Guest AlsoRanFPrepared Posted April 11, 2002 Share Posted April 11, 2002 I noticed some tweakage in my TC rod mount to the frame and am deciding just how I want to proceed. I am looking for pros and cons for a comparison between the A arm setup hence eliminating the TC rod and re using the stock pickup points and simply replacing the frame rails. The design part is not a consideration, only the end result. With that said is there any reason to use the TC rod versus an A-arm? Shoot me some opinions. Fully adjustable A-Arm with a caster increase is what I had in mind using the stock setup from the ball joint up. -Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
260DET Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 So you would replace the tension rod and suspension arm with a one piece fabricated A arm? Can't see why it wouldn't work well, providing it is properly designed, engineered and fabricated. You could incorporate an adjustable camber and caster setup in the A arm as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueovalz Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 I did not quite understand the "tweakage" in your TC rod, but isn't the lower control arm/TC rod assembly basically an "A" arm set-up anyway. There are (IMHO) other easier ways to get adjustable caster. The one that comes to mind is a heim jointed lower arm, and spacers on the TC bushing or a threaded TC rod (both of which are sold by one of our members). Also, the majority of the forces (compressive) impressed into the chassis from braking are distributed quite well into the OEM unibody reinforcement through the TC rod. So you would want to use this pick-up point, which I think you wanted to do anyway. With that said, then a spherical bearing or the nylon/aluminum bushing replacement may be an advantage, but then you completely eliminate any shock resistance that the rubber bushings provide (should you bump a curb or something), thus risking a bent rod or worse yet, unibody (but in F Prepared, who drives around town) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RB30-ZED Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 I run a 25mm square brace across the chassis rails from just behind the TC rod mounts. Fits nicely in front of the gear box and made a huge differance to stopping the car in a straight line Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AlsoRanFPrepared Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 Terry, The tweakage I referred to is the frame and the TC rod cup/bracket that is welded to the lower frame. On the drivers side it seems to have taken quite a curb or side impact and is bent inwards about .75 inches. In either case the bind from the traditional bushing setup will be eliminated as I will be using Heim joints. The proposed A arm would have heim joints at each attachment point to the chassis and likely the chassis points would allow say two inches of foreward/reward adjustment. I would additionally design in a few more degrees of caster. Since the front frame should/will be replaced alltogether I was planning on designing in the pickups. I also may look into placing some anti-dive into the A-arm configuration. Thanks for your input. -Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikelly Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 For a while Nissan COmp. sold a set of TC Rod Boxes that were heavier gage metal than the factory units... basically you cut them off and welded the heavier units into place. I don't think they are available anymore... You could beef up your existing units though, and I like the idea of a rod running between them... Maybe I can fabricate a rod with some heim joints for that... Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.