Initial Suspension Settings for my Dart Before Alignment

[1969VADart]

I am working through some different things after getting all the components installed for my disc brake conversion on my 69 Dart. I have factory LCAs and torsion bars (I’m just cruising not corner carving) but new PST tubular UCAs with big ball joints and the new steering arm and ball joints on the lower. I adjusted the UCAs with the front mount as far out as I could get it and the back as far in as possible based on what I read. Then I lowered the car to get a sense of where I am at. Both wheels have a lot of positive camber in them. Here’s a couple pics but I can get some better ones. The passenger side wheel also has considerably more toe out than the drivers side. In fact the drivers wheel appears to be tracking pretty straight. I am satisfied with my ride height adjustment. Could use some advice on where to begin my adjustments to bring that positive camber in. From what I have read on FABO it seems that I should just focus on bringing the rear UCA mount out to adjust without really moving the front. I have also bounced the car up and down to try to get it to settle. Have not tried rolling it because I don’t have the brakes completely done and bled yet. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

[72bluNblu]

Are the UCA’s on the correct sides?

“Bouncing” on the car will NEVER fully settle the suspension. It has to roll. The camber changes as the suspension goes through its travel. But when you lower the car onto the ground the tires hit with the suspension at full extension, and the friction of the tires on the ground resist the changes in the suspension. It will not fully settle until the car rolls.

The ride height in those pictures is far above the stock height, it’s sitting VERY high. That is also effecting your camber. When the suspension is fully extended, the wheels move toward positive camber. That could be a big part of it. At that height are the UCA’s on the upper bump stops?

As for what to do about it, make sure you have the UCA’s on the correct sides. Then check your ride height vs the stock height, higher than stock is very bad for the suspension geometry. Once you’ve dealt with that, you need to roll the car. Even a couple feet forward and back will make a difference. With all of that taken care of, I suspect the problem will be solved.

If for some reason after all of that the camber is still positive, all you can do is adjust the front of the UCA’s further in. If the rear leg of the UCA is already all the way in toward the frame that will be the only way to reduce the positive camber and move toward negative camber. But you’ll be sacrificing caster to do it. With everything installed properly and at the right ride height that shouldn’t be necessary.

The factory ride height is described here in the FSM, “V&L” lines is for an A body

 

[Tinmannz]

I have no clue how to solve your problem.
But I really like the color of your car. Very nice choice!

 

[doug 371]

Leave the tie rod ends disconnected till you have camber/caster close. If you changed from small bolt pattern to big bolt the tie rods will have to be adjusted out significantly...

 

[dano]

I'm with Blue your front end is really high. Mine sat cambered in at the bottom like that until I maxed the adjusters to where the fron it all the way out and the rear adjuster is all the way in. I have yet to align the car.

What color it that? My 69 Is Vitamin C Orange.

 

[67Dart273]

Leave the tie rod ends disconnected till you have camber/caster close. If you changed from small bolt pattern to big bolt the tie rods will have to be adjusted out significantly...

Not sure I follow. It's easy to "rough in" the toe almost by eye until you get everything else in

Roll and jounce the car

Jack it up under the A arms, not the frame

Install turn plates of some sort

Set upper arm adjusters for max caster, then work in camber

Set the toe

Check wheel for center, "walk" the tie rods until wheel is straight.

Test drive the car, and recheck alignment.

You can align it yourself. You need an accurate level device for camber. Caster is figured by turning wheels in or out, that is how all camber/ caster gauges work

You need a level place to work, I just level up my trailer and use that. You need something for turning places, and a way to set toe. Crackeback has talked about setting boards on top of soda cans next to the tires, and measure between, front and rear of the tires.

My beat up old ****

Demon Alignment

Need a driveway alignment advice after suspension overhaul- just good enough to get it to the shop?

My beater old caster camber gauge. These do NOT measure caster, they measure camber and COMPUTE caster, which you can do with a plain angle measurement device

I also got lucky with the gauge, and scored some beat up old Ammco turning plates at same time, but you can make them

I'm alone, so I bought mixed pieces of a toe gauge and made the rest Turns out it was for a truck, I had to cut it down

 

[1969VADart]

Thanks for the feedback. I have actually brought the front end down some from those pictures just by bouncing and rocking the car back and forth. Those pics were taken as soon as I set it down. I measured the ride height per the manual and it is close to spec. Not as high as those initial pics. I will try to remeasure and readjust if necessary. There is only about 2 1/2'' of open space between the top of the tire and the fender lip currently - I think it was over 4" initially. I contacted Jamie at PST and he said the tubular UCA's are not right and left - that either can be installed on each side - they have the same design geometry. Seemed strange that one tire was toed way out while the other was generally straight with just a lot of positive camber. I will keep working on it and see if I can roll it more than just rocking it.

