Aligment camber issue. Update

[1969chargerrtse]

Why does my car have a positive camber to it?  The more I raise the car to a stock height, the more the top of the tires point outward.  The A frame cams are all the way inward, I just don't get it.
You can see in this picture how the camber is positive, the tires are angled outward.  If I lower the front the camber gets better.  I don't want to go to an alignment shop if I don't have to.  I did the toe in and straightend the wheel to center and it rides great, I just can't lift the car up as the wheels move outward as if you were lifting the K frame up with a jack.

[charger Downunder]

First thought i thought you are adjusting the cams the wrong way.
When i adjust my height i jack the front off the ground turn the adjusters evenly and lower the car take it for a quick drive to level it out.
How are the bushes.

[1969chargerrtse]

The bushings are fine. They are adjusted to bring the A frame as far inward to the motor as possible yet the tires still angled away from the center of the car. Right?

[gtx6970]

Let me make sure I read this right.

You raise the ft end of the car and the tire leans outward?



If you have both cams turned all the way in,( ft and rear - both sides )  either something is bent or something seriously wrong underneath

[1969chargerrtse]

Let me make sure I read this right.

You raise the ft end of the car and the tire leans outward?



If you have both cams turned all the way in,( ft and rear - both sides )  either something is bent or something seriously wrong underneath

Yep. That's why I started this thread. Just wanted to make sure I had it correct as I'm no alignment expert.  I see nothing bent.  Guess a trip to a alignment shop is all that's left.
The car drives straight and doesn't shake or shimmey. The tires are even wearing correct. But to my eye they look angled to a positive camber. Guess only a machine will have the correct answer.

[Tilar]

Is it possible you have the wrong spindles or something on it? I would think the higher you raise the car the further in at the top they would be.

[1969chargerrtse]

Is it possible you have the wrong spindles or something on it? I would think the higher you raise the car the further in at the top they would be.

I'm wondering about the A frame or Control arm.  The spindle shouldn't change anything?  If you lift any charger from the K frame the tires will pull outwards at the top. So as you lift your height you pull your A frames in to compensate, but in my case they are all the way in.
I think I have 70 spindles, I know I have 70 calipers, maybe the 70 spindles angle different?

[HPP]

If you lift any charger from the K frame the tires will pull outwards at the top.

Actually, this is only correct for most GM and Ford cars of the same era. On a mopar, the tires should do the exact opposite and should go to negative camber when the nose comes up. Look at any photos of mopars pulling wheelies at the strip and compare them to Camaros and Mustangs and you'll see what I mean. This is part of the mopar design and the reason mopars of the era handled so much better than their competition.

If yours is doing the opposite, then something is not set up correctly. Since your car is together and driving, it makes it difficult to diagnose. Even if you take it to a frame shop and have it checked, unless they have the origianl measurements to verify, they won't be able to confirm it is in spec, they can only say if it is square and plumb.

One possible answer may be the upper control arm bushings. Do you know if you have standard or the offset "problem solver" units? If you have the offset units and they are installed backwards, they can create this problem. If you have the standard bushings, then that gets us back to something not being in the proper place. If installed correctly, the offset bushings can help correct the problem, but it is a kind of band-aid for something that may be more serious.

It is a pain, but I'd pull an upper a arm to check the bushings, unless you put them together and are postive what bushing is in there. Also, your tires look a bit new to show any wear issues yet. I wouldn't depend on them telling you much yet because street tires are made of such hard compounds they won't show immediate wear patterns like a soft compound race tire will. If you have an infared thermometer, you could check the temp across the tread face immediatly after a short drive. Hot spots will show where the wear is going to be the greatest.

[1969chargerrtse]

You guys hit some great thoughts. I'm thinking it's a spindle issue. Found some Info on the net.  Gonna try to find part #s etc.

[HPP]

If your talking about the 3/8" taller spindles from a later model mopar, those aren't the issue. Those would actually create a situation where the upper arm would have a shorter effective length and you would have the opposite problem from what you have.

Assuming you have the correct control arms, then the location of the inner mounting positions is not correct.This could mean the frame rails where the upper mount go are twisted and pushing the pivot point out, or the k frame is bent and pulling the mounting points for the lower arm in.

Let me ask this, why did you raise the car up?

BTW, if you moved both upper control arm cams to point in, you've lost your caster as well.

