Why Nobody Makes Front Upper Arms That Sit Further Backwards?

[JAS-25T]

This is Mark working on one of his other project cars.

[haw001]

That's what you call good quality safety gear! But that can't be me, because I notice he remembered to put on his safety goggles where as I would have conveniently left them on top of the car and forgotten them. But that's another emergency room story.

The real problem is that now I'm in Melbourne it's damn cold (that's saying a lot as I work in shorts year round in Sydney) and I've had to start wearing pants when working my usual late night last minute jobs. So of course I'm welding and instead of dropping a little spot of weld on to my bare skin and causing a small little burn that's fixed with a lot of expletives, it instead gets logged in my coveralls, catches fire and before I notice it I've got a 2 inch round section of burnt polyester embedded in my skin!

I really should be working for ACCC in their product safety section, defining common sense safety practices, but again that's a whole other story...

[Sydneykid]

Gary,

is there anything that can be done to fix this...

But the standard rear geometry in an R32 is not the best. The anti squat built into the lower control arm pivot points for example. Nisan recognised this, that's why R33's and R34 have far superior rear geometry

And also what can be done to fix the front, or do you jsut need to keep replacing the bushes?

I really dont want to change to a 34 to fix these issues

Thanks mate

Duncan covered the rear quite well. For the front I simply redrill the holes in the brackets for the upper control arm inner pivot to remove the twist. From memory the rear hole needs to be further down, lower in the bracket, by around 15 mm. To work out where to redrill the hole I do a dummy assembly (no spring or shock installed and at the correct ride height) and then put the front bolt into the upper control arm via the standard hole. Then it's obvious where the rear hole needs to be drilled.

Cheers

Gary

[Gts-t]

Good stuff, ill give this a go when i get the time

thanks alot!

[djr81]

On 8/13/2009 at 8:35 AM, djr81 said:

Here are a couple of drawings and three photos.

The first shows what Nismo do to the standard upper link bracket to allow for more castor/camber. Essentially it is a stock component but with the holes drilled differently - the front moved closer to the centreline of the car & the rear lower. Thus the upper link is rotated on two axes - allowing for more castor.

The second shows a stock LHS bracket.

The third shows the Nismo bracket installed with a stock upper arm. Interestingly (or not) the bracket ends up giving you less camber for the same arm length. The shot was taken before I installed some new arms that I had made.

The fourth is a drawing of a Cusco arm - these are 10mm shorter than the stock arms. Note the trail. Unfortunately I don't have a drawing of a stock arm. Mostly due to being lazy.

The last shows the whole lot bolted up with the new arm - in rattle pack black, no less. I drew the arms to use the Whiteline bushes.

As an aside note that Nismo used to do a sliding bracket for the R32, but now all you get is a stock item with harder bushes. Also their castor rods are approx 5mm shorter than the stock items.

Just for posterity I believe there to be an error in the location of the NIsmo bolt hole in the first drawing.

[GTSBoy]

OK...but what's the error?