The color is Hemi Orange for those wondering.

 

[1969VADart]

Well now I don’t know what the right answer is. I called PST back and one person said these tubular UCAs have a right and a left and another said they are interchangeable. Needless to say, adjusting the fronts all the way out and backs all the way in (see pictures) still had netted me what appears to be negative caster. My understanding is it should be positive with those initial settings. So the question is open, are the UCAs really side specific? Just looking at them they look exactly the same. I am at a complete loss here.

Drivers side

Passenger side

 

[72bluNblu]

Well now I don’t know what the right answer is. I called PST back and one person said these tubular UCAs have a right and a left and another said they are interchangeable. Needless to say, adjusting the fronts all the way out and backs all the way in (see pictures) still had netted me what appears to be negative camber. My understanding is it should be positive with those initial settings. So the question is open, are the UCAs really side specific? Just looking at them they look exactly the same. I am at a complete loss here.

Drivers side

View attachment 1715542764

View attachment 1715542765

View attachment 1715542767

View attachment 1715542769

Passenger side

View attachment 1715542770

View attachment 1715542772

View attachment 1715542774

View attachment 1715542775

There is absolutely a right and a left.

And yours are backwards.

Positive caster is what you need, and that means the top of the spindle should be leaned back toward the rear of the car. The tubular UCA’s have additional positive caster built in. When they’re installed correctly the upper ball joint should also be angled so the spindle would be layed back. Those UCA’s need to be swapped side to side.

 

[1969VADart]

There is absolutely a right and a left.

And yours are backwards.

Positive caster is what you need, and that means the top of the spindle should be leaned back toward the rear of the car. The tubular UCA’s have additional positive caster built in. When they’re installed correctly the upper ball joint should also be angled so the spindle would be layed back. Those UCA’s need to be swapped side to side.

I appreciate the follow up. Why would PST claim that they are interchangeable if there is a right and a left. It seems to me from measuring that the geometry of these arms is symmetrical (like a normal V shape) despite the optics. Can you tell just from looking at those pictures I am wrong? Not questioning your feedback at all. I just want to make sure before I bust all this stuff back apart. I assume I can support the lower control arm and assembly and just bust the upper ball joint loose and pull the UCAs out, if that is what I need to do. Or do I need to pull everything back apart? Again, I appreciate all the feedback.

 

[72bluNblu]

I appreciate the follow up. Why would PST claim that they are interchangeable if there is a right and a left. It seems to me from measuring that the geometry of these arms is symmetrical (like a normal V shape) despite the optics. Can you tell just from looking at those pictures I am wrong? Not questioning your feedback at all. I just want to make sure before I bust all this stuff back apart. I assume I can support the lower control arm and assembly and just bust the upper ball joint loose and pull the UCAs out, if that is what I need to do. Or do I need to pull everything back apart? Again, I appreciate all the feedback.

I have NO idea why anyone at PST would tell you they're interchangeable, there is absolutely a right and a left. That is true of the stock UCA's and all of the tubular UCA's as well. They are not symmetrical and they can not be switched side to side. Of that I am 100% sure.

From pictures it can be a little hard to tell, the angle that the picture was taken from can play visual tricks. But your ball joints appear to be well forward of the shock with the ball joint angled backward which would give negative caster. The UCA's should have been marked right and left from PST. To me, based on your pictures they look backward. And your camber and caster angles adjusting the way that you're describing backs that up too. With the front leg adjusted out from the frame and the rear leg adjusted in toward the frame you should have clearly negative camber and positive caster.

Excuse my dirt, but I have a similar picture from a fairly similar angle that I think shows that yours are not on the correct sides.

Now, I know the angle of the picture isn't identical, but the centerline of your ball joint being so far in front of the body of the shock indicates to me the arms are probably switched. It's easier to tell with stock UCA's, but none of these UCA's are symmetrical. If you think about where you would have to be standing to take a picture with the ball joint lined up with the shock, like it appears in my picture, you'd have to be standing well forward of the shock and looking back. The angles of our pictures would then be dramatically different, which indicates the issue.

