Firm Feel upper control arms?

[Midnight340]

Anybody use these? Or have a report on whether you like them? Dennis at FF tells me they add 3-4* caster (built in to the arms) and you can run 0 to -2* neg camber still.

I have their Stage 2 box and their 1-1/4" sway bar so I know their products are very high quality and service excellent.

Just wondered about your experiences with the control arms?

 

[Midnight340]

Nobody ever used these? Really?
If I get a pair I will try to post a review of how they work out for me. Was really hoping someone had tried them.

 

[Bruceynz]

I have ordered some for my Cordoba, should be on the way to NZ next week according to Dennis, also ordered some of the those aluminium body mounts too, from what I understand the more caster the better! New cars have around 5 degrees yet our Chryslers are lucky to get 2! Caster helps with steering wheel self centre, straight line stability and reduces movement on the road due to cross winds. The aluminium body mounts are suppose to lock the sub frame to the unity body and eliminate wander. I took mine to the alignment shop the other day, the rubbers were so soft in the top arms my alignment guy struggled with it, this is what pushed me to get the firmfeel ones, our cars are 30 years old, our suspension system is still based the design Chrysler implemented in 1957, there is nothing wrong with it, its still used in racing cars in some form today so whats that say! Just tire tech and what we demand from a car has changed and with the guys at firmfeel making the bits for us to modernise our cars is great!

 

[kkritsilas]

Bruceynz:

The suspension that Chrysler implemented in 1957 used the longitudinal torsion bars that ran (roughly) parallel to the frame rails. The torsion bars in those cars are pretty much straight, running front to back. It was used across all body lines until 1976.

In 1976, with the introduction of the Volare/Aspen, Chrysler had a completely redesigned front suspension, using "L" shaped torsion bars that ran across the width of the car (perpendicular to the frame rails for part of the "L"). This same suspension system is used in all F, J and M chassis cars, unless modified by later owners. THis is the transverse torsion bar front suspension.

The suspension is fine for almost all street driving, but does have less perfect geometry than the older longitudinal torsion bar system. There was a lot of opposition to the new system within Chrysler due to its less optimum geometry. The true reasons for the redesigned front suspension would probably never be known, but some reasons that have been put forward are: quieter, smoother ride; easier to assemble due to the entire front suspension being one piece with the K member, so the entire front end of the car would be installed in one step with the K member and engine; fuel savings due to the overall system being lighter and allowing for a smaller car with big car ride; and I am sure others. The front suspension did get a bad reputation, due not to the design, bu the first year or so of the Aspen/Volare, the K member steel thickness was so thin, that the K member would actually deform over time, throwing the wheel alignment off, and eventually, running out of wheel alignment adjustment so that you couldn't bring the alignment within specifications. The thicker K member fixed that, but a lot of damage to the reputation of the Volare/Aspen, that front end design, and Chrysler, had been done, even after Chrysler fixed the issues.

The first suspension (longitudinal) design is the one that is held in highest regard. The later one (transverse), while a good one after all of the fixes were put in, is nowhere near as good (too much camber change over the front wheel travel up and down, from what I understand).

 

[Aspen500]

Not really on topic but,,,,,,,,,,I put the Stage 2 FF steering gear in my car and have to say it was some of the best money I have ever spent!

From what I've seen, the transverse bar vs longitudinal (or coil spring for that matter) camber change is about the same. It has to do with the control arm length and steering axis inclination mostly. When I did the alignment on mine, out of curiosity I used the air jack to raise the car from ride height to full extension and the camber change was very little, maybe .25 degrees at the most.

I work with a guy who's been a front end/alignment tech for 40+ years and he remembers the early Aspen/Volare k-frame problem. He said he could line one up and 6 months later it would be back, wearing the inside of the tires off. Camber was negative 2 or 3 degrees and no adjustment left in the slots. Sometimes they would put a "Porta-Power" wedge between the upper control arm bracket and the sub frame and bend it back, then weld reinforcement gussets on to help keep it from bending back again. Guess it sort of worked.

 

[Midnight340]

I'm not sure how much caster you could dial in fresh from the factory, I don't think it was much. But obviously with the slightest distortion in the K-member you can use up all your adjustment getting the camber right, leaving nothing left to dial in caster.
Mine isn't bad, but I have installed not only the Stage 2 box, but also the longer pitman arm (1" longer) which gives 12 to 1 steering ratio instead of 16 to 1. I absolutely love the "sports car" steering. I should say Trans Am steering since that's what it is. But doing quick turns I could use more caster to help self-center.

As an unexpected side benefit, the turning radius is greatly reduced with longer pitman. Nice!! And no tire rub on mine either. Really fun changes.

I have to move this spring, so it will be a while before I can report back on the Firm Feel UCA's, but I am definitely doing it.

Great products from the guys at FF!!!

 

[Aspen500]

For what it's worth, found the print out from when I did the alignment and ended up with about -.30 degrees camber and +3.52 left and +3.29 right and that's the max I could go and still keep camber OK.

