big_wheel1971

Guys,

I replaced the upper control arm and was advised the lower could remain stock. With the car back on the ground, spindle does not sit as perindicular as it should (too much tilt in at top of tire- camber?caster?- I always mix those up). Is it possible that this is a geometry issue between the after market and stock arms? Has anyone replaced only the upper arms without any problems? It could be just me missing something along the line.
Thanks

1965cutlassragtop

Lower and upper should be a matching set. Plus, the upper and lower are meant to work with each other in unison, using similar geometry and achieving a certain improvement. I wouldn't even consider running different upper and lowers. It just doesn't operate or look correctly. The increased camber is a clear example why not to do it. You'll prob burn through your ball joints, tie rods, and possibly bushings as well.

big_wheel1971

Thanks for the info. I'll look into some new lowers I guess.

joe_padavano

Tilt inward or outward is caster.

Is the problem that there isn't enough adjustment available to properly set camber? If so, do you have stock length UCAs or the shortened ones for the B-body spindle conversion? If the latter, they won't work unless you use the taller spindles.

Shizzy

you mean camber.

Caster is the tilt of the spindle in the vertical plane.

joe_padavano

Yes I did. DOH! Sorry for the brain fart.

fdwheelman

I learned it this way:

Caster - Casting a fishing rod - wheels forward/backward (from side profile towards or away from front bumper)

Toe-In - Look at your feet, toes go in and out. (Wheels pointing from a top profile towards front bumper - Toe-in means your "toes are pointing towards the hood ornament)

Camber - no logical quickie, since it's the odd man out, it's how close to 90 degrees the wheel sits to the ground. (Look down the side of the car, front to rear)

Might help, although descriptions are a little hard to do without having a car to show it on...

big_wheel1971

don't think they were any shorter that the stock uppers on visual comparison. Bought through local rod shop and were for an A body. I questioned them about the geometry before purchase and was told it would not be an issue. Anything for the sale??? Looked into new lowers and looks like $650 Cdn.

Compared spindle length and they are same height between stock and new disc setup. I thought the upper ball joint looked like too much of an angle when hooked to spindle.

What a learning experience. Thanks for the input on camber/caster guys.

1965cutlassragtop

1156454b.jpg

46b85d61.jpg

7716238c.jpg

I just got this set on eBay, will be installed in about a week or so, but so far from what I see I am very impressed. Greasable bushings and ball joint pre-loaded on these, solid construction. I paid $350 for the whole set....could be an option for you.

big_wheel1971

The uppers I bought are Heidt's. I may look into that set and sell off the uppers I have. Who was the seller on Ebay?

greenslade

you may just need a alienment,

1965cutlassragtop

If his alignment was off, his concern would be the caster of the wheel. He is saying the camber is off, and is using unmatching upper/lowers. I am guessing he didn't have this problem before he swapped his uppers. That rules out alignment in my opinion. It's def your control arm/spindle arrangment causing the problem. The seller on eBay is rodpartsdealer. If you search "65 cutlass front control arm" u should be able to find them also. They are buy it now $295 + 45 shipping. Sway bar links also included, seats for the springs, and bumper stops.

firefrost gold

Those do look like nice arms I would like to know what the set up specs are ?

big_wheel1971

Ragtop's correct, there was no issue before the swap. I'm gonna look into those arms and go from there.

gearheads78

With the exception of SPC's the A-body lower control arms on the market are just tubular version of stock arms. Your issue is you more than likely you have the wrong uppers for your application.