S13 suspension into AE86 - LCA length??

[Hen]

My tape measure was put to good use this arvo measuring some susp components with Jez aka Rallystanza.

First 2000 words on different control arms.





It should be clear that the arms shown are (from top, and all driver's side) AE86, GE Sigma, S13 and MX62.

Note the similarity between MX62 castor arm and swaybar holes and AE86. Apparently the stock AE86 parts will match up with the Sigma arm no problems, so I think they will fit MX62 fine aswell. Also the chassis end crush tube and bush look identical between AE86 and MX62 arms.

I'll draw up a nice diagram when I have a moment, but the MX62 arm is 50mm longer (crush tube to balljoint) than the AE86 arm. This is close to the S13 arm. Some quick measurements on the Rallystanzamobile and the S13 hub on MX62 arm suggest that track will increase ~25-35mm per side. Stock (though lowered) AE86 setup is 415mm from chassis mount to wheel mounting face, this will most likely be 440-450 with MX62 and S13 (including thickness of the disc). Though this won't really be known until we can mount it all up.

Some more measurements of AE86 vs MX62


So the MX62 arm looks the goods. Now if anyone can find out something more common that shares LCAs with the MX62 then that'd be great.

Hen

[Hen]

PS, Jon, if track increase is a problem you can run a Nissan offset wheel to pull it in maybe 15-20 mm per side.

[roadsailing]

I'm pretty sure the standard AE86 radius rod won't work with the MX62 arms, as the mounting holes are a lot further outboard than the AE86 ones (and a fair bit further out than the sigma ones).

might have to use the MX62 radius rod or make something up to suit, at the very least i would say some bending of the rod would have to be done.

some creativity will be needed on the swaybar mounting too.

too bad there isn;t an XT130 arm there too, would be good to see in that lineup.

nice photography!

[EVOSTi]

the MX62 arm looks to be about 10mm longer than the S13 arm, what is the reason you want to run it? because of the mounting points of the castor rods? wont you still have the dillema of the balljoint as with the ae86 or can you use the balljoint previously mentioned?

it seems when increased track is a major factor, it might be better to just use the s13 and grind down the crush tube a little.

[Hen]

Yes, I've been thinking about whether S13 or MX62 would be better Evo. The MX62 ball joint fits the S13 hub very well. One main advantage I see is that hopefully the factory swaybar and castor rods holes can be used. Not too hard to modify the S13 ones to fit, but I'd prefer more factory looking if possible.

And yes, if track is an issue then S13 arms are definitely a better option. However for me, more track seems like an advantage, as long as I can still set camber to something reasonable.

Hen

[jonra23]

Hen
Would it be possible to get measurements of the taper on either the S13 spindle hole orr the MX62 taper?

thanks
jon

[Hen]

Jon,

Just took those measurements.



Hen

[jonra23]

Hen.

Thanks very much, greatly appreciated for you going to the trouble, + rep.

One small problem though, seems when someone posts a .jpg i can see it as a picture, but when someone posts a .gif i can only see a small grey square..
Anyone got any suggestions what i have set up wrong.

regards
jon

[EVOSTi]

well there ya go hen beat me to it

i guess in my case i might be better off going with the s13 arms unless i can find a balljoint to suite the ae86 arm, but i want to keep my guards standard (willing to lightly flair) and keep my current wheels.
or maybe i should just change my wheels instead of needing to flair front and rear to accomodate my diff and front suspension setup

[jonra23]

Can somone give me just the measurements please or save pic as jpeg as i cant view a GIF for some reason.

regards
jon

[EVOSTi]

why not right click and save image?

S13
bottom of taper diameter : 17.96
top of taper diameter : 16.08
height of taper : 14.72
ratio : 1:7.83
MX62
bottom of taper diameter : 17.92
top of taper diameter : 15.85
height of taper : 16.71
ratio : 1:8.02

[jonra23]

Thanks EVOSTi.

Much appreciated, +REP, sorry to be a pain but any GIF image only comes up as a grey square on my computer either to view or following link, linked or attached JPegs work ok.not sure what settings i have wrong

http://forums.toymods.org.au/index.p...t=0#msg_634791

about 3/4 of the way down mentions using standard AE86 LCA and a magna tr balljoint, sway bar mount touched but sounds like an easy fix.

TR definitely doesnt fit, the TS ones I meassured and posted in other thread look close enough on both taper and press fit section that i am going to buy one for a mock up fit when get back from gassfields in 2 weeks.

regards
jon

[EVOSTi]

yes thats why i mentioned TR magna balljoints. i conversed with him through PM's and he insisted he had done the conversion (but the car was still off the road) and had used TR balljoints. but when i told this to sprinter saurus who attempted the conversion he checked the TR balljoints and obviously they didnt fit so went another route. i was always going to go down to autopro and go through their stuff when i got around to it.

[gearb0x]

Just to but in, while your measuring all them controll arms did anyone manage to measure XT130 arms center to center?? I spent the arvo at teh wreckers and forgot to measure it :/

[Negative Boost]

Has anyone thought of the simple way out?

This can be done by reaming out the steering nuckle/S13 spindle hub thingo (dont know what to call it). Example, i've reamed out my celica RA60 steering arms to fit the supra MA61 ball joints already and they work perfectly. I've also just sent another pair of RA60 steering knuckles down to the Engineers shop to get reamed out to fit the Sigma GH ball joint. Costs $40. Simple if you ask me. Seriously consider this guys. Only works if the ball joint is larger than the steering nuckle/S13 hub thingyo.