Any good suspension guys in NE PA?

[snipernuts]

hi al!!  i've got my 1969 Charger SE that needs a total front end rebuild.....anybody know of a good front suspension place in NE PA?  i'd really like to get my front end totally rebuilt to include the factory steering box, or maybe a firmfeel II box

any help would be greatly appreciated!!

thanks!

greg

[myk]

First you'll have to decide what components you want mounted on the car.  For example, I'm pretty sure a stage 2 Firm Feel steering box is much different in feel from a stock steering box.  PST, Moog, Hotchkis?   Rubber or polyurethane bushings?  Unless you let the shop choose the suspension pieces you'll have to pick those out as well.  What are your expectations for the car?

[snipernuts]

i'm looking for a poly, upgrade to stock, nothing crazy, just better than stock.

[HPP]

No recommendations on a shop, but once you find one, I'd add a few suggestions.  First, skip the poly in the upper control arms and go with Moog offset bushings installed the opposite of the instructions. This allows you to get additional caster in the suspension which these cars sorely need. Second, make sure the poly strut bushings are not too thick and cause the lower control arm to set further back than stock. Poly can be turned down to offset the difference if they are too thick. Third, when the rebuild is done, DO NOT use the original factory alignment specs unless you are using OEM style bias ply tires. Radials will tolerate a much larger range of settings that will improve the feel of your car. Ask them to try to get 2005 Mustang specs under it.  They won't be able to achieve these, but ask them to try and take what they can get close to.

[snipernuts]

holy crap!!  this explains alot HPP!!  i originally had the entire front end rebuilt 2 years ago, and it never felt the same after that!!  i'm not a suspension guy, i'm electrical!  so, maybe first i should have the alignment checked first against the 2005 Mustang, then work out a plan after that.  is there anything else i need to know?

thanks guys, ya'll awesome!!

Greg

[HPP]

Well, whats it doing that makes you feel like a rebuild is in order?  Wobbles, rattles, wanders, etc?

Ride height and alignment in concert with tire construction and size can have a huge impact on how the car feels.

[snipernuts]

hey HPP!!  it wanders over the road, almost to the point of the "death grip" on the steering wheel, can't go over 70 without shaking pretty good. .  i changed the wheels / tires to 15x7, BF Goodrich's, 60's all the way around.  the last time it was aligned was by STS tire, and i'm almost 99% sure they did it by the old specs that were mentioned above.  any guidance as far as any specs would be greatly appreciated!!!

thanks HPP!!

[HPP]

If I had to bet on it, I'd say they used stock specs.  So many shops are computerized now days without classic car databases, that is why I suggest '05 Mustang specs because it gives them something to type in that is more current. The Mustang specs are more aggressive and can't be matched by the Mopar, but it gives them something to shoot for.

When using radials, you want as much caster as you can get. The mopar eccentric arrangement will probably limit you to +3-4*, but this is the compromise the Ma built into these cars. Ideally I'd like to get 7-9*, but that  ain't going to happen with stock arms and bushings. The stock spec is something like -1-2*  and you want to go positive instead. The extra caster increases high speed stability, increases turn resistance ( to help reduce some of the over assist feeling), and creates more tire tread contact when moving through bump and turns at the same time.

For camber you want something between 0 and -1*. Stock specs were +1-0*. Since camber and caster are achieved through the same eccentrics, gaining camber means you compromise caster. You typically want zero to a slight negative camber so when the body rolls in a turn, you maintain more tread on the ground instead of having the tire tip over as the suspension compresses.

For toe you want around .0625" total toe. This has the tires slightly pointing in when static. The idea here is that the friction of the rod and all the tolerances of the joints will force the tires out into a neutral position of zero for the least amount of rolling resistance and the most stable feel during turning into a corner.

So, back to your specific symptoms- the wander  is most likely wear in the steering box. These cars starting showing wandering tendancies at as little at 60,000 miles and it only gets worse over time. You can adjust some of the slop out using the sector nut. I don't know the specific procedure, but if others don't chime in with it, search around here or the net to find the method to adjust. I'd try this first because all it costs is some labor and it will help point you in the direction of future repairs. If things improve with this adjustment but don't become great, then you know you need a rebuilt or new box.

I'd also check all the joints in your system now as well. Put the front end in the air and grab the top/bottom of the tire and try to rock. Any play here is bad ball joints which definetely need replacement. Do the same on the front/back  of the tire and see if the linkage and other joints have any excessive movement. If any of these are moving around, then you know you need to get into hard part replacements. At 2 years and part time driving, I wouldn't suspect any of these to be bad, but it does happen and any more, quality of hard parts is always suspect since so many of these come from offshore manufacturers.

[snipernuts]

holy  crap, thats alot to digest!!!!  any way i could pic your brain some more? 

[HPP]

YEah, no problem. Just ask away.

[snipernuts]

hey HPP!!  ok, the big question, if i add the offset UCA bushings, what would be the specs i need to get to the alignment guys?  i've got "C" body disc brakes, 15" magnum 500's , 60's all the way around.

[HPP]

Depends on your confidence in your shop and their willingness to tackle custom specs. Some shops won't do custom work or charge extra for it. Simple anwser is use 2000-2005 Mustang. They will try then say they could only get "X" out of it, which is better than stock. If they will take on custom work, you want +5* caster, -.5-0* camber, 1/16" or .08* toe in. There are no easy adjustments out back, but have them also check thrust angle. If this is off a lot you can shim the spring hangers, otherwise its just a good thing to know in case you have any issue down the line.

[Dmichels]

C body disk brakes? I hope you used B body steering knuckles. The C body ones are too tall and screw up the suspension geometry
Dave

[HPP]

Negative ghost rider, geometry improves with the taller knuckle, especially in cars that have been lowered via the t-bar adjuster.

However, installing a C body knuckle is not a direct bolt on either because of the differences in  ball joints, so its rare to find anyone who actually has C body knuckles and true C body rotors, because true C body rotors are  1.25" thick compared to the ABEFJM bodies that are 1" thick.

However, I suspect the C body rotor noted above is actually the 11.75 rotor that was found on a lot of late 70s vehicles, some nameplates of which were C bodies during the '60s that ended up downsized during the '70s and ended up as B and R bodies.