I've used RCC, and am very disappointed. I have HMS coilovers on the back that are somewhat disappointing and after talking to Lee on the phone about tubular front control arms, he wouldn't give me a straight answer (or even ballpark) on a few questions about them or admit that his rear coilover design is flawed.
So, my questions is, does anyone know a reputable fabrication shop that makes good tubular front control arms?
I see that it looks liek WCF will be offering some tubulars soon, anyone have any pics or something of them? Fitment? Quality of welds? Alignment specs?
I've seen some lambo guys out there with something different but those all seem to have air ride integrated in to them and want an insane amount of money for the complete air ride kit.
Well, the adjustable caster link on the RCC kit looks weak, I've seen custom tubular control arms before and they used much beefier hardware to acheive the same purpose. Second, the spring hat is mickey mouse in my opinion for two reasons:
1) Using a spherical bearing sideways is a bad idea. I talked to 3 people on this topic (QA1 tech staff on the power tour, and two circle track fabricators). Two flat out say it's a bad design and the third says I'll be replacing the spherical often enough to be annoying when used like this in a street application. After running the car for one week or and being annoyed by the rattling, I took apart the coilover to find the sphericals had alot of play and cut them out and replaced them with bigger ones, this time held in with a snap ring, not welded in like RCC does.
2) The spring hats are designed to be ground and stuck in the spring pocket? I think this a bad idea as it's another possible (and probable) source of rattle as well as headaches everytime you jack the car and the suspension is fully extended. I again re-engineered this by taking a 1/4" plate and welding inside my cross member pocket, then bolted RCC spring hat to that to ensure it wouldn't move at all.
On top of this there are many other annoying little parts to the kit (ie: the collared hex bolt that holds the spherical/spring hat to the shock shaft isn't long enough to tighten agains the jam nut... resulting in one of my shocks coming loose as prepared by darrel within the first week. alignment shop was unable to get desired camber range on the front left after two attempts stock LCA aligned 3 times just fine..). Overall, not impressed. Darrel was helpful on the phone trying to sort things out and everything, but in my opinion his design needs some perfecting, especially for that price.
As for HMS, I'm currently running their coilover conversion kit on the rear of my car and my only complaint is that there should be 14 springs with rates accordingly so that when the car is lifted the spring doesn't pop out of the spring hat. and make two loud bangs each time the car is set down unless you help guide the springs. This was very annoying during my engine swap as the car was lifted and set back down frequently. The reason that makes me want to steer clear of HMS is that when I talked to Lee on the phone about tubular fronts, he wouldn't even admit that it was truly a problem, rather that it "happens sometimes"... and in all reality I wouldn't say the rear of my car is lowered that much as it's riding on 18" wheels in the back. As for the icing in the cake when I asked him about spring rates and suspension travel he never could give me any straight answers as to what works best for him. Rather he would throw the world at me stating that different people have different opinions, and while I totally understand this, I would like some starting point to pick my springs at, knowing what he knows about his front suspension kit, this should have been a pretty straightforward question/answer.
All and all I'm looking for opinions of people who like/hate their front suspension, something more then "it just works." I mean, these aren't cheap parts and they are very critical safety parts, something I'd like well designed from the start.
I wouldn't expect either place to know what settings work well with their components. They sell parts, they don't operate a race team or do anything that would involve sussing out a good setup. For setup advice, you're better off coming here or going to the Fiero Racing List on yahoo groups.
I have for a while been advocating a hybrid setup involving both Held and RC components for the front. I never liked the RCC upper coil over mount. I think that Held upper mounts should be used because they bolt in and aren't Mickey Moused like the RCC mounts, but that RCC control arms should be used because they are castor adjustable.
Inadequate rod-ends is a defect common to pretty much the entire RCC product line. I got their bump steer kit a couple of years ago and the rod ends looked like $10 junkers. I swapped some $25 ones in place of the originals and have been satisified with the rod ends since. I'm not terribly happy with the design of the rest of the bumpsteer kit, but the rod ends are now adequate.
There are a couple of threads on the forum about DIY rear coil overs. They're really not hard or expensive. I made my own out of Koni struts. I'm running 325x12 springs and don't have any issues at all.
Basically, in the current market for tubular suspension components for the Fiero, if you want something well engineered, re-engineer it yourself.