As far as fixing it, all you need to do is back off the torsion bar adjusters and break the upper ball joint loose from the spindles and switch the UCA's. No need to touch anything else.

 

[1969VADart]

I have NO idea why anyone at PST would tell you they're interchangeable, there is absolutely a right and a left. That is true of the stock UCA's and all of the tubular UCA's as well. They are not symmetrical and they can not be switched side to side. Of that I am 100% sure.

From pictures it can be a little hard to tell, the angle that the picture was taken from can play visual tricks. But your ball joints appear to be well forward of the shock with the ball joint angled backward which would give negative caster. They UCA's should have been marked right and left from PST. To me, based on your pictures they look backward. And your camber and caster angles adjusting the way that you're describing backs that up too. With the front leg adjusted out from the frame and the rear leg adjusted in toward the frame you should have clearly negative camber and positive caster.

Excuse my dirt, but I have a similar picture from a fairly similar angle that I think shows that yours are not on the correct sides.

View attachment 1715542879
View attachment 1715542880

Now, I know the angle of the picture isn't identical, but the centerline of your ball joint being so far in front of the body of the shock indicates to me the arms are probably switched. It's easier to tell with stock UCA's, but none of these UCA's are symmetrical. If you think about where you would have to be standing to take a picture with the ball joint lined up with the shock, like it appears in my picture, you'd have to be standing well forward of the shock and looking back. The angles of our pictures would then be dramatically different, which indicates the issue.

As far as fixing it, all you need to do is back off the torsion bar adjusters and break the upper ball joint loose from the spindles and switch the UCA's. No need to touch anything else.

Really appreciate the detailed follow up. I went ahead and popped off one side tonight and tried to compare to the other side mounted. The arms might be equal length but the ball joint head looks decidedly different in terms of angle. I will probably just go ahead and switch them and start the adjustments over to see what I am working with. Appreciate that picture too. Gives me another way to compare. Standby for more follow up tomorrow.

Really not sure why I have mixed answers from PST. The last guy I spoke to this afternoon said they are absolutely, undoubtedly universal. Guess we will see. Thanks.

 

[72bluNblu]

Really appreciate the detailed follow up. I went ahead and popped off one side tonight and tried to compare to the other side mounted. The arms might be equal length but the ball joint head looks decidedly different in terms of angle. I will probably just go ahead and switch them and start the adjustments over to see what I am working with. Appreciate that picture too. Gives me another way to compare. Standby for more follow up tomorrow.

Really not sure why I have mixed answers from PST. The last guy I spoke to this afternoon said they are absolutely, undoubtedly universal. Guess we will see. Thanks.

No problem!

Yeah I dunno what PST’s deal is, the UCA’s are the same dimensions and all but they are mirror images of each other. There’s a right and a left. Like you already discovered the angle of the ball joint changes if you swap them.

I’m pretty sure that swapping them will solve your issues.

 

[dano]

When you have them switched be sure to check for interference where the arm comes away from the pivot. My QA1 arms hit a gusset and I had to grind the gusset to allow the arm full drop down to the bump stop.Do this check before you connect the spindle.

I was going to comment on the lack of Zerks but these have delrin bushings and what looks to be a metal washer that contacts the body. I like this design better than the QA1 ones I have where the urethane bushing pivoting on the body.

 

[Bodyperson]

Another indicator that the control arms need swapping is in the comparison picture that 72bluNble provided shows 69VADart's arm NOT lining up with the strike through bumper.

 

[1969VADart]

Alright so a little follow up. I pulled out the UCAs and swapped one to the opposite side for a test fit and comparison. The picture below is what the UCA looks like mounted on the opposite side from where I had it. While it is not seated on the spindle it is lined up to connect. That looks like a very extreme angle for the ball joint. I feel like the previous way I had them installed was correct after looking at this. I also set the other arm on top to get an idea of the angle differences. The last picture is the way it looked before I swapped for comparison. So which UCA does everyone think is the correct one? Side note: the geometry in these arms is definitely not symmetrical so that they would be interchangeable. The ball joint angles alone bear that out.

Before I swapped for comparison.

 

[1969VADart]

When you have them switched be sure to check for interference where the arm comes away from the pivot. My QA1 arms hit a gusset and I had to grind the gusset to allow the arm full drop down to the bump stop.Do this check before you connect the spindle.