[1969chargerrtse]

If your talking about the 3/8" taller spindles from a later model mopar, those aren't the issue. Those would actually create a situation where the upper arm would have a shorter effective length and you would have the opposite problem from what you have.

Assuming you have the correct control arms, then the location of the inner mounting positions is not correct.This could mean the frame rails where the upper mount go are twisted and pushing the pivot point out, or the k frame is bent and pulling the mounting points for the lower arm in.

Let me ask this, why did you raise the car up?

BTW, if you moved both upper control arm cams to point in, you've lost your caster as well.

I moved the car up trying to get closer to a normal factory look height, but when I lift up the camper goes positive.

[HPP]

Fair enough. FWIW, I believe the factory ride height spec is 1 7/8". That is measured at the t-bar socket (position A) and the bottom of the lower ball joint (position B). Subtract B from A and it should equal 1 7/8" plus or mins 1/8".

I'd still be interested in what bushings are in the upper contorl arms. Moog developed the Problem Solver offset bushings to specifically address this type of issue way back in the 70s. If they aren't causing the problem, they certainly could help fix it.

It might also be worthwhile to acquire a Field Service Manual and start checking frame reference points.

[1969chargerrtse]

Fair enough. FWIW, I believe the factory ride height spec is 1 7/8". That is measured at the t-bar socket (position A) and the bottom of the lower ball joint (position B). Subtract B from A and it should equal 1 7/8" plus or mins 1/8".

I'd still be interested in what bushings are in the upper contorl arms. Moog developed the Problem Solver offset bushings to specifically address this type of issue way back in the 70s. If they aren't causing the problem, they certainly could help fix it.

It might also be worthwhile to acquire a Field Service Manual and start checking frame reference points.

Thanks for the info. I'm gonna start with what spindles I have?  If they are correct 70 spindles I'll take a look at installing off set bushings and hope that helps. We'll get this figured out. The car is done, so this is next on my hit list. I could leave it as it drives and looks great. I just like things correct.

[charger Downunder]

I remember something about a washer that would space out the spindle or something like that some one was selling them,i cant remember if it would fix your problem but maybe a cheaper option.?

[HPP]

You certainly could do that. If you install a .125 thick, hardened washer between the ball joint and the spindle, it will change the camber angle to allow more negative adjustment. It does not, however, address the underlying issue of why there is excessive positive camber.

[1969chargerrtse]

Agree. Lots on my plate right now but I'll get to it.

[b5blue]

If your LOWER control arm bushings are shot they wear up and in, that would pull the bottom of the tire inwards. 

[1969chargerrtse]

If your LOWER control arm bushings are shot they wear up and in, that would pull the bottom of the tire inwards. 

I know but they are new and it's the same issue.  Thanks.

[1969chargerrtse]

I'm pretty sure I have incorrect spindles.  Here's a picture of mine, and I think of a 69 or 70.  They are not even close.   Mine goes straight up where as the other has a wave. Anyone have any 69/70 spindle shots for me to compare?  I can almost see how mine would lean the tire outward at top.
Or any 70 spindles for sale?  

[1969chargerrtse]

Found a 70 set.  Is 250.00 fair?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/260926410213?item=260926410213&viewitem=&vxp=mtr

[Charger-Bodie]

Arent those spindles (the ones on your car) the factory disc brake ones? The ones you have a link to are 70 up style disc brake spindles. Different than 69 disc brakes.


EDIT: Actually, I think maybe those look lile F-body spindles maybe.

[1969chargerrtse]

I need someone to post a picture of their 69 disk brake spindle. I have a sigle caliper so i don't know if its a 70 set up or Aspen etc...

[1969chargerrtse]

When lifted.

[gtx6970]

I have both the 69 drum brake spindles and a set  of the 69 B-body disc brake spindles on hand, so I can take a picture the 1st of the week

[1969chargerrtse]

I have both the 69 drum brake spindles and a set  of the 69 B-body disc brake spindles on hand, so I can take a picture the 1st of the week

That would be awesome. Thanks.   
Any chance if you know if 69 and 70 are the same?   I swear I bought pads for a 70 setup. 

[no318]

The disc brakes are different from 68-69 vs. 70.  68-9 were 4 piston calipers and had different pads.  70 and up had the more common style (like the a body swap). I don't know about whether the spindles are different or not. 

I agree that the lower bushings worn can amplify/cause the problem you have.  Some shops use the offset uppers as a problem solver, but, I'd be suspicous of the lowers.  They ususally aren't the first thing someone changes.  They are not near as easy as the uppers to get to and can't really be seen once installed anyway.