300ppi seems to be a good start for the rear springs, with about 275 a good start in the front. Use equal size sway bars front and rear.
don't know what you finally decided (maybe nothing yet?) but an OPTION I suppose is to have your own made up as you want.... IFF there is a reputable welding/hot rod/race shop somewhere near you. With some care and attention (race type shop should KNOW how important this is) you can have custom made up that is 'similar' to the stockers.
These mimic the stock setup but are exactly 1 5/8" longer to suit my revised front end geometry. The small bolts are to protect the threaded holes for the grease nipples. The big deal is to do a really good setup jig. These fit really well and they will be adjusted as per the stock; using washers to make adjustments. I had a welding/hot rod shop weld them up to be really sure about weld strength and penetration etc. Not taking chances with that.
I also had lowers made up on the same basis. Same 'lack' of adjustment, but I don't have to worry about a weak link, either.
Just an option. It can be done.
IP: Logged
08:59 AM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
Originally posted by fiero308: These mimic the stock setup but are exactly 1 5/8" longer to suit my revised front end geometry. The small bolts are to protect the threaded holes for the grease nipples. The big deal is to do a really good setup jig. These fit really well and they will be adjusted as per the stock; using washers to make adjustments. I had a welding/hot rod shop weld them up to be really sure about weld strength and penetration etc. Not taking chances with that.
I also had lowers made up on the same basis. Same 'lack' of adjustment, but I don't have to worry about a weak link, either.
If you're getting custom uppers made, then they can be made wider across the inner pivots than the stock uppers, giving a greater range of castor adjustment. Castor adjustable lowers are then not necessary.
How is your front end geometry revised?
IP: Logged
09:11 AM
Jun 9th, 2005
watts Member
Posts: 3256 From: Coaldale, AB, Canada Registered: Aug 2001
Originally posted by nitro: As for HMS, I'm currently running their coilover conversion kit on the rear of my car and my only complaint is that there should be 14 springs with rates accordingly so that when the car is lifted the spring doesn't pop out of the spring hat. and make two loud bangs each time the car is set down unless you help guide the springs.
when I asked him about spring rates and suspension travel he never could give me any straight answers as to what works best for him. Rather he would throw the world at me stating that different people have different opinions, and while I totally understand this, I would like some starting point to pick my springs at
I totally know what you mean about the rears! Every time I've got mine up in the air... I'm just waiting for the dual BOING/BANG when they settle. I also think there should be a big nylon (or whatever) washer underneath the coil where it sits on the adjuster collar. Metal on metal? Worse... hard steel on aluminum??
I opted to use the 400# springs in the rear of mine, and don't find them REALLY hard. Yeah, they're stiff. But if I wanted a Caddy ride.... I'd buy a Caddy! (that might give you a starting point anyhow)
well some good information a little too late for me.
I purchased the RCC front tubular control arms and coilover package. I was definitly NOT happy with the amount of grinding I had to do to get the shock mounting plates to fit and considered doing what you did to get them to fit correctly (welding a plate inside the crossmember). I'll definitly keep an eye on the spherical bearings. When (not if) they wear out I'll look at using a sherical rollerbearing (If they actually make a beast that small).
The strength of the adjustment bar on the LCA was definitly questioned, but I don't know enough about them to make a call on it. That will be a "wait and see" issue. I was disappointed with the lack of response I got from several emails I sent Darrel over a minor fabrication issue with the front LCA.
Perhaps I should look at getting some better sherical ball ends for the bump steer kit before I get the rear suspension put together. Especially, if it's THAT certain they're going to wear out.
My biggest question was and still is..... Do the front shocks have enough travel? I put the suspension all together once and put some weight on the fenders to check travel and it seemed good. However, now that I've got the engine in it seems to have NO travel like the shocks are bottomed out. The rear of the car is jacked a foot or so off the ground though, so that might explain all the weight on the front suspension right now.
I think Will is right though. I'll probably end up re engineering the existing set up when it breaks.... but that's half the fun of modding cars isn't it?
If you're getting custom uppers made, then they can be made wider across the inner pivots than the stock uppers, giving a greater range of castor adjustment. Castor adjustable lowers are then not necessary.
