Besides looking really cool? The websites all say it "corrects the geometry" but I can find no explanation. Why does it need correcting? I think they are just trying to reinvent the wheel. Am I wrong? Whats wrong with the genuine GM, made in USA upper arms? o No:
I have been told that the tubular a-arms do correct the geometry. They raise(lower?) the ball joint location which increases/(decreases?) the camber which will improve the steering and handling. Keep doing some searches, especially on the larger, name brand sites and I am pretty sure they will spell out the specifics. If you look at an older car in a hard turn, the tire doesn't sit flat on the pavement but tends to roll off, where if you look at a more modern car, the tire stays much flatter giving it better grip. I know I haven't really said anything, but there is info out there.
http://scandc.com/new/node/674 Mark at SC & C is a very personable guy/Engineer and is always willing to chat on the phone.
They're...just...TUBULAR! Sorry, I lived a lot of my life in the San Fernando Valley part of LA, and that shurfer shtuff is everywhere.
Well Ill give you the standard answer : it depends. What do you want from them? Some are just for show and don't correct anything. Others however correct a lot of geometry issues. The SPC arms Marcus sells at scandc.com are adjustable length so you dont have to use alignment shims, they use tall ball joints, and adjust the ball joint angle. This causes the geometry to change for the better, almost like a modern car. The old cars actually apply camber in the opposite direction when turning. The car will drive better, you will have leas clearance issues between large tires and the fender since the wheel isnt being pushed out it turns, and using the taller lower ball joints will reduce bumpsteer, lower the car, and lower the center of gravity, thus reducing the rolling moment so you are not hanging out the window in a high g turn
The tublar control arms probably weigh a ton less. That's a big plus.:idea2: ---------- Post added at 08:02 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:57 AM ---------- Saw these on Summit. http://www.summitracing.com/parts/rsd-uca6472/overview/make/buick/model/skylark/year/1971 If I had seen these a few years ago I would have NEVER rebuilt my originals. It costed me way more money to resuse those boat anchors.:af:
Back in the 80's when I was messing around with my first Buick, a 72 Skylark, I installed a kit from HO Enterprises, that allowed the use of the taller F body spindle in the 64-72 A body. The taller spindle resulted in negative camber gain. In other words, the camber in the outside tire in a turn, would go negative with increasing suspension compression. This is the exact opposite of what happens with the stock A body front suspension. The resulting handling improvement is literally night and day. It will make the front of the car stick like never before, so much so that inducing oversteer becomes very easy with the throttle, or brakes, and that can be dangerous if you are unaware of it, and not ready. It is a dramatic improvement for sure. Back then, the kit had it's drawbacks such as a very severe upper ball joint angle, and it required a lot of shims to get the front end aligned correctly. Today, you have other options such as tubular arms and taller ball joints to do the same thing. anyone who wants to seriously improve the A body handling should look into this as it works better than anything else.
If you replace nothing but the upper control arm, you will gain only a slight improvement. Most say they add 5 degrees of positive caster, which tilts the centerline of the ball joints back. They also generally weight a few pounds less. I put tubular upper, lower and tall upper ball joints on my car a few years ago and it really woke up the handling. The front tires do not wear the outer edge off near as much as they used to. I corner pretty hard and like my twisties. At right (passenger) full lock, the right tire is out a tad at the top and the left tire is out a tad at the bottom. As was stated before, that's opposite of the factory configuration. Much more modern and I don't hear the front tires squealing near as much in a tight turn in parking lots. If you want them, get them. They should be easily returned to stock and they will improve the handling. I can not tell a difference in ride as it has always been pretty smooth.
I did some more research abou them. I get it. But doesnt the steering get alot heavier adding all that caster?
Yes, caster increases steering effort, but if you have power steering, who cares. Caster enhances tracking and stability. Mercedes uses a lot of +caster in their front ends. The more + caster you run, the more the camber changes as you turn the wheel. Ever see a Mercedes with the wheels turned to full lock? You can see the inside wheel has a lot of + camber, and the outside wheel has - camber. Another way of enhancing handling.
Im familiar with MeBe front ends. The reason I asked is that a freind of mine is considering tubular upper control arms but of the offshore variety. Its basically a cruise night, weekend driver car. I told him that tubular uppers would be a waste of money for his purposes. I dont think he drives the car to the point where he would take advantage of the benefits given the costs and the way he likes to halfass things. My suggestion was some new upper bushings (his are toast), some new Moog upper ball joints and some urethane front sway bar bushings.
