ma61 front end upgrade writeup.

[nb86]

So I was staring at my ma61, which needed rotors and ball joints for the RWC anyway, and i noticed the amazing similarity between this and every other 80's RWD toyota front end i had seen. This got me thinking..., what other bits might fit to the tune of improving wheel selection, alignment and steering response.
With the factory gear removed, a trip to toyospares had me searching through front end bits of all descriptions. After looking at everything (I mean everything!) i found that the best combination of bits all came on the same car, an SA63 celica.
I picked up the complete struts with brakes (both within spec ), with control arms and steering arms for a very reasonable price. I promptly replaced the ball joints, which are smaller than the MA61 units (BJ145 on the celica, BJ314 on the supra). By mixing and matching shocks, springs and top hats, I found that the suitable combo was the SA63 strut housings, which now carry a shorter stroke Monroe insert, with the MA61 springs and tops. On closer inspection i noticed that the MA61 caliper was seized on one side, however the SA63 unit was exactly the same so i swapped them. The rotors are also the same, so my roadworthy items were now dealt with. Now the SA61 struts offer a few degrees more negative camber and the steering arms are shorter than the MA61 items. However, the ball joint is offset outboard compared to the MA61 unit. The control arms are the same length though.
By using the Sa63 control arms with the mathching steering arms, the result is faster steering response and less turns lock to lock. The other benefit is the 1.5 degrees of negative camber i now have, compared to 0.5 degrees positive before. The offset on the ball joint also reduces the front track by about 10mm a side. Now i can run 15*8 -5 offset rims all round with no clearance problems.
The only actual modification of parts required is elongating the rearmost castor rod mounting hole by 3 mm, as these are a different bolt spacing to the MA61 units. This also gives a slight castor increase.
Some pics below, the supra control arm is the one sans-balljoint, the supra steering arm is the longer of the two (notice the smaller ball joint taper) the supra strut is the one with no brake. Also note my new stainless brakelines, which needed replacing anyway.

[ViPeR_NiPPleX]

nice work dude. Certainly is one way of achieving the neg camber + quick steering upgrade. Any concern about the smaller balljoints?

[japlish]

i think you just convinced me to not use s13 gear on mine, and this is cheaper!
+rep 4 you.

[JustCallMeOrlando]

Would using the shorter arms be possible using MA61 struts? I'm not keen on getting more camber through kingpin angle, because it means i'm going to have clearance issues between my tyres and struts.

[ViPeR_NiPPleX]

shorter arms would give less camber... wouldn't it?

[thechuckster]

no ... shorter arms means less steering movement required

[ViPeR_NiPPleX]

ohhh.. steering arms didn't think shorter lca's made sense!

[Pube]

You can also bolt up xt130 struts too with swapping similar parts such as ball joints and steering arms, will give you about 2 deg neg camber.... thats if rt142 and ma61struts are the same. Gives you the option of the popular pug/hilux upgrade

[JustCallMeOrlando]

Haha, Chuck is correct Basically due to the size and offset of my rims I don't have space to get my camber from a bigger kingpin angle, and because i'd like to keep my car legal, a spacer is no go.

[CrUZida]

Just get some camber tops.

[nb86]

The ma61 struts would bolt to the sa63 arms, however the offset on the ball joint would mean way too much positive camber.

[JustCallMeOrlando]

Just get some camber tops.

Thats the solution for camber, I'm talking about the quicker steering though.

[ViPeR_NiPPleX]

well it's gotta be either lower ratio rack and pinion or shorter steering arms...

[wilbo666]

As said the RA6X/SA63 steering are are offset (inboard) giving less track when used on MA61...

I'm not keen myself on using the RA6X/SA63 arms without locating the castor rod holes to the correct position...on my quick inspection the other day they looked a fair way out to just get away with slotting the rear hole (I think without moving the castor rod holes the castor rod bush would be quite preloaded, something I'd rather avoid).

As I'm keen to reduce my track...17x8 +5 rims (and R33 brakes so effectively 17x8 -3! ) so I'm going to get my SA63 PS arms (shorter) reamed to take the MA61 ball joint and use my existing MA61 lower control arms. I'm going to use RA65 struts (coil over blah blah) to keep the camber neutral. I'll add camber tops to dial in the -ve camber that I want.

That way I won't be preloading my castor rod bush.

I guess this won't really work as well for JCMO as he will want his rims to stay where they are! So does anyone know of an ~10mm longer LCA he can use so that he can use the shorter PS arms and keep his existing strut and track (same track due to the longer LCA).

Cheers
Wilbo

[ViPeR_NiPPleX]

i wish i could remember now... i think i measured one at the wreckers.... was a cressida i believe, mx23 maybe? or mx62, don't quote me though, not even 100% sure it was 315 or 330mm long and one was 360!