How is your front end geometry revised?
just saw this..... I have done a lot of ........stuff .... to the front end. Basically everything is new and one-off. I have adapted to a camaro 'stub axle' and thus wheel bearings; have parted off the camaro brake rotor to create a light(er) weight hub sort of a la zettner and others.... I am using a 5 on 4 3/4" bolt circle and IROC Z 16" rims with 13" vette slip on rotors and willwood calipers. Not finished quite yet but very close. I have had the new hub machined to work better with the stock kingpin inclination angle to reduce the scrub radius as much as possible. At the same time my 308 kit is 4" wider across the front so I ended up making longer upper and lower control arms. Coil over shocks with a much-revised upper spring mount to connect the shock to.
this is the left front lower with the new shock mount sort of visible. Still testing/checking at that point.
next is the amount I had to grind away from the upper spring mounting area; I welded and supplemented this; it was to clear the shock and coil over.
this is the RIGHT front of course but shows how things fit. I'm trying to find a pic showing just the hub assy but might have lost that one.
My biggest question was and still is..... Do the front shocks have enough travel? I put the suspension all together once and put some weight on the fenders to check travel and it seemed good. However, now that I've got the engine in it seems to have NO travel like the shocks are bottomed out. The rear of the car is jacked a foot or so off the ground though, so that might explain all the weight on the front suspension right now.
I think Will is right though. I'll probably end up re engineering the existing set up when it breaks.... but that's half the fun of modding cars isn't it?
Yeah, that's another disappointing part of the kit. I took the time to measure the three things that would limit travel (shock bottoming, coil bind on spring, and the tire hitting inner fenderwell). Well, guess what happens first? Shock bottoms and there is barely an inch of travel with the way I have it. I'd be interested to hear how yours rides, any eta when the car is to hit the road?
By the way, driving with a broken lower control arm is a very difficult thing to do... so I'd keep an eye on those if your think they are going to break.
quote
IFF there is a reputable welding/hot rod/race shop somewhere near you. With some care and attention (race type shop should KNOW how important this is) you can have custom made up that is 'similar' to the stockers.
Wow, that's alot like what I was looking for. Not sure that the design of the fiero needs a boxed lower control arm section, I like the bend in the tubular allowing for lower shock mounting allowing for more travel. But those look wayyyy stronger then the flimsy stuff I have.
Outta curiosity how much did they charge to have those made? Or did you have make them?
Do you think it is necessary to cut the edge off the cross member? I kinda have a 1/4" plate welded in mine that is gonna make that alot more difficult...
Also, is this setup on the road? How does it ride? What shock and spring setup did you use?
Sorry for so many questions, but that setup (except the increase in length) is exactly what I want.
Nitro; not sure if you are asking me or someone else but I'll jump in with what I can: "enough travel" is going to be a personal decision of course to reflect what you want yourself. In my case I am willing to give up comfort for handling. The old adage about racing design is that if (ie suspension) some design is difficult to solve, then minimize its effect..... in other words (and quite literally) the complex changes in geometry that happen in all the different situations you encounter when doing spirited driving cause all kinds of situations, body roll among them, which in turn has a very large effect on all your suspension geometry intersection points. So ......... minimize the movements that are creating the problems.
Watch an F1 car as it goes up on the rumble strip and back onto the track. Note too that it has EXTREMEly long control arms; as long as they can make them. This is all to minimize the amount of "change of angle" that happens to the front suspension. The whole car basically goes up then down; the wheels don't really move up and down independently (hardly) at all for that reason. They then KNOW that the suspension and thus all the angles will stay within a very limited and thus predictable range and THAT is something you can plan around. Anyway I made a decision early on to go with very stiff suspension. My shocks only have about 2 1/2" of stroke which translates to roughly 5" of total WHEEL travel because of the placement along the LCA. 2/3 of that 5" is for compression and 1/3 for extension. So, NO, I don't have much movement but that is what I designed for. I am not going to drive this car daily or maybe even weekly; depending on various things. I DO hope to do autocrossing and lapping days simply to see how good a job I did. That is my main goal. It will only travel on known good roads and where I know there aren't any speed bumps etc etc etc.
Having very limited travel means, of necessity, a VERY stiff spring. The car is going to preload the spring to its normal ride height but the spring ahs to resist bottoming out all the time too (under 'hard' driving conditions). More comfort issues. Yeah, I better get a pillow for my drivers seat
That probably wouldn't suit MOST of the people on this board, they would likely want more travel and more forgiving suspension for a daily driver or similar. So that is an 'early-on' decision to make.
I looked at a bunch of different kits etc that were avail and no flame or anything but I didn't like what I saw with those Heim joints in that lower control arm (that I think Soelesca has? not sure who it is right now) as the lower arm does the lions share of the work. That is why it is so beefy compared to the upper.
