Front Upper Camber Arms or Lower Offset Ball Joint?
04-09-2021, 09:01 AM
#21
Oh...maybe a Hardrace adjustable upper arm is a good option then.
Personally, I haven't seen any issues (referening broken UCA's) with my or my friends' cars using SPC for the past 10-12 years with lots of track use.
But hey...tires are getting stickier. So these cars are bound to start breaking their fairly light duty OEM parts that were designed to work with max performance tires that were on the market like 21+ years ago.
I agree that adding a moment load will only make the arms MORE breakable.
I like using lower joints because it widens the track.
I like Hardrace/Megan because they include optional RCA plates if you wanna use them with tie rod position correction and all that rabbithole stuff.
Or you can run standard thickness with just the camber correction. Your scrub radius and bumpsteer will be slightly affected. But...you can probably ignore that.
But that doesn't pull in the top of the tire. And they come with their own set of risks.
Personally, I haven't seen any issues (referening broken UCA's) with my or my friends' cars using SPC for the past 10-12 years with lots of track use.
But hey...tires are getting stickier. So these cars are bound to start breaking their fairly light duty OEM parts that were designed to work with max performance tires that were on the market like 21+ years ago.
I agree that adding a moment load will only make the arms MORE breakable.
I like using lower joints because it widens the track.
I like Hardrace/Megan because they include optional RCA plates if you wanna use them with tie rod position correction and all that rabbithole stuff.
Or you can run standard thickness with just the camber correction. Your scrub radius and bumpsteer will be slightly affected. But...you can probably ignore that.
But that doesn't pull in the top of the tire. And they come with their own set of risks.
My friend said that i should be able to fit these with a roll and no pull if i get -3 front camber. He had this will lower joints. Currently the car is stock ride height so i cant really gauge how it will fit when lowered. i dont plan to be slammed and plan to keep a 1-1.5 finger gap, stock is 3-3.5 per my fingers
04-09-2021, 09:14 AM
#22
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Illnoise. WAY downtown, jerky.
Posts: 8,357
Received 1,377 Likes
on
1,029 Posts
No. With lower joints and -3 camber, your front fenders will not safely house a 9", +42 wheel.
Unless you're using like a 225mm tire?
One of my S2000's has lower joints, 17x9.5 +47 and 255's.
It like...JUST barely fits with non-pulled fenders at -3.2 deg. I use "fits" in a very laughable way. You have to be a goddamn surgeon when pulling into driveways or you'll bacon the fender. My wife baconed TF out of my fender when she borrowed my car for 5 mins. :|
The other S2000 has 17x9 +40 with 255's and lower joints. That car has MASSIVELY mutilated and rolled and pulled fenders with no regard for presentation. It fits....but likely only because I'm not paying attention to the potentially massive amount of interference?
Unless you're using like a 225mm tire?
One of my S2000's has lower joints, 17x9.5 +47 and 255's.
It like...JUST barely fits with non-pulled fenders at -3.2 deg. I use "fits" in a very laughable way. You have to be a goddamn surgeon when pulling into driveways or you'll bacon the fender. My wife baconed TF out of my fender when she borrowed my car for 5 mins. :|
The other S2000 has 17x9 +40 with 255's and lower joints. That car has MASSIVELY mutilated and rolled and pulled fenders with no regard for presentation. It fits....but likely only because I'm not paying attention to the potentially massive amount of interference?
04-09-2021, 09:14 AM
#23
I'm going to paste another post that I made in the past to a similar question. The gist is that I see evidence pointing to failures using SPC joints in upper rear arms but not fronts. I see evidence of RCA's causing knuckle failure in the fronts as well. I did not find evidence of SPC joints causing failures in upper arms. On my personal car, I'd most highly prefer the Hardrace arm as a whole replacement, second place is SPC joints in OEM front arms, 3rd place being offset bushings. I do not think you should need more camber adjustment in the rear. I just installed SPC's in my arms. I tried to be cheap and not buy the SPC specific press and used a generic rental press. I bent the plates that were supposed to be pressed into the arms at first take. I then bought the SPC press and it all went smoothly. If you're smart, you can use another press but you need to press only on the surface area for the circular part that presses into the arm. I pressed on the outside edges of the plates and taco'd it. The SPC press makes it easy but I could have made it work with the generic press knowing what I know now.