For comparison, lined up a 2012 Charger at work the other day and they run over +8 degrees caster. Dang!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[aspen77rt]

Bought some last year for the aspen. Nice pieces. They will go on the car this year along with their torsion bars.

 

[Bruceynz]

I had an email from Denis at FF and I have bought some of his top A arms, hope it is ok to copy and paste his email if anyone objects I will remove it, but from what he said can get up to 5 degrees, sounds pretty good to me!

Aspen500 - Dang 8 degrees, that's a lot lucky we have power steering

Hi Bruce,

You will be able to get at least 4-5 degrees positive caster, and still set the camber where you want it. We like to set them at 3-4 degrees positive caster and -1/2 to -1 degree camber for good road handling and cornering.

Thanks, Dennis-FFI

 

[Aspen500]

I had an email from Denis at FF and I have bought some of his top A arms, hope it is ok to copy and paste his email if anyone objects I will remove it, but from what he said can get up to 5 degrees, sounds pretty good to me!

Aspen500 - Dang 8 degrees, that's a lot lucky we have power steering

Hi Bruce,

You will be able to get at least 4-5 degrees positive caster, and still set the camber where you want it. We like to set them at 3-4 degrees positive caster and -1/2 to -1 degree camber for good road handling and cornering.

Thanks, Dennis-FFI

The new Chargers track good with the 8+ degrees. My dad has a 2012 Charger also and he loves how it drives.

 

[Bruceynz]

See what we can get out of the FF ones, if I can get 5 degrees I think that will be pretty good, also have a steering gear I have rebuilt in NZ, had bearings fitted to the sector shaft as they have none and then had the reaction springs doubled up to increase the weight of the steering. FF offer fast ratio idler and pitman arms, but I am not sure what 2.75t lock to lock would be like, my Japanese car is 3.0t lock to lock so would be faster than that. For a road car is 3.5t lock to lock seems ok to me. Is their an advantage going faster ratio for a road car?

 

[Mopar&vettedude]

Actually I bought the tubular uppers for my doba, and i love them. It really helps with the ride and the steering. I feel the car is more responsive when turning. I'm still planning on upgrading to the fast ratio idler and pitman arm to make the steering quicker.

 

[kkritsilas]

Bruceynz:

My 1993 Lincoln Mark VIII had 2.5 turns lock to lock. Car was fairly big/heavy, yet steered like a sports car; easy to drive, and quicker to react to steering inputs. No issues with being able to turn the car exactly the way you wanted it to. 2.75 turns lock to lock is not an issue on a street car, in fact, I would say it is a vast improvement for our cars.

 

[Bruceynz]

Hi KK..

Ok that sounds like one of the next mods to do to my doba, geezzz there won't be much original Chrysler left except their idea My doba when finished will have new torsion bar bushes, FF top A arms, new bushes in the bottom arms, heavier power steering gear, FF aluminium body mounts, she already has 60 series tires and wider rims, now I am thinking of iso deletes and the longer pitman and idler arms for the faster steering, WOW!! I will have a handler oh not to mention I have some addco anti sway bars to fit as well! I hope money starts growing on trees soon I need some

See You
Bruce

 

[Midnight340]

As I mentioned in posts above, I have the Stage 2 box, and FF's 1-1/4" sway bar, plus the longer pitman. Really, REALLY love the improvement in handling. The faster steering is great! Responsive, not scary at all. Very fun. I do need the upper arms though to get a more modern caster setting. 5 degrees would be great.

(by the way, I had replaced my idler arm some time back, so I installed only the longer pitman. No negative effects. I have read the factory ran the longer pitman but stock idler on their Trans Am Charger/Cuda cars.)

 

[Bruceynz]

So is FF the only place that sells the fast ratio idler with the right size for out larger sector shaft steering gear boxes? And it is all ok as Midnight says just to change the pitman arm to the longer one as I to have just fitted a brand new standard length idler arm.

Thanks
Bruce

 

[Aspen500]

Only problem using a long pitman with the shorter idler is the ackerman is off (toe out on turns). Only really noticeable when turning sharp. Not sure if it would fit but I do know the E-body guys put a C-body idler on with the T/A and AAR pitman. I guess the c-body idler is the same length as the fast ratio pitman.

 

[Bruceynz]

If that was the case it would mean the C body pitman arm is longer wouldn't it?

 

[Aspen500]

From what I can gather, the c-body pitman is the same length as the fast ratio arm on an AAR or T/A. I see (on an e-body anyways) a 1970 Fury idler is a direct bolt in. For an f-body, no idea of the pivots are the same size or the angle is right. Might be worth looking into.

 

[Midnight340]

The only time the fast ratio with stock idler issue comes into play at all, practically speaking, is really tight turning at very low speed. (As Aspen500 said.). The AAR and T/A cars used the shorter stock type idler arms. I discussed this with Dick when I did mine. (Some of my info comes from what Rich Ehrinberg wrote... probably back in the "Green Brick" articles that I have somewhere.). Anyway, I might add the longer idler if my stock one wears out, but not till then.
I remember that the Imperials had a longer pitman, but my research indicated that none of the stock longer arms will fit the splined shaft on our boxes.