[Squidward]

I try to drive my 67 Fbird at least a few times a week. I recently noticed that I was getting wear on the tire inner edges. Last time I got it aligned, I told them give it as much caster as you can, and give me a tiny bit of negative camber.

I checked the camber, and I had a touch over -1 degree on driver side, -.5 passenger. I pulled out some shim to get to -.3 on the driver side, but the passenger side had no shims on the front, and a stack on the rear. So I have no more adjustment to reduce camber on the passenger side unless I sacrifice the caster.

1st gen factory steering specs don't leave a lot of adjustment. I have refurbed factory front suspension stuff. Thinking about replacing the control arms.

Is there a basic kit of control arms that give more modern adjustability? Not looking for exotic stuff, but something that gives a nice mild performance drive.

Thanks!

[65 Lamnas]

Originally Posted by Squidward

I try to drive my 67 Fbird at least a few times a week. I recently noticed that I was getting wear on the tire inner edges. Last time I got it aligned, I told them give it as much caster as you can, and give me a tiny bit of negative camber.

I checked the camber, and I had a touch over -1 degree on driver side, -.5 passenger. I pulled out some shim to get to -.3 on the driver side, but the passenger side had no shims on the front, and a stack on the rear. So I have no more adjustment to reduce camber on the passenger side unless I sacrifice the caster.

1st gen factory steering specs don't leave a lot of adjustment. I have refurbed factory front suspension stuff. Thinking about replacing the control arms.

Is there a basic kit of control arms that give more modern adjustability? Not looking for exotic stuff, but something that gives a nice mild performance drive.

Thanks!

I’m more of an A-body guy and that’s where the lion's share of my knowledge resides, but the cars are similar enough that most of what I say should translate.

The cheaper route would be Moog’s offset upper shaft kits for the upper arms. New bushings shafts and hardware are included, 2 per car, K5250. It’s for solving the issue of “frame sag” and allowing additional camber adjustment when you’re out of shims, yet need to remove some.

When I went thru the suspension on my ‘65, I went withI Global West upper arms. They change the geometry a bit and allowed me to get about 5° of caster and 1/2° or so (can’t remember) of camber and have plenty of shims to play with.

I’m sure their F-body upper arms afford the same or similar improved geometry. They aren’t “exotic”, but they aren’t cheap Chinese crap either. www.globalwest.net

[Squidward]

Originally Posted by 65 Lamnas

I’m more of an A-body guy and that’s where the lion's share of my knowledge resides, but the cars are similar enough that most of what I say should translate.

The cheaper route would be Moog’s offset upper shaft kits for the upper arms. New bushings shafts and hardware are included, 2 per car, K5250. It’s for solving the issue of “frame sag” and allowing additional camber adjustment when you’re out of shims, yet need to remove some.

When I went thru the suspension on my ‘65, I went withI Global West upper arms. They change the geometry a bit and allowed me to get about 5° of caster and 1/2° or so (can’t remember) of camber and have plenty of shims to play with.

I’m sure their F-body upper arms afford the same or similar improved geometry. They aren’t “exotic”, but they aren’t cheap Chinese crap either. www.globalwest.net

Thanks, dude!

I am now contemplating whether to get some upper arms that have the caster inserted, or go with the offset shaft. I will need the offset shafts at a minimum. I've never encountered a suspension that needed this tweaking, but this is the only 1st gen I have and will ever own. 2nd gens are my jam, and they always just worked once you replaced worn out bushings.

I will look at the Global West stuff. With all of the other "budget" arms, what is the weak link? Is it the ball joint?

[JLMounce]

The arms that carry the most amount of adjustment, and don't leave you doing it with shims are the SPC arms. They are no longer anywhere near economical however. A full set of upper and lowers will run you close to 2K.

In regards to the budget arms, the tolerances in the bushings are all over the place and the ball joints are a known failure point. I tried a set of the budget arms on my wife's old Chevelle. Like all of these budget arms, they are copies of the original Global West design. I did not have a great experience with them. Although we knowingly replaced the ball joints, we didn't do anything with the bushings. That made the install a bit of a nightmare and the arms wouldn't hold an alignment well. They were also extremely noisy.

The cross-shafts on your factory arms are going to help you out, but if you need more, I think at this point buying a quality arm from Global West, BMR, Detroit Speed, Ridetech etc. is the best money spent. You end up changing so much crap on the budget arms that your costs become similar anyway.

[HWYSTR455]

Agree with Jason, but will add, the SPC arms do flex in hard conditions. I prefer the ones with a cross brace, and not just an open 'A'.

Global West are the go-to, and, you can have them add an offset shaft. One comment on the offset shaft, if you don't need it, or your stuff isn't too far off, by turning the shaft the other way might make for a big shim stack.

Ride Tech is a nice, more affordable option, has the alignment advantages, and a semi-cross brace/plate. They use quality bushings and ball joint. It comes with an offset shaft.

As for lower arms, GW is the go-to. It's stronger than just about all the others, and can order with diff bushings. Nice they have nuts welded to the coil spring plate, and you can adjust ride height with pocket spacers.

The knock off GW lowers are near identical when it comes to geometry, or at least I can't determine any diff. Yes, at minimum you need to change the ball joint, and the sway bar hardware is cheaper stuff. You can 'get away' with the bushings, on a 68-72 A-body (442) I did use the provided bushings, and haven't noticed any issues. I don't drive that car as hard as my GTO, but to say, it aligned the same as the GTO (I used GW uppers though).


.

