When installed and the suspension is at the lowest point (hanging) the U section of the paddle nut plate may just touch the coil spring. When in use the paddle nut plate is a long way from the coil spring. My concern is if some are elongating the bolt holes inward to move the upper ball joints inward even more the U section will be more inclined to hit the coil springs (this may be dependent on the orientation of the spring so I want to assume worst case).
So my question is: How many of you have had to elongated the upper control arm bolts holes inward? You do have to elongated the large center hole to allow the ball joint to be adjustable and able to move inward.
------------------ Rodney Dickman
Fiero Parts And Acc's Web Page: All new web page!:www.rodneydickman.com Rodney Dickman's Fiero accessories 7604 Treeview Drive Caledonia, WI 53108 Phone/Fax (262) 835-9575
MOOG K5292 etc UBJ Don't alter Bolt holes on the CA. Adjustable BJ already have slots for the bolts.
If needed Change the big hole only enough so BJ can move.
If your "Paddle nut plates" doesn't allow BJ to move or hits the spring then needs more design work. Sorry. Installed as Shown here will likely hit the springs when people jack the car etc. Not sure if could hit anything else. Don't think it can driving most times.
Spring have little clearance when CA is at low point. Not much clearance to attach brake hose bracket. GM and some others use Pop Rivet to attach that bracket. If use a bolt, the head points toward the spring. Often Installing the bracket bolt need to jack up the CA to get room to push threads thru the hole. Install order: Bolt, CA, Bracket, Nut.
------------------ Dr. Ian Malcolm: Yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should. (Jurassic Park)
I'm sorry but I would need to answer this in relation to Chevettes. With Fieros not having as much weight in the front, it was rare that the holes for the ball joint had to be opened more. Now this of course does not include those who want to decrease their camber for performance conditions. However most of the time is was to increase camber that made a need to move the ball joint. Back to Chevettes. First there were fixed ball joints. Then there were the ones that you flipped around to increase camber. This worked, but could not be done in increments. Then they came out with the slotted ball joints. Those were the ones that were on most Fieros I'd seen. Chevettes would have an issue that caused the camber to go negative too far. Most of those were over equipped models with air, p/s, and automatic. It was just wrong to see a 4door with all those options and most of the time loaded up. After they got older they would sometimes get front subframe sag. All the others and Fieros, there was something else going on causing negative camber. Worn or bent(control arm shafts) parts and weak springs. On the Chevettes with subframe sag, it was replace the subframe or open the hole. But only towards the outside and only an 1/8. And most of those it was to just remove an area that seemed to not be punched out right. The holes sometimes would have a flat area that just had to be rounded. Like the Fiero, Gm fixed some of the problems on the Chevettes when it was too late. Some of the 85s and 86s had reinforcement gussets in the subframe to help with the sag. Some they fixed the shock tower problem to keep the shock from punching through it. For a POS the engines were not that bad. Wished they would have offed the Holley they were using and injected it. If someone is grinding out the inside of the hole, my guess, It would be due to trying to get in readings it wasn't designed for. For mine I would do it. For a customer? nope.
IMOP I like the bolt retainer. If it touched the spring when fully extended? Doesn't bother me. If it is that bad and the retainer is that far in, after you make the adjustment. Take the wheel off. See how far it sticks out from the control arm. That part of it can be bent/rolled/formed up the inside of the control arm. If you don't want to scratch the paint on the control arm, layer thick foil between the control arm and the retainer. Form. remove. May have to remove the brake line and reinstall. I can swear I've done this before, I just can't be sure of the application.
[This message has been edited by cmechmann (edited 02-03-2015).]
Rodney, technically if your worried that this need upgrade will interfere with the "U" piece, why not just shave off some of the outside bracket? Since this piece is to line up and tighten the 2 UCA ball joint bolts, its not like the bracket will have tension or stress on it. Its just for an easier method like you mentioned to do alignment from tightening / loosen the bolts from the top, like 88s.
Really a great idea, and sad GM never offered doing this from the beginning.
Note that FSM and GM Factory installs both bolts threads pointing up. 87 and others FSM Wheel alignment Is common for many cars. Reason is nut and threads are much longer vs. bolt head and could bind the "Knuckle" when steering wheel is turning.
Mean If you install thread down then you could have binding problems. More so when slotted BJ are push inboard. Lock to Lock change could be nothing or a little to allot less range. Repeatedly hitting the threads/nuts could make the bolts work loose etc.
quote
Originally posted by fierogt28: I don't see a problem in clearance issues for the brake hose or brake hose bracket. Its on the other side of the UCA in the photo posted.
