Big Brakes???

[rbryant]

The '91-up cast control arms move the ball joint position forward roughly 1/2-3/4" This has caused problems for some people (including myself) where the tire rubs the outside of the front wheel well. I've had the entire '91-up front suspension on 2 different Daytona's ('90 and '88) and both times I had this problem.

I'm not saying it's a bad set-up and doesn't work, just putting information out there that has been verified a few times.

I see more like 3/8" forward on the arms that I looked at (including an overlay tracing that I did on cardboard to compare them) . I think it really depends on the arms and how they were machined. I have seen them where the ball joint is centered in the boss on the casting and I have seen where it is machined all the way to the front of the boss.

I think they decided late in the game to add some caster and they did so by simply machining the ball joint hole on the extreme front of the boss which is about 3/8" forward. If you are at a junkyard you can probably pick and choose to eliminate this issue by choosing arms machined in the middle or back. Hopefully this was really done on purpose for caster and not simply tolerance at the factory...

On the charger I kept the stamped arms to save weight. If the tires clear on the given car then the extra caster is good (but I also have caster plates so that is mute on my setup).

The cast arms were really to reduce deflection on the heavy cars. That is why the caravan never came with stamped dual pivot arms. It is less of an issue on the smaller cars.

-Rich

[rbryant]

The nice thing is that if you find the knuckles everything else can be ordered off of rockauto.com for cheap.

Are they really getting that hard to find? They come on ANY 91-94 daytona/shadow/lebaron/spirit.

I am sure lots of people have them laying around... A pair of them can fit in a medium flat rate box (without bearings) so they ship fairly cheap.

I had a set of spindles sit in my garage for something like 3 years before somone finally bought them.

-Rich

[135sohc]

In the rest of the world outside the southwest things rust away and what remains doesn't last long before getting crushed…

[rbryant]

In the rest of the world outside the southwest things rust away and what remains doesn't last long before getting crushed…

Lately I just buy stuff from ebay when I don't see something at the junkyard or don't have time to go....
They are running about $50 each shipped.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw...er%29&_sacat=0

I still bet that someone on the forum has a pair that they will sell even cheaper. Heck I sold my powdercoated set cheaper than that a few months back.

-Rich

[Reaper1]

As Rich just stated, the cast arms aren't aluminum. They are most likely cast steel as I don't think cast iron would have the toughness required for that type of usage. Plus they don't really rust like iron would, so I'm thinking there's some nickle in them, which most certainly would be in the make-up of steel.

In suppose with enough modification you could make up for the difference of the forward/aft wheel placement. Unless I had no other option I wouldn't go there, but that's my personal choice.

[Reaper1]

Interesting about the machining difference, Rich. You've clearly seen more of these (or payed more attention anyway) than I have. I'm not really all the sure I would notice 3/8" difference in wheel placement, but I'd have to go dig in my old posts to see what I measured.

Didn't vans get stamped dual pivot arms in '89 or '90 before going to cast? I really don't know.

[cordes]

Are they really getting that hard to find? They come on ANY 91-94 daytona/shadow/lebaron/spirit.

I am sure lots of people have them laying around... A pair of them can fit in a medium flat rate box (without bearings) so they ship fairly cheap.

I had a set of spindles sit in my garage for something like 3 years before somone finally bought them.

-Rich

As stated above anything for our cars is getting hard to find in the yards. They're still readily available on here and I would highly recommend that guys seek these out. It's a great upgrade and the best way to do it. The later knuckles on stamped arms with 11" brakes and your pads is really hard to beat.

[Force Fed Mopar]

The '91-up cast control arms move the ball joint position forward roughly 1/2-3/4" This has caused problems for some people (including myself) where the tire rubs the outside of the front wheel well. I've had the entire '91-up front suspension on 2 different Daytona's ('90 and '88) and both times I had this problem.

I'm not saying it's a bad set-up and doesn't work, just putting information out there that has been verified a few times.

FTR, I never had this issue on my '87 Shelby Z. Wheels were in the same position whether using cast or stamped arms. My cast arms were from a '93 Shadow ES. I was running 205/55/16 tires on GTC meshies. With 205/60/16's I got a little rub but that's a pretty tall tire for a Daytona.

