When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Took my freshly rebuilt '70 Cutlass in for an alignment and the shop says there's about a 1.1 degree negative camber with no shims used. What would cause this, and how can I fix it?
The frame is original to the car. I removed shims from both sides when I disassembled everything but I have no idea if the alignment was right or not. The control arms (upper and lower) are from a different car, a '71 Cutlass Convertible - could this cause my problem? New bushings throughout, new balljoints, everything is new.
The front end sits higher than it should and definitely higher than I like, using UMI "Stock Height Small Block" springs which I hopefully indexed correctly. Could the negative camber and higher stance be related?
Certainly ride (spring) height will affect your camber. I would make sure your springs are seated correctly. Also, you could get a set of offset control arm shafts. Did the alignment place offer any solutions?
Certainly ride (spring) height will affect your camber. I would make sure your springs are seated correctly. Also, you could get a set of offset control arm shafts. Did the alignment place offer any solutions?
No solutions from them, but they admitted they don't have the experience with the older cars. I think the old tech they had isn't there anymore unfortunately but I've been told about someone good with these cars nearby who I'll go talk to before committing to anything else.
I have to research the offset and adjustable control arms to see what solutions they may bring to the table...the actual repair will be a winter project but I need to get my head around it and start planning now!
I "think" I had the springs seated properly but it's definitely something I'm wondering about now and need to have a close look at.
The 64-72 A-body cars have a terrible camber change curve with suspension travel. This is why people use tall spindles or ball joints. In the photo your car looks to be VERY high in the front. This will cause negative camber. The car needs to be at the factory spec ride height for alignment.
The 64-72 A-body cars have a terrible camber change curve with suspension travel. This is why people use tall spindles or ball joints. In the photo your car looks to be VERY high in the front. This will cause negative camber. The car needs to be at the factory spec ride height for alignment.
The photo doesn't lie...the front is definitely at least a couple inches too high, certainly higher than it sat before and not how I want it to sit. It sounds like my first goal should be to get it sitting closer to where it should be before messing with control arms.
This would, I assume, mean a closer look at the springs to make sure they're indexed and seated correctly as my first step. The car seems to be sitting square so if one is wrong, I'd think they're both wrong lol. These are new UMI "Performance Stock Height Springs 4049F" for small block applications. With my aluminum heads and intake, I believe the 455 now weighs a touch less than a small block.
This would, I assume, mean a closer look at the springs to make sure they're indexed and seated correctly as my first step. The car seems to be sitting square so if one is wrong, I'd think they're both wrong lol. These are new UMI "Performance Stock Height Springs 4049F" for small block applications. With my aluminum heads and intake, I believe the 455 now weighs a touch less than a small block.
It's VERY easy to get the tops of the springs incorrectly seated in the frame pockets, which causes at least an inch of extra height. Beyond that you may need to cut a coil.
