ALFAGTV6.COM

TS_turbo · Post by **TS_turbo** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 1:21 pm

hmm light,wide track,upside balljoint... i like it verry much

if its no secret what kind of lenght adjust will you use?

Micke · Post by **Micke** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 1:50 pm

No secret. Rod ends, quite like your picture.

Maurizio · Post by **Maurizio** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:59 am

Hey Micke, keep up the good work

I have searched the net a few yaers ago about the fiat/lada ball joint. I can't find the page anymore but there are a lot of cheap crappy ones around which fail easely.

Searched for a better quality product and found this one:
http://www.wulfgaertner.com/html/upload ... .04_EN.pdf
Looks nice and if it can withstand a E46 M3 (1400 Kg or so..... )
Haven't tried it (in the list of things to do

)

Saluti,
Maurizio

Micke · Post by **Micke** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:13 am

I'm not that familiar with beemers but aren't they McDonalds, McIntosch, McPherson or something similar?
In this case the spring force does NOT go through the lower ball joint.
You need an upside down joint from a car with the spring on the lower control arm. (Volvo 140, Opel Kaputt, etc)

Maurizio · Post by **Maurizio** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 3:10 am

e30 M3 won't work

Ok: back to my original plan:

on top of a

If you take the right combination they both share the same rotation point, which is a must to make it work. A uniball is not designed to take axial loads, but in combination with the spherical plain bearing it can!

tomp · Post by **tomp** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 5:00 pm

Check out these spherical bearings 17 kN axial thrust in a 30mm diameter. Wouldnt that handle lower ball joint duty?

http://www.rbcbearings.com/sphericalpla ... pe=HighMis

Micke · Post by **Micke** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:51 am

Might do. What does this static thrust mean in terms of dynamic force?

One possibility maybe is to misalign the bearing to get the load in a more desired direction?

tomp · Post by **tomp** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:30 pm

They have a derating chart on a pdf but its kind of blurry and hard to read. need t o print it out. Looks roughly like dynamic thrust is 25% of static. Still within range . If your really worried they also list double angular contact bearings that can handle the entire car without breaking a sweat. Unfortunately they are available in inch sizes only.

Maurizio · Post by **Maurizio** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:53 pm

I'm no automotive suspension engineer, but my gut feeling says the ball joint dynamically needs to withstand at least 8G (=8 * highest corner weight of your car combined axial + radial).

Micke · Post by **Micke** » Thu Jul 20, 2006 1:05 am

Don't combine the forces.

Lateral force must be seriously overdimensioned. This would clear hitting something.

In axial direction the case isn't that bad. The force comes through the spring and shock. If you have the shock data you can calculate the max force. But DON'T hit the bump stop or bottom the suspension then.

Maurizio · Post by **Maurizio** » Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:13 am

Right Micke: I didn't write down what I meant to say: at least 8G in each direction, combine them and see if the ball joint is still overdimensioned.

Maurizio wrote:I'm not sure where I read it, but in my memory fade it says take for horizontal loads 20G and 8G vertical as total load....

I thought I wrote it somewhere in a thread,

still think these numbers are ok, but I can't find the source anymore. Was something from a kitcar builder

ps look here www.dpcars.net --> DP1

tomp · Post by **tomp** » Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:53 am

Cant post html but here is a snippet of rbc's chart for some of their bearings.
The last three columns are: static radial, static thrust, dynamic radial in kN.
1 kN is about 224 lbf. So, if we say the car has 800 lbs per corner 8*800=6400.
MBH1720: 31 kN dynamic radial = 6969lbf. this bearing has a 17mm bore and 35mm od.
MBH1215 12 26 15 9 22 85 13.7 17
MBH1517 15 30 16 10 25 107 16.9 21.5
MBH1720 17 35 20 12 30 155 24.3 31
MBH2025 20 42 25 16 36 248 43.2 49.5

But what new pickup points will give the best characteristics for track duty. the inner points are pretty well fixed at least if you want to retain some torsion bar assistance. So that leaves arms and uprights to play with. Usually the lower arm is parallel with the ground at normal ride height.
-Tom P.

ar4me · Post by **ar4me** » Tue Oct 30, 2007 7:35 pm

Not sure exactly where to post this, but since adding negative camber and toe-in to the dedion was discussed briefly in the beginning of this thread I figured I'd post here:
I'm about to add negative camber to the dedion. After reading various inputs including the first page of this thread I have decided to cut the dedion tube in the center since this seems somewhat controlled (as opposed to cut the two "end pieces" individually), though leaving the dedion in car. However, some questions:
1. The center of the dedion has the Watts attachment point. It seems that would interfer, no?
2. Do you guys cut slightly to the front in order to cause toe-in if anything?
3. I did the trigonometry, and to get 2 degrees on each side I need a bend of 176 degrees at the center (as opposed to straight = 180). This translates to cutting a wedge of about 5 mm width at the top. However, that does not take into consideration any pulling due to the heat from the welding. How wide a cut, how deep, and do you cut and bend to exact camber and then weld, or do you set it up for slightly less knowing that the heat of the welding will pull it some?

Thanks for any additional details,
Jes

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Tue Oct 30, 2007 11:43 pm

Use a narrow cutting disc and make two cuts 10cm to each side of the watts link. This will give you enough room to bend to any angle you want.
Toe won't chage unless you change the width of the tube and this method won't do that.

MR2 Zig · Post by **MR2 Zig** » Wed Oct 31, 2007 5:47 am

you could take it to an R.V. shop. most have a bender to bend entire axles to get solid axles aligned. as I understand it they are very precise.

hth,
scott

Adding negative camber to dedion