I've been doing this work for many years and do know the pic shown is the bottom side of UCA. Is not the bracket or hose. Is the bolt to attach the bracket that goes thru the CA hole causes tight clearance issues. Many uses bolt to replace the pop rivet doing work on UCA or replacing the Hose. Many Nuts and extra thread can hit the spring if you use them other way around. Is easier to install w/ bolt pointing out. You can just pinch the wrench holding the bolt.
quote
Originally posted by cmechmann: If someone is grinding out the inside of the hole, my guess, It would be due to trying to get in readings it wasn't designed for.
Many lower the car causing alignment problem... bigger center hole and slotted BJ might help.
I have no problem using standard non-adjust BJs etc and just had alignment done because of cradle swapping and rack change.
I'm having Quad Raider check to see if the bolts and nuts stick down enough and if they would ever hit the spindle casting on full left or right turns. The adjustable front upper ball joints that I sell have thicker flanges and when installed there will not be as much of the bolt sticking thru the nuts. Looking at the pictures Quad Raider posted I'm thinking maybe GM put the nuts on top because the rubber boot bulges out and could (over time) possibly wear thru the rubber boot. My upper ball joints use a different style of boot and this would not be a problem. My suggestion on my web page is that these plates should not be used with ball joints that have boots that bulge out when installed. I could could show some pictures of this. I would maybe suggest that you only use my upper ball joints with these paddle nut plates.
I also want to try doing a 90 degree bend on the end of the U section to make them shorter and sit farther away from the coil spring. I might try cutting some of the very end off to make them shorter also.
------------------ Rodney Dickman
Fiero Parts And Acc's Web Page: All new web page!:www.rodneydickman.com Rodney Dickman's Fiero accessories 7604 Treeview Drive Caledonia, WI 53108 Phone/Fax (262) 835-9575
I'll check for interference with the bolts and steering knuckle when I get by the shop tonight. After I installed the bolts and flange over the weekend, I turned the steering wheel all the way to the right and I didn't see an issue. Tonight I'll turn the wheel both ways with the suspension in different positions to see what happens.
For reference, my car has 191,000+ miles on it and I think the front suspension is all original.
[This message has been edited by Quad Raider (edited 02-04-2015).]
I checked for interference with the suspension compressed and with it at full extension. The knuckle never comes close to the nuts or the bolts when I turn the steering wheel from stop to stop.
On my tired old front end, the nuts appear to contact the rubber boot on the ball joint, but I don't think the contact would cause a problem.
I took some photos but it was hard to get good shots with the lighting and my big old phone. I'll post them in the morning.
I struggled to get decent photos with my phone. It's just too big to get good closeups of the ball joint. Sorry the photos are blurry.
The first photo shows the suspension at full extension with the steering wheel turned all the way to the right. This is the driver's side ball joint.
This photo shows the suspension compressed, as far as I could get it to compress with a jack, with the the steering wheel turned all the way to the left.
I cycled the steering wheel back and forth with the suspension extended and compressed and the nuts and bolts never came close to the knuckle. The rubber boot is very close to the top of the nuts, but I can't be sure there's contact. If there is I don't think it's a problem because the contact would be constant. It might be a problem if someone uses slotted ball joints and tries to move the ball joint more than an 1/8-inch inboard. Shorter nuts would eliminate the issue. I'd also recommend shorter bolts.
[This message has been edited by Quad Raider (edited 02-05-2015).]
I had to elongate the holes in the UCA to the get the camber I wanted. I think I took like 2mm off with a Dremel. My adjustable Moog ball joints did not offer anywhere near the adjustment I needed. I could zero out camber, but not get anything negative. I bought new flanged allten bolts for clearance and nylock nuts to ensure they don't go anywhere. I had it aligned in 9/13 and then checked in 12/14 and they've gone nowhere. Front coils are cut - I think 1 or 1.5 coils. I've not had interference problems in any driving, mostly very spirited.
Bolts, for reference:
McMaster 92235A332
[This message has been edited by thesameguy (edited 02-05-2015).]
Rodney sent me a new and improved flange, which features a bend on the outside of the "C". This photo shows the suspension at full extension. There's at least an eighth of an inch of space between the flange and the spring. I don't think there would be any contact with a flat flange, but the bend guarantees there won't be.
Not having to put a socket on the underside of the A frame to change out the ball joint is a great improvement.
