Suspension set up

[racecartom]

My upper a arms were changed out due to a wreck and now I can't get much more than 1 degree neg camber. With the orig mk 4 a arms I was able to get 2 degrees plus. Can I move the 94 mustang lower arms from the inboard holes to the outboard holes. This would appear to give me more adjustability. Any input would be appreciated.
Thx
Tom

[CraigS]

You can definitely do that. Remember you will need to adjust toe in and you could run into tire to fender clearance problems when you move them out. It's certainly worth a try since it's a free experiment. Another fix will be a shorter sleeve for the UCA. Most likely you only need to change the rear sleeve. At least that is usually the one that is too long when you try for more caster combined with more negative camber

[Jeff Kleiner]

It's the angled ball joint plate of the newer style control arms that are causing the geometry change. I've run into the same when retrofitting a customer's Mk3 with the latest UCAs and had to cut 1/4" off of the rear adjuster sleeves to get back into alignment range. If you do this, or even purchase shorter sleeves as Craig mentioned, mock it up first to be sure that you don't bottom out the female threads---I had to also trim back the male thread stub by a similar amount so that this didn't occur. No concerns about functionality when doing this because when you are all set up you'll have almost 100% of the threads engaged.

To another of the points that Craig made; if you move the lowers out even with negative camber the top of the tire will be farther out that it was with the previous configuration and could pose fender to tire clearance issues. The Mk4 wheelwells are snug to begin with.

BTW, you did not mention how the car is used but generally I don't go more negative than .5 to .75 if it is primarily used on the street.

Good luck,
Jeff

[Ray W.]

I just had to do what Jeff described to my upper control arms because I have pin drive length lower A arms. It works, and I would try it before changing the holes on the lower A arm.




It's the angled ball joint plate of the newer style control arms that are causing the geometry change. I've run into the same when retrofitting a customer's Mk3 with the latest UCAs and had to cut 1/4" off of the rear adjuster sleeves to get back into alignment range. If you do this, or even purchase shorter sleeves as Craig mentioned, mock it up first to be sure that you don't bottom out the female threads---I had to also trim back the male thread stub by a similar amount so that this didn't occur. No concerns about functionality when doing this because when you are all set up you'll have almost 100% of the threads engaged.

To another of the points that Craig made; if you move the lowers out even with negative camber the top of the tire will be farther out that it was with the previous configuration and could pose fender to tire clearance issues. The Mk4 wheelwells are snug to begin with.

BTW, you did not mention how the car is used but generally I don't go more negative than .5 to .75 if it is primarily used on the street.

Good luck,
Jeff

[racecartom]

Thanks Jeff. I use the car for auto x, track attacks and HPDE events. I'm running Hoosier A6's which require lots of neg camber.
thx
Tom

[racecartom]

Thanks to all. I had been previously thinking about both fixes and believe I will go with cutting down the adjuster sleeve..............tom