RCA stands for Roll Center Adjuster which is a style of ball joint that gains adjustable camber and changes the roll center of the vehicle. I'm not here, nor am I knowledgeable enough, to debate the merits of that from a technical perspective. I will say that there have been plenty of fast drivers that have not used RCAs and I haven't seen much data or experienced reviews to suggest that it highly matters. I have seen the post, linked below, attributing the use of RCAs to a broken front knuckle, resulting in a scary failure. Especially for canyon carving, not timed track competition, I do not see it as being worth the risk to adjust the roll center and risk the failure of a critical component. The SPC camber adjustable ball joints have been tried and true for the most part. They install in the upper arms and are seemingly the most common method of adjusting camber on these cars. I have not seen evidence pointing to failure with using these joints in the front upper arms. There have been reports of them leading to a failure in the rear upper arms which is the second link below. This is the longer explanation as to why I am for using only camber adjustment in the upper arm of the front end...
There is usually a push on this forum for OEM parts and sometimes almost shaming people for questioning using anything other. That being said, they are typically the right move for most people. Aftermarkets are not tested in the same manner as OEM parts. Sometimes, the sentiment is overdone, but there is usually reason backing it. Luckily, theres 2 decades of info and testing knowledge on this forum to utilize to make an informed decision.
https://www.s2ki.com/forums/s2000-ra...1108656/page2/
https://www.s2ki.com/forums/s2000-br...l-arm-1172212/
RCA stands for Roll Center Adjuster which is a style of ball joint that gains adjustable camber and changes the roll center of the vehicle. I'm not here, nor am I knowledgeable enough, to debate the merits of that from a technical perspective. I will say that there have been plenty of fast drivers that have not used RCAs and I haven't seen much data or experienced reviews to suggest that it highly matters. I have seen the post, linked below, attributing the use of RCAs to a broken front knuckle, resulting in a scary failure. Especially for canyon carving, not timed track competition, I do not see it as being worth the risk to adjust the roll center and risk the failure of a critical component. The SPC camber adjustable ball joints have been tried and true for the most part. They install in the upper arms and are seemingly the most common method of adjusting camber on these cars. I have not seen evidence pointing to failure with using these joints in the front upper arms. There have been reports of them leading to a failure in the rear upper arms which is the second link below. This is the longer explanation as to why I am for using only camber adjustment in the upper arm of the front end...
There is usually a push on this forum for OEM parts and sometimes almost shaming people for questioning using anything other. That being said, they are typically the right move for most people. Aftermarkets are not tested in the same manner as OEM parts. Sometimes, the sentiment is overdone, but there is usually reason backing it. Luckily, theres 2 decades of info and testing knowledge on this forum to utilize to make an informed decision.
https://www.s2ki.com/forums/s2000-ra...1108656/page2/
https://www.s2ki.com/forums/s2000-br...l-arm-1172212/
04-09-2021, 09:24 AM
#24
No. With lower joints and -3 camber, your front fenders will not safely house a 9", +42 wheel.
Unless you're using like a 225mm tire?
One of my S2000's has lower joints, 17x9.5 +47 and 255's.
It like...JUST barely fits with non-pulled fenders at -3.2 deg. I use "fits" in a very laughable way. You have to be a goddamn surgeon when pulling into driveways or you'll bacon the fender. My wife baconed TF out of my fender when she borrowed my car for 5 mins. :|
The other S2000 has 17x9 +40 with 255's and lower joints. That car has MASSIVELY mutilated and rolled and pulled fenders with no regard for presentation. It fits....but likely only because I'm not paying attention to the potentially massive amount of interference?
Unless you're using like a 225mm tire?
One of my S2000's has lower joints, 17x9.5 +47 and 255's.
It like...JUST barely fits with non-pulled fenders at -3.2 deg. I use "fits" in a very laughable way. You have to be a goddamn surgeon when pulling into driveways or you'll bacon the fender. My wife baconed TF out of my fender when she borrowed my car for 5 mins. :|
The other S2000 has 17x9 +40 with 255's and lower joints. That car has MASSIVELY mutilated and rolled and pulled fenders with no regard for presentation. It fits....but likely only because I'm not paying attention to the potentially massive amount of interference?
I use to have a set of weds 9 +49 and with the 245, it had plenty of front clearance hence me trying a 42. If it doesnt work, ill scrap the rims and go back to the weds.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post