I was going to comment on the lack of Zerks but these have delrin bushings and what looks to be a metal washer that contacts the body. I like this design better than the QA1 ones I have where the urethane bushing pivoting on the body.

Yeah I ground off some of that tab that was interfering in the frame. See pictures below.

 

[72bluNblu]

Alright so a little follow up. I pulled out the UCAs and swapped one to the opposite side for a test fit and comparison. The picture below is what the UCA looks like mounted on the opposite side from where I had it. While it is not seated on the spindle it is lined up to connect. That looks like a very extreme angle for the ball joint. I feel like the previous way I had them installed was correct after looking at this. I also set the other arm on top to get an idea of the angle differences. The last picture is the way it looked before I swapped for comparison. So which UCA does everyone think is the correct one? Side note: the geometry in these arms is definitely not symmetrical so that they would be interchangeable. The ball joint angles alone bear that out.

View attachment 1715543301

View attachment 1715543302

View attachment 1715543303

Before I swapped for comparison.

View attachment 1715543304

Good god!

Well, seeing them swapped side for side confirms two things for sure, there is definitely a left and a right as we knew, and they look like they were on the correct sides to start off with. The geometry with them swapped is clearly wrong, there's no way that will work. Sorry you had to go through all that work, apparently they were right the first time and I blew it.

Given the alignment issues you had with them on the sides they were on originally, I'm beginning to question whether those UCA's are built correctly. Something isn't right, that's for sure.

 

[1969VADart]

Good god!

Well, seeing them swapped side for side confirms two things for sure, there is definitely a left and a right as we knew, and they look like they were on the correct sides to start off with. The geometry with them swapped is clearly wrong, there's no way that will work. Sorry you had to go through all that work, apparently they were right the first time and I blew it.

Given the alignment issues you had with them on the sides they were on originally, I'm beginning to question whether those UCA's are built correctly. Something isn't right, that's for sure.

No worries on having to put in the work. I'm going to go ahead and swap them back and see if maybe I can get adjustments to where they need to be. I had actually started to get things a little better set up, but it had me perplexed. I will go back to work on this problem. I guess in a worse case scenario, I can just swallow my pride and buy a different set of UCAs. But I feel like these should work. The part numbers suggest they are appropriate to my application - older than 72 model A-body with a disc brake swap that involves 73+ spindles.

 

[72bluNblu]

No worries on having to put in the work. I'm going to go ahead and swap them back and see if maybe I can get adjustments to where they need to be. I had actually started to get things a little better set up, but it had me perplexed. I will go back to work on this problem. I guess in a worse case scenario, I can just swallow my pride and buy a different set of UCAs. But I feel like these should work. The part numbers suggest they are appropriate to my application - older than 72 model A-body with a disc brake swap that involves 73+ spindles.

They should work, as you can see from my picture I ran a very similar if not identical set for awhile before I upgraded to my SPC adjustable UCA's. But that's assuming they were built correctly. I don't know where PST gets their UCA's, I know they don't make them. The look identical to the Magnumforce tubular UCA's, which is what my old ones were.

Yeah, just play with the adjustment and see what you get. Remember to roll the wheels a little between adjustments to see where you're really at. I wish I could give you a hand, with a couple of basic alignment tools it would be fairly easy for me to sort it out in person. Pictures over the internet don't always show everything that's going on .

 

[1969VADart]

They should work, as you can see from my picture I ran a very similar if not identical set for awhile before I upgraded to my SPC adjustable UCA's. But that's assuming they were built correctly. I don't know where PST gets their UCA's, I know they don't make them. The look identical to the Magnumforce tubular UCA's, which is what my old ones were.

Yeah, just play with the adjustment and see what you get. Remember to roll the wheels a little between adjustments to see where you're really at. I wish I could give you a hand, with a couple of basic alignment tools it would be fairly easy for me to sort it out in person. Pictures over the internet don't always show everything that's going on .

I reinstalled them and reset them in the frame - fronts all the way out and rears all the way in (or at least as far out and in as I could physically force them. In going back and looking at the caster alignment (eyeballing it), there may be a little positive caster there, which I think it should be. A few degrees is quite frankly hard to eyeball. But once I get the wheels back on and actually roll it (not just bounce on the car) that should give me a better idea. Really appreciate all the feedback. By the time this is over, I should be able to disassemble the parts under the fender with my eyes closed.