That is great info thank you. It would break my heart to trim the inner fender lips, only need 2-3 mm at most

 

[72bluNblu]

Hey guys,

Purchased the 17 in rally’s from year one for the 69 Valiant. Rears fit great, fronts with 225 wide still rub fender lip at times.
I have read that B and E body arms are shorter by 1/16 to 3/8, will they fit an A body k frame/ spindles?
Basically trying to gain more neg offset on the spindle.

thoughts?

Jay

Yes, the B/E LCA's are shorter. But unless you add fully adjustable UCA's, like Hotchkis or SPC, you'll have a really tough time getting your camber settings even close to right. Not to mention shorter control arms make the suspension geometry curves worse. You'll also likely need adjustable strut rods too, since the rear mount point will move.

I know of one gentleman that used A-body LCA's on his Challenger. Basically he was looking to improve the geometry curves and using longer control arms does that. He used Hotchkis UCA's (which also change the geometry on an E body), made his own strut rods, and did a few other custom deals (C body spindles) and then worked the whole thing out with a suspension geometry program to make sure it all worked from a handling point of view.

There's no way I'd venture down that road just to fit a set of rims that have the wrong backspacing. Using the shorter LCA would already worsen the geometry. Then you'd need the adjustable UCA's to shorten them to get your alignment right. The UCA's will set you back a good $400 or more. Plus the adjustable strut rods. And after all that and an alignment your suspension geometry curves would be worse than stock.

Not a good idea IMHO.

 

[72bluNblu]

That is great info thank you. It would break my heart to trim the inner fender lips, only need 2-3 mm at most

Why? Trimming or rolling the fender lips is purely cosmetic and is darn near invisible unless you stick your head in the wheel well. The suspension changes you're talking about wouldn't be cosmetic, they'd negatively effect how your suspension functions.

 

[408STRKR]

Yes, the B/E LCA's are shorter. But unless you add fully adjustable UCA's, like Hotchkis or SPC, you'll have a really tough time getting your camber settings even close to right. Not to mention shorter control arms make the suspension geometry curves worse. You'll also likely need adjustable strut rods too, since the rear mount point will move.

I know of one gentleman that used A-body LCA's on his Challenger. Basically he was looking to improve the geometry curves and using longer control arms does that. He used Hotchkis UCA's (which also change the geometry on an E body), made his own strut rods, and did a few other custom deals (C body spindles) and then worked the whole thing out with a suspension geometry program to make sure it all worked from a handling point of view.

There's no way I'd venture down that road just to fit a set of rims that have the wrong backspacing. Using the shorter LCA would already worsen the geometry. Then you'd need the adjustable UCA's to shorten them to get your alignment right. The UCA's will set you back a good $400 or more. Plus the adjustable strut rods. And after all that and an alignment your suspension geometry curves would be worse than stock.

Not a good idea IMHO.

I do have the adjustable strut rods from RMS as well as UCA, but I agree with you. The rims looks fantastic but prefer the front about another 1/2-3/4 lower. One guy told just to mill the rim 2mm and should be ok..... but I am not in agreement with that option.

 

[72bluNblu]

I do have the adjustable strut rods from RMS as well as UCA, but I agree with you. The rims looks fantastic but prefer the front about another 1/2-3/4 lower. One guy told just to mill the rim 2mm and should be ok..... but I am not in agreement with that option.

Honestly I would do that before I messed with the suspension. A few mm's off the wheel mounting surface shouldn't effect the overall strength of the wheel. Those are cast rims though, so without seeing them I couldn't say for sure. But I would bet the mounting surface isn't the thinnest part of those wheels, and a few mm's wouldn't change much. Might be worth showing them to a machinist. A good machinist should be able to tell you if it's a bad idea or not.