[1969chargerrtse]

The disc brakes are different from 68-69 vs. 70.  68-9 were 4 piston calipers and had different pads.  70 and up had the more common style (like the a body swap). I don't know about whether the spindles are different or not. 

I agree that the lower bushings worn can amplify/cause the problem you have.  Some shops use the offset uppers as a problem solver, but, I'd be suspicous of the lowers.  They ususally aren't the first thing someone changes.  They are not near as easy as the uppers to get to and can't really be seen once installed anyway.

It's the spindles I'm wondering about.  I have the 70 single piston caliper so I want to see what 69 and 70 spindles looks like.

[charger Downunder]

I'm pretty sure I have incorrect spindles.  Here's a picture of mine, and I think of a 69 or 70.  They are not even close.   Mine goes straight up where as the other has a wave. Anyone have any 69/70 spindle shots for me to compare?  I can almost see how mine would lean the tire outward at top.
Or any 70 spindles for sale?  

Is it possible you have the spindles mounted on the wrong side my 70 has the brake calipers on the front in your pics i cant see them at all looks like they are rear mounted or may bee 69 are different. ?

[1969chargerrtse]

Yes they are in the rear. Wow 70 had them in the front?  Its the way the car came when I got it 6 years ago.

[383_68charger]

I just got done installing spindles off a 84 diplomat on to my 68 charger.I had to put the calipers on the back because on the front the caliper will hit the spot where the sway bar mounts to the lower control arm.I didn't have the sway bar on but I could clearly tell if it was on the caliper would hit the link too and not just touch it a little

[1969chargerrtse]

I just took a look in my service book and in 69 the Calipers are in the rear. 

[b5blue]

In 70 the swaybar mounts were moved inwards and the swabar mounting and shape were changed. 

[383_68charger]

I should be good with my calipers facing back then?68 charger

[383_68charger]

These are spindles off a diplomat.

[gtx6970]

1969 - 4 piston bendix disc brakes on B-bodies were rear mounted

1970 - single  piston Kelsey Hays calipers were front mounted.

[Chryco Psycho]

the caliper position doesn't matter as long as it clears the sway bar etc while turning & as long as it doesn't pinch or stretch the hose while turning

[1969chargerrtse]

1969 - 4 piston bendix disc brakes on B-bodies were rear mounted

1970 - single  piston Kelsey Hays calipers were front mounted.

Wow. I have a single mounted rear caliper.  Sure wish someone could tell me what I have?

[1969chargerrtse]

I should be good with my calipers facing back then?68 charger

Kinda looks like mine. Gotta funny feeling mine are similar?
I'm pretty sure that this car had original disk and they were removed. Then a style like the Diplomate was added years later. I think this car was raced and parts taken off of it from what I've been seeing since I owned it. The brake lines on the frame etc look old and original for front disk.

[1969chargerrtse]

Grabbed these two pictures today.  Top picture is a drum 68 and the lower picture a drum 69.  They both have the curvy spindles.  Gotta find a 70 next to see if it looks like mine.

[1969chargerrtse]

I should be good with my calipers facing back then?68 charger

No positive camber issue with your car?

[HPP]

I'm pretty sure I have incorrect spindles.  Here's a picture of mine, and I think of a 69 or 70.  They are not even close.   Mine goes straight up where as the other has a wave. Anyone have any 69/70 spindle shots for me to compare?  I can almost see how mine would lean the tire outward at top.

While they appear different, they both have spindle axis inclination, SAI, built in to them. The curves and shape of the spindle are not a direct impact on this. IIR, I believe the 68-76 era spindles are 5 to 5.5 SAI. The later Diplomat, or FJM bodied spindles, I think have a 6-7 degree SAI, plus a taller height.

You might need to brush off the parts and search around for and write down the particular casting number on each part to definitively say what they are. I still don't think spindles are your issue.

[383_68charger]

I should be good with my calipers facing back then?68 charger

No positive camber issue with your car?

I can't really say for sure if I do or not.I just got them on the car and just eyed it up,It looks good right now but I'll know for sure once I get it on the line up machine and start playing with the caster and camber.I should know in a few weeks I hope.I want to get brakes on it before I drive it up on the ramp.

