Hope this is not true. Moog Offset Upper control arm bushings.

-
72bluNblu said:
Yeah the Moog boxes I’ve seen all say where the parts are actually from- China, Mexico, India, Canada and the US. Seems like the K7103’s are still made in Canada and the US, there was another thread here on it. Not sure why, pretty much everything else Moog makes for these cars has been outsourced. But Moog does still have facilities in the US and Canada.
Click to expand...
Could be old stock, but they're packed in sealed bags with moisture absorber and look perfect.
With the plethora of tubular upper control arms now, demand has surely gone down and maybe warehouses got stuck holding excess stock.

I'll take 20 year old USA parts over anything rubber Made in India. Maybe that's why their birthrate is so high.
 
getting set to rebuild my duster's front suspension....I've got manual steering and plan to keep it. would you still recommend the problem solvers set to maximize caster?
 
michiganpat said:
getting set to rebuild my duster's front suspension....I've got manual steering and plan to keep it. would you still recommend the problem solvers set to maximize caster?
Click to expand...
I've grown to where I no longer like the offset bushings. I've installed a crapload of them, too. I don't like them because of the offset. Look how thin the bushing material is on the thin side. There's just not much there. Since there are now so many really NICE upper control arm options out there, IMO, that's a much better way. You get a good stout tubular upper control arm with new poly bushings and new ball joints. Although the cost is more, it takes away the labor if pressing in bushings and installing ball joints. Not to mention repositioned ball joints to increase caster. It's just a win/win, IMO.
 
michiganpat said:
getting set to rebuild my duster's front suspension....I've got manual steering and plan to keep it. would you still recommend the problem solvers set to maximize caster?
Click to expand...
Yes, modern radials will wear longer with the extra caster provided by the offset bushings
 
If caster is off side to side causing a pull in one direction it will wear tires.
 
ir3333 said:
i can't count the number of posts/threads that insist you need offset upper bushings. I have never used them or saw the need. My vehicles all steer and self centre fine with stock replacements.
Are you sure you needed them?
Click to expand...


^^I was going to say that but decided not to. Please just answer the question. The question which the OP asked^^
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CFD244 said:
Basically, making the front arm as long as possible, and the rear arm as short as possible for max. caster.
Click to expand...
To put this another way, you want the spindle "leaned back" as far as you can get via the offset, so you want the hole in the rear bushing inboard towards the center of the car, and the front bushing hole outboard, towards "you"
 
I have had off-set bushings on my '68 Cuda since 1972 when I went to BFG's. The bias ply tires ran well with stock caster, but the BFG's wondered at the low caster setting. My alignment shop said that the radial tires had less dynamic caster than bias ply tires and therefore needed more static caster to allow self-centering. As the stock UCA'a are stout design, I like keeping them over buying aftermarket UCA's.
 
92b said:
If caster is off side to side causing a pull in one direction it will wear tires.
Click to expand...
No sir. While it can cause a pull, caster is a non wearing tire angle.
 
RustyRatRod said:
No sir. While it can cause a pull, caster is a non wearing tire angle.
Click to expand...
Not in my experience doing front end alignments. I was taught in tech school that caster is a non wearing tire angle but running the alignment rack taught me otherwise.
You can have toe correct and camber correct and still wear tires if caster is incorrect side to side causing a pull to one side or the other.
If alignment specs are correct and the steering wheel is straght the car will travel straight down the road.
Now put it back on the rack and add a degree of caster to the left front and subtract a degree of caster from the right front while resetting the camber and toe to spec. Now on the test drive the car pulls right toward the ditch. To keep the car out of the ditch you instinctively turn the wheel from straight ahead to slightly left of center.
Now the car is going straight down the road with the rf toed in and the lf toed out. Scrubbing the outside of the rf and the inside of the lf.
 
67Dart273 said:
^^I was going to say that but decided not to. Please just answer the question. The question which the OP asked^^
Click to expand...
I mentioned in other threads that I was hoping to do some small course road racing. I am looking for anything that will increase the car's handling.

