Does anyone have experience with this adjustable upper A arm/strut rod set by Specialty Products for '64-'66 Mustangs? It looks very interesting and gives you a Shelby Drop geometry without drilling the shock tower: UPPER CONTROL ARM & STRUT ROD SET, ADJUSTABLE CAMBER - #3082-1D - National Parts Depot
Adjustable Upper A Arm/Strut Rod from Specialty Products (64-66 Mustangs)
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Joined
·
12,606 Posts
Haven't used. Very familiar with the providing vendor. Interesting write-up in the NPD ad..... "camber curve has been optimized
by building Shelby Drop geometry into the billet aluminum cross shaft."
Mere relocation of the upper arm doesn't do a thing to "optimize" the camber curve. Dropping the UCA merely slows the arrival of
whatever camber curve is prescribed by the lengths of both of the arms.
Not crazy about the built-in drop cross-shaft. Would have to look at the material being used and figure strength of materials.
(SorT has that too but I know Shaun has done the math on his products)
There's no crossbar on the upper arm in the photo.
ex-Global West GM
1991-1995
by building Shelby Drop geometry into the billet aluminum cross shaft."
Mere relocation of the upper arm doesn't do a thing to "optimize" the camber curve. Dropping the UCA merely slows the arrival of
whatever camber curve is prescribed by the lengths of both of the arms.
Not crazy about the built-in drop cross-shaft. Would have to look at the material being used and figure strength of materials.
(SorT has that too but I know Shaun has done the math on his products)
There's no crossbar on the upper arm in the photo.
ex-Global West GM
1991-1995
Street or Track has a similar relocation method for their UCA if you dont want to drill. @Shaun @ Street or Track
www.vintage-mustang.com
Chris
UCA shafts with 'Shelby Drop' built in
Not an original idea but we are now offering CNC machined drop shafts with the popular 'Shelby Drop' built in. These shafts are machined from 4140 so are super durable. They are available as an upgrade to new orders as well as a retrofit option to existing customers. Skip drilling holes, bolt...
www.vintage-mustang.com
Chris
Joined
·
22,672 Posts
Buy quality parts from Global West or Street or Track. Be safe
Joined
·
1,549 Posts
I agree with this. Most importantly, in this case, you get what you pay for, quality. Buy once, cry once.
I'd rather compensate the camber with shims rather than moving the ball joint. That way, the control arms stay the same length and you compensate for any shock tower variation from side to side. It may not matter much either way in practice though. An adjustable ball joint position also has the risk of starting to slide around unintentionally (but they may have solved this in some way?). Other than that, they look fine to me, judging from the picture.
As I see it, both dropping the upper arm and shortening it can minimize the positive camber gain. The orange one has 1" shorter upper arms (just to see the effect).
![Rectangle Slope Plot Font Line]()
I know you worked with this in the past but I don't see how dropping the arm wouldn't help the camber curve. I once calculated it for different scenarios. The base geometry has some camber gain, relative to the chassis, but it’s only ~30% of the body roll and the camber relative to the pavement will increase with body roll.
As I see it, both dropping the upper arm and shortening it can minimize the positive camber gain. The orange one has 1" shorter upper arms (just to see the effect).
Joined
·
165 Posts
Looks ok to me. The aluminum mount may turn somepeople off.
But it does not actually move once installed so it will not have that type of stress.
Light weight which is always a plus.
Joined
·
12,606 Posts
Yes, merely dropping it doesn't quite fix. (fix = at least "zeroing" the positive camber gain)
Shorter arm in the SPC product?...... I don't know if that's the case.
In general, never really understood people's reluctance to address a really big shortcoming in the Mustang front end, that factory UCA.
Willing to lower, because it's basically a free mod, but not replace it and really vastly improve the situation. And replacing it with
many of the tubular upper arm upgrades is a major improvement from the aspect of handling, dynamics, strength and lack of noise.
It's not the kind of improvement you can debate for hours like subframe connectors, it's really obvious, like a frying pan to the forehead.
Sadly I don't think this SPC item is the solution it could be.
ex-Global West GM
1991-1995
I don't know either if the SPC arm is shorter. My example was generic.
I'm not sure if I agree with your earlier statement that dropping the arm doesn't do a thing. In my opinion it helps a lot and shortening the arm in addition can make it even better.
The arm's strength is another aspect and I'm sure (some of) the aftermarket arms are (much) better in this respect. Maybe I should try a set
I'm not sure if I agree with your earlier statement that dropping the arm doesn't do a thing. In my opinion it helps a lot and shortening the arm in addition can make it even better.
The arm's strength is another aspect and I'm sure (some of) the aftermarket arms are (much) better in this respect. Maybe I should try a set
Joined
·
12,245 Posts
If I were in the market for a set of tubular UCAs, I'd get a set with the balljoint moved rearward to improve positive caster like those from Street or Track and Global west. The SPC kit just looks like another "me too" product that can be marketed as "tubular", but doesn't really improve anything.
streetortrack.com
Combine those with an adjustable strut rod and a LCA camber kit for the best bang for the buck in a front suspension.
Street or Track Tubular +Caster Upper Arms
Tubular +Caster Upper Arms for 65-73 Mustangs.Sold as a pair. Includes mounting hardware.
streetortrack.com
1964-66 Mustang Street or Drag Tubular Upper Control Arms featuring 3 degree positive caster MST-463 (Sold as a Pair)
<B>Alignment help along with performance.</b> Global West has engineered an upper control arm for 1964, 1965, and 1966 Mustangs. This control arm is used for street and drag race applications. The arms are a direct replacement for the factory mainly because the length, ball joint angle, and...
www.globalwest.net
Combine those with an adjustable strut rod and a LCA camber kit for the best bang for the buck in a front suspension.
Joined
·
347 Posts
I have them on a late model Mercury Comet, they use the 67-70 arms. They have been on the car for several years now. I do not road/rally race this car. The ball joint is moved rearwards for improved caster. Along with roller spring perches it provided a huge improvement in the driving characteristics of the car. I would have no problem using them again on another street car, but for track SOT, GW.
Joined
·
1,341 Posts
Description says it has 3* Caster built in. And it comes with an adjustable strut rod.If I were in the market for a set of tubular UCAs, I'd get a set with the balljoint moved rearward to improve positive caster like those from Street or Track and Global west. The SPC kit just looks like another "me too" product that can be marketed as "tubular", but doesn't really improve anything.
Street or Track Tubular +Caster Upper Arms
Tubular +Caster Upper Arms for 65-73 Mustangs.Sold as a pair. Includes mounting hardware.
1964-66 Mustang Street or Drag Tubular Upper Control Arms featuring 3 degree positive caster MST-463 (Sold as a Pair)
<B>Alignment help along with performance.</b> Global West has engineered an upper control arm for 1964, 1965, and 1966 Mustangs. This control arm is used for street and drag race applications. The arms are a direct replacement for the factory mainly because the length, ball joint angle, and...www.globalwest.net
Combine those with an adjustable strut rod and a LCA camber kit for the best bang for the buck in a front suspension.
I think the problem is the low price. It seems like everyone wants to pay big bucks for bragging rights.
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