[1969chargerrtse]

I'm pretty sure I have incorrect spindles.  Here's a picture of mine, and I think of a 69 or 70.  They are not even close.   Mine goes straight up where as the other has a wave. Anyone have any 69/70 spindle shots for me to compare?  I can almost see how mine would lean the tire outward at top.

While they appear different, they both have spindle axis inclination, SAI, built in to them. The curves and shape of the spindle are not a direct impact on this. IIR, I believe the 68-76 era spindles are 5 to 5.5 SAI. The later Diplomat, or FJM bodied spindles, I think have a 6-7 degree SAI, plus a taller height.

You might need to brush off the parts and search around for and write down the particular casting number on each part to definitively say what they are. I still don't think spindles are your issue.

Interesting. Man you know your stuff. I guess I'll man up and make an appointment.

[HPP]

Thanks, just trying to help out. It is always a tough thing to do this type of analysis over the internet, but with the casting numbers I'm sure some of us here can figure out what exactly you have on there.

[gtx6970]

1969 B-body bendix disc brake spindle and caliper assy

[gtx6970]

1969 B-body DRUM brake spindles

[1969chargerrtse]

Interesting. Drum have that curvy spindle and disk does not. Now if we could get a 70 disk brake spindle we'll have all 2nd gen types. Thanks very much!

[Tom Q]

I have read the posts, looked at the pics
Pay attention here-it is not the spindles
Hello is there any one paying attention??
Stop over analyzing and speculating

If you want some help please read and respond to the following:
The "ride height" appears to be set to high
Post a pic from the side
How much distance between the lca bumper and the frame rail??
Post a pic

How tall are those tires? They look really tall, too tall.
How tall are they? Measure the rolling circumference and do the math

I think the car is too high in the T bar adjustment.

I don't understand why stock ride height is so important, rather the car should be set to where the tire is centered in the wheel well. [Martin book on handling] BTW too many charger people put tires that wayyyy to big for the car.  26-27 inch tall tire that's it!  Bigger is not always better.

One more suggestion-do not ever put the jack under the center of the k frame and pick up the car-I don't care what others will say. "I have been doing this for years etc etc"  That's just some more bad [yes it's free] advice from the internet.

Remember I have not a clue with these chargers...just kidding

[1969chargerrtse]

The ride height is obviously way to low. The tire is up in the fender. The tires are standard 15" size nothing large in height. And it appears the spindles are not correct 69 spindles so that's why I'm asking about spindle changes and the effect they could have?
Why not pick up from the center of the K frame?
Love your picture. Cool shot.

[b5blue]

  Unless you unload the T Bars quite a bit you over torque the LCA bushings and start tearing the lower bushings rubber as the LCA twists down. (The bushings don't rotate, they flex up and down.)

[1969chargerrtse]

  Unless you unload the T Bars quite a bit you over torque the LCA bushings and start tearing the lower bushings rubber as the LCA twists down. (The bushings don't rotate, they flex up and down.)

I set my bushings in the LCA in a normal riding position before I tightened them so they wouldn't be twisted.

[1969chargerrtse]

I always found the stock height high in the front on the Chargers.  Here are a couple pics from Charger ads 68 and 9

[b5blue]

  Unless you unload the T Bars quite a bit you over torque the LCA bushings and start tearing the lower bushings rubber as the LCA twists down. (The bushings don't rotate, they flex up and down.)

I set my bushings in the LCA in a normal riding position before I tightened them so they wouldn't be twisted.

And that's per the FSM instruction if I remember correctly. 

[1969chargerrtse]

 Unless you unload the T Bars quite a bit you over torque the LCA bushings and start tearing the lower bushings rubber as the LCA twists down. (The bushings don't rotate, they flex up and down.)

I set my bushings in the LCA in a normal riding position before I tightened them so they wouldn't be twisted.

And that's per the FSM instruction if I remember correctly.  

No per RPM ( me ) thought process.   It's something I did myself.  Others did tell me to do something close like that, but you can't?  If you put the bushings in while the arm is down and then snug the CA nut It tightens it there because it's tapered, and you have to pull it in to get the torsion bar in, so when you lower the car the bushing twist up.  So what I did was assemble the LCA loose in a normal riding position, then tighten everything up.  Then lower the arm by pushing it down, assemble everything and lower car, knowing the bushing was squeezed tight at a normal every day riding position. A big Mopar friend of mine that works on them daily says he just puts them in and doesn't worry about what position it was tightened in.  To each his own.