[Squidward]

Thanks all. I am going to try the Moog offset shafts. I've been trying to keep a closer to stock looking appearance lately, even tho the ac system and some of the electrical yell "non stock" kinda loud. My driving style doesn't really need extreme suspension stuff. It just needs a couple degrees caster for stability, and camber/toe set to not destroy my tires.

We'll see how it goes!

[JLMounce]

It is quite hard to get any amount of real caster from the factory arms, without inducing more negative camber than you may want for good tire life.

If tire life, is the preferred result, you may need to sacrifice some of your positive caster, even with the offset shafts.

How's the rest of your steering system? While larger amounts of negative camber do of course wear the inside of the tire more heavily, typically the type of camber you are running isn't a major concern. It's not until you get up to and past about -1.5* on a street car where this issue really starts to show up. If you're seeing significant wear, you may need to look at rebuilding the steering and the control arm bushings. Any flex in this system leads to alignment changes in use that can cause adverse tire wear. Specifically from the tie rod ends on a first gen, because of the rear steer arrangement.

By nature a rear steer setup like the first gen utilizes has a tendency to drag the tires on the pavement. Making sure that the steering system is tight and free of tolerance stack reduces that issue.

There is one option available to you on a first gen that may get you where you want, without adding aftermarket parts. That's the Guldstrand Mod. By changing the mounting position of the upper control arm on it's mounts, you gain positive caster and negative camber gain. On a street application, this can allow you to run a less aggressive alignment, while still taking advantage of the stability that the added caster provides.

There are two ways to go about this. You can either cut the upper control arm mount off the subframe, trim the bottom and relocate it aft on the front, or you can drill new holes in the mount which are lower and aft of the factory holes. When doing this and utilizing the factory upper control arm, you typically have to lob off the ears of the upper mount. Once the factory control arm is affixed, you don't notice that the mount has been cut.

https://www.pro-touring.com/threads/...-Mod-Templates

[Squidward]

My moog shafts arrived, gotta carve out some time for install.

I truly appreciate all the input and suggestions. Just trying to make this car a little more drive friendly.

Yesterday I tried to trade it for a 79 Formula. The other party wasn't looking for a trade. My wife loves the 67, but doesn't care for 2nd gens. I just need to make the best out of what I have.

[East]

https://www.globalwest.net/product/1...-shaft-global/

https://www.camaros.net/threads/shou...e-used.450138/

[JLMounce]

Originally Posted by Squidward

My moog shafts arrived, gotta carve out some time for install.

I truly appreciate all the input and suggestions. Just trying to make this car a little more drive friendly.

Yesterday I tried to trade it for a 79 Formula. The other party wasn't looking for a trade. My wife loves the 67, but doesn't care for 2nd gens. I just need to make the best out of what I have.

Sometimes that's best. It took me 15 years to get my bird on the road because I kept chasing after different cars while it sat. Once I got rid of my other toys, I had it on the road in 6 months.

Perhaps a better question in this thread is this....

What is your car not doing now that you need or want it to?

[rohrt]

Originally Posted by Squidward

Thanks, dude!

I am now contemplating whether to get some upper arms that have the caster inserted, or go with the offset shaft. I will need the offset shafts at a minimum. I've never encountered a suspension that needed this tweaking, but this is the only 1st gen I have and will ever own. 2nd gens are my jam, and they always just worked once you replaced worn out bushings.

I will look at the Global West stuff. With all of the other "budget" arms, what is the weak link? Is it the ball joint?

I used adjustable SPC arms on my 68. There are some pros and cons going this route. If I remember correctly I was able to get 3 deg of caster. I also used the SPC lower arms as well. They move the tire 1 deg to better center it when adding +Caster. I can run my 235/60 tires without rubbing. The upper arms have the 1/2" taller BJ for better camber curve.

They do work nice to being able to dial in the specs and at the same time a big PITA for other reasons.

I just looked at the price and wow everything is expensive these days.

[JLMounce]

FWIW you can get a LOT of caster out of the SPC arms. Here's my current alignment that was put on the car about a month ago. I'm sitting just shy of 6* of positive caster. My setup uses a .9" Howe tall ball joint. You can also use any of the aftermarket knuckles, which are taller yet. But, for a street car, that .9" tall ball joint is a good compromise on performance and cost.

This is about the limit in the current configuration of the arms. However, if you need more, you swap the driver/passenger upper arms from one side to the other. This gives you the ability to achieve 8* or more of positive caster. That said, for a street car, that's actually getting into territory you don't want. It starts really creating a jacking effect that will destroy your tires quickly. You'd only want to go this route in a competitive environment where tires are consumables.

[HWYSTR455]

Yeah that sounds about right.

Not sure about F-bodies, but both my A-bodies with GW uppers & lowers, are getting in the 4.9 - 5.5 range of caster.

If I went with a tall ball joint I would get more, but the AFX spindles don't require them and have been told they won't help.


.

[JLMounce]

Originally Posted by HWYSTR455

Yeah that sounds about right.

Not sure about F-bodies, but both my A-bodies with GW uppers & lowers, are getting in the 4.9 - 5.5 range of caster.

If I went with a tall ball joint I would get more, but the AFX spindles don't require them and have been told they won't help.


.

There's a point at which the knuckle can get too tall. If you look at all the people doing subframes or parts for stock frames, most aftermarket knuckles in the systems are coming in between 1.2" to 1.5" taller than the GM short spindle.

That seems to be the engineering sweet spot for negative camber gain without causing stuff you don't want on a street car.