Bushings were only $35, I thought ok , even if it only helps a little, I want it.
Tuning a suspension and tuning an engine is the same philosophy
 
Brooks James said:
I mentioned in other threads that I was hoping to do some small course road racing. I am looking for anything that will increase the car's handling.

Bushings were only $35, I thought ok , even if it only helps a little, I want it.
Tuning a suspension and tuning an engine is the same philosophy
Click to expand...
Keep in mind the best specs for road racing may not be best for tire wear on the street. Might have to pick your poison.
 
RustyRatRod said:
No sir. While it can cause a pull, caster is a non wearing tire angle.
Click to expand...
I guess that I would say is as long as you don't induce an pull to one side or the other with caster it is not a tire wearing angle.
 
92b said:
Keep in mind the best specs for road racing may not be best for tire wear on the street. Might have to pick your poison.
Click to expand...
Agreed, may eventually go with a separate set of Nitto's or something like that
 
92b said:
I guess that I would say is as long as you don't induce an pull to one side or the other with caster it is not a tire wearing angle.
Click to expand...
Another way to say it is that caster does not wear tires directly but can cause wear indirectly as in your earlier post you say that toe was causing the wear.
 
92b said:
Now the car is going straight down the road with the rf toed in and the lf toed out. Scrubbing the outside of the rf and the inside of the lf.
Click to expand...
Think about this for a minuet. This is impossible. The car would be turning to the left. In order to go straight, toe must be equal from side to side. To go straight, total toe is divided equally. Now I'm not disagreeing that this condition would not have some tire wear due to the application of the Ackerman steering geometry coming into play.
 
92b said:
I guess that I would say is as long as you don't induce an pull to one side or the other with caster it is not a tire wearing angle.
Click to expand...
It's a non wearing angle even with a pull. The only reason caster induces a pull is because one side would have less caster making it pull to that side. As long as camber and toe were in spec, there would be no tire wear, regardless of caster difference.
 
92b said:
Not in my experience doing front end alignments. I was taught in tech school that caster is a non wearing tire angle but running the alignment rack taught me otherwise.
You can have toe correct and camber correct and still wear tires if caster is incorrect side to side causing a pull to one side or the other.
If alignment specs are correct and the steering wheel is straght the car will travel straight down the road.
Now put it back on the rack and add a degree of caster to the left front and subtract a degree of caster from the right front while resetting the camber and toe to spec. Now on the test drive the car pulls right toward the ditch. To keep the car out of the ditch you instinctively turn the wheel from straight ahead to slightly left of center.
Now the car is going straight down the road with the rf toed in and the lf toed out. Scrubbing the outside of the rf and the inside of the lf.
Click to expand...
The alignment rack taught you that when caster is significantly different side to side, camber and toe usually are too and that causes tire wear. Caster by itself does not.
 
Bodyperson said:
Another way to say it is that caster does not wear tires directly but can cause wear indirectly as in your earlier post you say that toe was causing the wear.
Click to expand...
I guess so.
If you drove from east coast to the west coast in a 100 mile an hour cross wind out of the south it would have the same effect. You could blame the tire wear on the toe being off because of the wind.
 
RustyRatRod said:
The alignment rack taught you that when caster is significantly different side to side, camber and toe usually are too and that causes tire wear. Caster by itself does not.
Click to expand...
That isn't what i'm saying. What I learned was that if a car came in and it showed tire wear and the only thing out of spec was the caster that even though I was taught that caster isn't a tire wearing angle, in fact it very well could be the cause of the tire wear. There is enough range in the specs on some cars that it might not even show up as being out of spec individualy. But when compared to each other it was a problem.
 
92b said:
That isn't what i'm saying. What I learned was that if a car came in and it showed tire wear and the only thing out of spec was the caster that even though I was taught that caster isn't a tire wearing angle, in fact it very well could be the cause of the tire wear. There is enough range in the specs on some cars that it might not even show up as being out of spec individualy. But when compared to each other it was a problem.
Click to expand...
Nope. Caster by itself does not wear tires. You're just wrong if you think that and have learned it wrong wrong wrong. I certainly wouldn't want you aligning anything I own. Since I cannot get through, I'm stopping right here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top