[68Ghost]

I’ve been battling the PO’s shock tower welding job for years. I finally thought that I grinded enough away so the SoT upper arms would give decent camber. I also installed ZRay’s cross member, and used the #4 plates.

I installed the upper arms as delivered, so I think next step is to disassemble everything again and remove the arm (frig!), and adjust the rod ends. Hopefully there’s enough adjustability. Posting just to complain a bit, and if folks see anything I’m missing.

 

[Woodchuck]

I don't know if I'd be too keen on "experimentation", especially given the changes in geometry that would occur by shortening the UCA, but logic would have it that you could disassemble the UCA and snip 1/2 inch out of the tubes and rethread the ends.....

 

[rusty1161]

Or just thread in the UCA rod ends, start with the rear until it bottoms out. Then do the front an equal amount to maintain caster and recheck your alignment.

 

[68Ghost]

Thanks guys, yeah I think that’s the two step process. First, screw then in all the way. If that’s not enough, then some trimming may be needed. I was hopeful the ‘shorter‘ SoT arm vs the stock would help, but I think that adding the Shelby drop location is pushing them out further, due to the welded brackets (despite my grinding).

I think the arms have to come out completely to make the adjustments. More to come…

 

[daveoxide]

So how thick is that plate that was welded? Does the crossmember do away with the camber adjustability for the lower arm? It also doesn’t look like you have any more adjustment on the rear part of the upper arm… I get your frustration!

 

[BlackStick]

Guys,

I would like to suggest that unless you have worked with the SoT arms you recuse yourselves from comment or speculation. Shaun has advised me an others here on adjusting these arms for camber, caster and toe. Hopefully he weighs in soon. I am going through the same issues now and my car was not cut-up.

I have the same crossmember and it does not limit lower arm movement. the holes are elongated.

 

[ArizonaGT]

I would like to suggest that unless you have worked with the SoT arms you recuse yourselves from comment or speculation.

Which is exactly why I’ve kept my big mouth shut on this one 😜

 

[68Ghost]

Hey guys, thanks for the replies.

Below is what I started with, and I ground down the lower portion so when I put the upper control arm in, it’s not pushing outwards. You can see how without grinding it down, it would be pushed even further out due to the weld and lower bracing. I’d say the plates are either 1/8 or 3/16.

The new lower cross member has adjustability, so definitely no issues there.

I reviewed SoT’s website and the instructions, I think I’m ok to dial them in all the way in. Thought I also saw another post that someone ground down the arm to make it even shorter.

@Shaun @ Street or Track

 

[ArizonaGT]

Ok, with those pics I can see what’s happening… the PO welded plates onto the towers. That’s moving your UCA outward, creating positive camber. At least that’s what I’m seeing.

 

[daveoxide]

So even if the plate was 3/16” thick, you shouldn’t have that much positive caster… assuming lower control arms are adjusted nearly all the way out.

Any chance those upper control arms could be installed upside down? Reason I ask is cause the ball joint angle looks like it’s canted outwards. If it was flipped, the ball joint angle at rest would be closer to perpendicular, pulling the entire upper joint inward, giving you more negative camber.

Curious what the cause and solution of this will be…

 

[68Ghost]

Hey guys. I installed per instructions, SoT makes its pretty mistake-proof, each is labeled. I just bolt them in!

Maybe its thicker than I think. I plan to pull them back out, what a pain!

I also can’t get the shocks centered, so I think it’s all related.

 

[rusty1161]

Adjusting your alignment with the helm joints is part of the value and versatility of these UCA’s. No need wait for Shaun to give to okay to try it.

 

[68Ghost]

Yeah, agreed. Also, I realized that I probably should have put the wheels on garbage bags so they’d move a bit easier. I don’t think it will make a big difference, but will be needed for the alignment.

 

[rusty1161]

The adjustments will narrow your track width and help with wheel/tire clearance too. Another benefit of Shaun’s parts. He did the same to his track car when he updated it a few years back Next phase for the 66 coupe

 

[Huskinhano]

I've been running the non coil over SoT for about 10 years. Yes you could thread on the leading Heim joint to reduce positive camber. However I'm pretty sure you're not going to gain a whole lot. The upper control arms on the 67 and later is the same length as the 65-66 but they are wider. So the shim calculations for the 65-66 should pretty much apply to your car. So Ford says every 1/16" on both studs effects camber by 1/3°. So if that plate welded on is 3/16° you gained 1° of positive camber. IMO you're going to have to bite the bullet and fix the situation and remove that plate.

 

[68Ghost]

Thanks Tom. Unfortunately, the mathmatical answer I was hoping not to hear! My tire looks like a lot more than 1deg of positive camber, so wondering if the plate is more than 3/16”.

I've been running the non coil over SoT for about 10 years. Yes you could thread on the leading Heim joint to reduce positive camber. However I'm pretty sure you're not going to gain a whole lot. The upper control arms on the 67 and later is the same length as the 65-66 but they are wider. So the shim calculations for the 65-66 should pretty much apply to your car. So Ford says every 1/16" on both studs effects camber by 1/3°. So if that plate welded on is 3/16° you gained 1° of positive camber. IMO you're going to have to bite the bullet and fix the situation and remove that plate.

 

[Huskinhano]

Thanks Tom. Unfortunately, the mathmatical answer I was hoping not to hear! My tire looks like a lot more than 1deg of positive camber, so wondering if the plate is more than 3/16”.

When I was doing my 66 I was going to keep the stock lower arms for a little while until I could save up for SoT tubular lowers. Pretty much I have to have the money for any projects or it doesn’t get done. So I found myself in a situation. I had recently moved, didn’t know anything of the local shop for alignment. I started to get worried and thought if I just did all this work, why can’t I do my own alignment. So I read up the suspension chamber in the shop manual and did it. I found my camber was positive. A little disconcerting I ordered a camber kit. As soon as I started with removing the lower arms I found the bushings were totally wasted. I broke a rule and used my CC and ordered lower arms from SoT. So a possibility is the bushings are gone in your car as well.

 

[BlackStick]

As I wrote elsewhere here I had positive camber when the UCA's were first installed. I trusted the shop to read the detailed instructions Shaun supplies but they did not despite me telling them several times... Anyway, I don't want to do the camber kit so I am working through this. Shaun's suggestions to correct my camber and caster problems were to screw the rear heim in all the way (reducing arm length for camber) and then to screw the front heim out 6 revolutions to move the ball joint rearward to try to correct the caster. The heim joints should be screwed in or out the same amount on both sides. If this does not correct my caster and keep the camber at 0 I will go to adjustable struts and then to the camber kit if I still have problems.

 

[Badbenz94]

@68Ghost and @BlackStick , it almost sounds like both of you possibly need your shock towers replaced. At a minimum, get your cars on frame rack and check measurements IMO.

Chris

 

[BlackStick]

@68Ghost and @BlackStick , it almost sounds like both of you possibly need your shock towers replaced. At a minimum, get your cars on frame rack and check measurements IMO.

Chris

Again, I have to ask: Do you have SoT UCA's?