I actually made up the upper arms myself - made all the parts, laid it out and tacked it together - and altho I can weld and would feel OK about doing them, I took them into a race type welding shop to have them welded up solid. The shop made up the lower arms and I am happy with them - mind you the car is NOT on the road yet. (too many projects on the go at one time problem here ........) The biggest deal with any of this work is a VERY painstaking layout and jig make-up process. You can't rush that or you will live with the mistake.
I still have to work in some suspension stops and I haven't exactly got a final answer on that but will do that before long; I am NOT going to let the shocks do that job; they are way too expensive to blow out or even to risk that.
Dunno if that helps or not but hope so. good luck with it all gp
IP: Logged
08:13 AM
Tugboat Member
Posts: 1669 From: Goodview, VA Registered: Jan 2004
I mickey-moused my own tubing bender using some cheap avail dies and a cheapo metal bender. (do you see a theme here?LOL) Used 1" OD DOM tubing of course.... I did some 'practising' with it to see how it would work out and for this degree of bending it worked really well. The big thing that I did that helped was to plug in a die for the 'stopper' so that I used a total of 3 dies; NO flat surfaces and thus the tube section stayed pretty good all along the bend. Didn't flatten out. That is 1/4" plate for the ball joint; not flattened tube. The hole is elongated to allow for the 'problem solver' ball joint.
oh yeah I think much beyond 1" OD and you would break this type of bender. It is just manual and only made for ie flat bar. I guess I could do larger dia but much thinner wall but .... where would I use stuff like that? The price of 3 dies would get kind of high and the only thing I would be able to do is exh piping so to me it isn't worth it; I would just go buy a bunch of bends.
this shows my turned down ex-camaro hub assy on the left with new longer studs. Fiero rotor on the right. At the top centre is the reworked fiero/camaro spindle. Fiero upright with modified camaro stub axle pressed in AND welded both sides. Bearings: left is the camaro inner (largest); next is the camaro outer; next is the stock 84-87 outer and inner bearings. Note that the fiero INNER bearing is about the same size as the camaro OUTER (small) bearing.... I like that. The hub ass'y is turned down across the board so the weight is pretty good. Haven't weighed it and with the vette rotor I expect it will be heavier than stock but not all that much. I DID weigh my whole 'wheel assy' - tire, wheel, rotor, caliper, bolts, spindle etc and allowed for 1/2 of control arms and shock etc and it came in at a surprising (seems high!) 100 lbs give or take a bit. I didn't think it would be that high..... but if that is what it is then so be it. Not much I can do about it. It is an interesting exercise. That is about 400 lbs of car weight that is not supported by springs..... (rears will weigh a bit more I think.) Anyway an interesting tidbit.
IP: Logged
09:11 AM
Tugboat Member
Posts: 1669 From: Goodview, VA Registered: Jan 2004
Originally posted by fiero308:Didn't flatten out. That is 1/4" plate for the ball joint; not flattened tube. The hole is elongated to allow for the 'problem solver' ball joint.
I could tell that there's a plate for the ball joint; but it looked like the ends of the tubing were flattened to meet it.
GL
IP: Logged
10:01 AM
Soelasca Member
Posts: 455 From: Edmonton Alberta Canada Registered: Sep 2004
Wow, this is turning out to be a most disappointing thread. I'm almost considering ripping out the entire front suspension and having it redone.
I anticipate having it on four wheels today. However it probably won't be running or driving for awhile. My new job is going to take me away from home again for about a month.
Once it's on all 4s I still have to get the exhaust done, hook up the wiring, do up the coolant system and have it aligned.
btw, do you have any alignment specs you're using for your car Nitro?
IP: Logged
11:12 AM
PFF
System Bot
Jun 15th, 2005
Will Member
Posts: 14252 From: Where you least expect me Registered: Jun 2000
Originally posted by fiero308: I looked at a bunch of different kits etc that were avail and no flame or anything but I didn't like what I saw with those Heim joints in that lower control arm (that I think Soelesca has? not sure who it is right now) as the lower arm does the lions share of the work. That is why it is so beefy compared to the upper.
The lateral component of the lower control arm experiences bending stress because of the spring load. The trailing component of the LCA, which seems to be what people don't like, is exposed to the same loads as the UCA--braking and cornering--and consequently doesn't have to be any heavier than the UCA.