[Dr. Johny Dodge]

tall ?
try a 215 60 15
yes it fits - it will JUST touch at the front of the passenger side front wheel well - but not hard enough to rub the paint off the plastic

ran that on both my 86 z and the 87 z - with the stock wheel position
anything that moves the wheels forward without the 92-3 fenders , no way

[jonnymopar]

Are they really getting that hard to find? They come on ANY 91-94 daytona/shadow/lebaron/spirit.

The knuckles are the same regardless of whether it's got the 10.25" or 11" brakes?

[Reaper1]

FTR, I never had this issue on my '87 Shelby Z. Wheels were in the same position whether using cast or stamped arms. My cast arms were from a '93 Shadow ES. I was running 205/55/16 tires on GTC meshies. With 205/60/16's I got a little rub but that's a pretty tall tire for a Daytona.

I've heard both results from multiple people, so it seems like it's a hit or miss type of thing. The first time I did the conversion to the '91-up suspension it was on my '90 Daytona. I used all the front stuff off of a '92 or '93 Shadow. That resulted in the displacement. I then moved that entire set-up to my '88 Shelby Z and had the same result. Once a swapped the cast arms back to stamped arms, the problem went away (no other hard-part changes).

It could be that the factory tolerances were just that loose. We are talking about K-cars here. LOL

- - - Updated - - -

The knuckles are the same regardless of whether it's got the 10.25" or 11" brakes?

Yes. In '91 all of the car knuckles went to bolt-in wheel bearings and bolt-on caliper adapters. Add in the revised roll center geometry and it's a darn good way to go.

[rbryant]

Interesting about the machining difference, Rich. You've clearly seen more of these (or payed more attention anyway) than I have. I'm not really all the sure I would notice 3/8" difference in wheel placement, but I'd have to go dig in my old posts to see what I measured.

Didn't vans get stamped dual pivot arms in '89 or '90 before going to cast? I really don't know.

The vans never got the stamped dual pivot arms from what I have read and observed. I don't think there was ever a reinforced stamped dual pivot arm like there was for the early single pivot van arms that had the extra reinforcements welded into them... Instead they just waited until the cast steel arms were ready.

I talked to someone who knew the designer of the cast arms and the whole point was for ride quality to limit deflection on the larger cars. Apparently the stamped arms would actually flex when the larger cars hit bumps rather than simply transfer the force to be absorbed in the bushings.

-Rich

[Dr. Johny Dodge]

I don't think they would change the fender just for tolerances

if you look at 92 you can actually see where the front fender opening got changed - the arc kinda wanders then continues to curve down to the bottom of the fender
definately a diff fender the ccorners and edges at the top back in front of the mirror are rounder and less crisply stamped
I had a 92 parked right beside an 86 when I noticed this

is it possiable the holes in the bottom of the knuckles were drilled diff for the V6 cars compared to the 4 cylinder ones ?

if they changed the rad cradle for the v6 then maybe the entire drivetrain got bumped forward too for better clearance to the firewall

[rbryant]

I don't think they would change the fender just for tolerances

if you look at 92 you can actually see where the front fender opening got changed - the arc kinda wanders then continues to curve down to the bottom of the fender
definately a diff fender the ccorners and edges at the top back in front of the mirror are rounder and less crisply stamped
I had a 92 parked right beside an 86 when I noticed this

is it possiable the holes in the bottom of the knuckles were drilled diff for the V6 cars compared to the 4 cylinder ones ?

if they changed the rad cradle for the v6 then maybe the entire drivetrain got bumped forward too for better clearance to the firewall

The arms are drilled off center for sure. I don't think the knuckles were different. If the difference was in the knuckle then going back to stamped dual pivot arms wouldn't change things for people that have had the issue.

At any rate... I just stay with stamped arms for the cars that have the clearance issue or you could look for cast arms that aren't machined forward. If someone wanted to get crazy they could fill the ball joint hole with weld on the cast arms and have it re-machined backward... That seems a bit extreme though.

I did briefly consider modifying the stamped arms to use a different ball joint socket along with a spindle mod so that I could run an off the shelf taller balljoint but I don't think I need it at my desired ride height. I also had the info to make custom taller ball joints but I needed to do a run of something like 70 sets and there wasn't enough interest to cover the costs.

-Rich

-Rich

[Dr. Johny Dodge]

ok I miss read something along the way - arms are diff , not the knuckles
thanks for seting me right