No I haven’t. The team I help now keeps really close to what the manufacturer recomends. If anyone ever does any work in this area, I’d love to hear your thoughts.
When I was building Chevelle stub cars that is always what we were using. I don’t know much of what they are doing with the aftermarket ones, but if the geometry is the same. I see nothing wrong with it. Thanks for watching.
I used to run, what I call, a negative lower control arm angle and only about 13 degrees of upper control arm angle on the LF. A negative lower control arm angle will lead downhill from the inner pivot to the balljoint. When the car rolls up, the lower control arm will get steeper and the upper control arm will flatten out. There is something else going on here also. I have a rule of thumb that says, never let anything go over center. If you have a positive control arm angle on the LF, when the car rolls up, it will actually go past the center of the arc and start pulling the other way. That goes against my rule of thumb. Thanks for watching.
In your third drawing you show the upper and lower control arm connection points being on the same plane and the force connection point going straight back toward the RR. The lower control arm connection points are not aligned with the upper control arm from a top view.
Right, I think there is something to be said about the angle of the lower and where it is placed. I'm just thinking now in a simple 2D application. I'm not entirely sure how it works. On a modified, I always do recommend the upper be mounted parallel to the center line of the chassis. Thanks for watching.
Have you done anymore testing with this theory since the video was made?
No I haven’t. The team I help now keeps really close to what the manufacturer recomends. If anyone ever does any work in this area, I’d love to hear your thoughts.
What are your thoughts on this theory for a modified with a chevelle stub and stock lower control arms? Thanks
When I was building Chevelle stub cars that is always what we were using. I don’t know much of what they are doing with the aftermarket ones, but if the geometry is the same. I see nothing wrong with it. Thanks for watching.
Good video on this. I have not thought about it in this way and struggled with this in my head. Quote of the day, I see said the blind man.
Thanks for watching. I'm still working with it in my head, trying to see it in a different way.
How do you raise that lf push bar to be above?
I used to run, what I call, a negative lower control arm angle and only about 13 degrees of upper control arm angle on the LF. A negative lower control arm angle will lead downhill from the inner pivot to the balljoint. When the car rolls up, the lower control arm will get steeper and the upper control arm will flatten out.
There is something else going on here also. I have a rule of thumb that says, never let anything go over center. If you have a positive control arm angle on the LF, when the car rolls up, it will actually go past the center of the arc and start pulling the other way. That goes against my rule of thumb.
Thanks for watching.
@@HoganTechnologiesLLC what kind of angle would you run on your RF upper control arm to achieve the downward force on the RF?
@@woodbeckmotorsports00 we were always between 18 and 20 static.
In your third drawing you show the upper and lower control arm connection points being on the same plane and the force connection point going straight back toward the RR. The lower control arm connection points are not aligned with the upper control arm from a top view.
Right, I think there is something to be said about the angle of the lower and where it is placed. I'm just thinking now in a simple 2D application. I'm not entirely sure how it works. On a modified, I always do recommend the upper be mounted parallel to the center line of the chassis. Thanks for watching.
🚖Steer with the gas pedal 🏁
Thanks for watching. I think that is the right idea.
In your opinion should the right side anti dive force connection point be higher or lower than the RR suspension push point in dynamic posture?
I think it should be as low as you can get it without going below ground. This includes dynamically.
Up grade your presentation with visualization graphics.....
I do put some graphics in the second half of the video.
I too would love to see more visual graphics and drawings. Not complaining in any way love this stuff lol