Bump Steer Spacer with Built In Steering Arm

[sssr20det510]

I was browsing around on the s12 forum and came across this. I was wondering if anyone has made some for a 510 these are for an s12 or simillar. The guy is going to be making them i figured might work with my set up sense i have 200sx struts. They shorten the arms to make the steering a little quicker.

 

Edited December 1, 2009 by sssr20det510

[Whoracle]

140$ from design products racing, core is required. edit: looks like you also have to run their tie rods, which are 215$. or are you looking for something different?

[sssr20det510]

i like the fact that these have built in bump steer spacers, and are not just heated up and bent. Plus i have 200sx struts so i need bump steer spacers or a spacer for the propper hole size in the bottom of the strut.

 

he said should be around 125-145 for a set of these

Edited December 1, 2009 by sssr20det510

[Whoracle]

yea, those are nicer then DPRs, but you asked if anyone made something like that for 510s :P. You should convince him to make some for 510/280zx struts, cause i would like a little quicker steering, plus billet stuff is shiny :D

[sssr20det510]

im waiting to see when he starts selling these ones, then ill ask

[fuzz's '71 510]

If you have something for me to go by, I could make you a set just need to know where you want the holes and anyother dimension would help to.

 

Fuzz

[BJW's FiveTen's]

If you need stock 510 arms for a reference I have some.

[datsunwizard]

Dam more project idea's. Do you have a link to that thread in the S12 forum?

Edited December 5, 2009 by datsunwizard
spelling

[sssr20det510]

It was there 2 days ago i emailed him about them looks like he deleted the thread ????

[sssr20det510]

the design dosent look that complecated who has a cnc machine ??? make some please

[datsunwizard]

I wonder what the complications are of making them shorter then the stock arms, besides the quicker steering? What else would have to be done to the steering linkage? Is it one of those things that you change one thing and it effects other stuff (geometry) of the steering?

[Duke]

One implication of making arms like those would be an increase in front track width and front camber. Not really a bad thing but something to think about. Also, I would be concerned with the tapered holes for the tie rod ends and lower ball joint. Aluminum is softer than steel, so I'm not sure as to how these would hold up over a long peroid of time.

[datzenmike]

Duke there's no moving parts to rub for sure but corrosion from road salt and dissimilar metals could deteriorate it. Maybe anodizing them?

[datsunwizard]

Why would the track be increased if you copied the 510 arms? I was thinking about the tapered holes also. Maybe hard anodizing the complete arms or steel inserts for the tapered holes. My interest in these was not for the quicker steering, but for the one piece aspect and shorter strut bolts (maybe stock length), not the 60+ mm bolts that are used with the existing bump spacers. One idea I have been playing with, is to make the portion that goes into the strut "D" shaped and welding in a key in the strut to make that hole "D" shaped, they would then be inner locked so the there is no sheer load on the strut bolt at all.

[sssr20det510]

I dont believe track would be increased. I think this design uses a heim joint tie rode end. as far as ball joint goes if it was made from a good hard aluminum i dont think it would be an issue.

[Cuts metal like mad]

I don't think it would affect camber either. It would be no different from a normal bumpsteer spacer in the way that it spaces the control arm down below the spindle.

 

One thing of note however, is the fact that you lose the castle nut & cotter pin, and would then have to use a nylock nut or another type of locking nut. Less favorable in my opinion.

[sssr20det510]

you sure i think the hole on the side is for the cotter pin to slide through

[Duke]

I was more thinking of when the time comes to change the ball joints or the tie rod ends. It would be pretty hard to do this without damaging them quite a bit.

 

Track and camber would be changed because the mounting hole for the ball joint is moved. Depending on which way it is move track and camber can be changed. this was a trick tht I have heard of production racers using to gain negative camber. You make a plug the fill the stock taperd hole, then drill and reem another tapered hole inboard on the steering arm, moving the bottom of the strut outward and increasing negative camber and track. When the arms were finshed, the only way to tell the difference was to examine them right next to a stock arm.

[MicroMachinery]

Wouldn't this also increase steering effort? Probably wouldn't be that big of an issue when driving, but at a stop, I would think that the shorter arm would provide less leverage than the longer one.

[mklotz70]

The stock arm's ball joint hole is not centered...looks like the billet one's is. I know that affects the scrub radius........what else? Cool idea :)

[Cuts metal like mad]

Would cetainly change castor Mike.

[Dime Dave]

These arms do not appear to have any Ackerman. Generally these are called zero Ackerman steering arms.

 

For a steering arm to have full Ackerman, the location the outer tie rod end has to be on an imaginary line drawn from the center of the rear axle to the front ball joint. Ackerman allows the steering angle of the inside wheel to turn a tighter radius than the outside wheel to follow the natural arc of a corner. Basically without Ackerman, both spindles will steer at the same angle inside or out. This means in a turn the tires will be scuffing because the inside will want to follow a tighter radius while the outside will want to follow a larger radius.

 

Zero Ackerman is when a line drawn thru the tie rod location and the ball joint is parallel to the chassis centerline. On these steering arms it appears that all the bolt holes are in a single line, if so these are zero Ackerman steering arms.

 

Zero Ackerman is the popular design for dirt track cars where they use opposite lock steering and throttle to turn (sounds like drifting to me). Zero Ackerman works poorly for street use. Most street cars have some degree of Ackerman in their design.

Edited December 7, 2009 by Dime Dave

[sssr20det510]

These arms do not appear to have any Ackerman. Generally these are called zero Ackerman steering arms.

 

For a steering arm to have full Ackerman, the location the outer tie rod end has to be on an imaginary line drawn from the center of the rear axle to the front ball joint. Ackerman allows the steering angle of the inside wheel to turn a tighter radius than the outside wheel to follow the natural arc of a corner. Basically without Ackerman, both spindles will steer at the same angle inside or out. This means in a turn the tires will be scuffing because the inside will want to follow a tighter radius while the outside will want to follow a larger radius.

 

Zero Ackerman is when a line drawn thru the tie rod location and the ball joint is parallel to the chassis centerline. On these steering arms it appears that all the bolt holes are in a single line, if so these are zero Ackerman steering arms.

 

Zero Ackerman is the popular design for dirt track cars where they use opposite lock steering and throttle to turn (sounds like drifting to me). Zero Ackerman works poorly for street use. Most street cars have some degree of Ackerman in their design.

 

I never really thought about that, i wonder if there is a way to design them so it dosent change the ball joint angle ???

[Mattndew76]

You can machine these so that the ball joint angle does not change. It just takes a little more time and thought with your fixtures.

[Mattndew76]

What ever happened with this?