help - sigma LCA

[Jordy88]

Mark,

if i was u i woud sell ur car cos face it, it aint as good as mine YA NUGGET

[Enchanter]

Im pretty sure the GE and GH are 3 bolt and I think all models after were 2. Its been a while though so I may be wrong.

GH Scorpion
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...t/100_0995.jpg

GJ Scorpion
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...t/100_0996.jpg

[merc-blue]

couldnt you just tap out some steel and make a "spacer" for the short section that is to thin before the nut, strength shouldnt be the issue more they thickness/fit? probly a good reason y not though

[poorolla]

I had another look at the sigma balljoint and although the thread is smaller, the taper is the same I wish i had of noticed that the first time i looked at it!
So anyway, for future reference the sigma balljoint BJ122 is the balljoint to use when putting sigma control arms into celicas
I drew a pic to try and help explain. apologies its so shit
Mark.

[poorolla]

So after driving the car with the sigma LCAs in i wasn't too impressed..
To sum it up, turn in was great, there was a definate improvement with the introduction of some negative camber.. BUT
- Turn the wheel to go around a corner and there was no self centring effect at all It would just keep steering towards the gutter and i had to manually steer it back to straight!
- Steering was lighter than light, i can understand it being a bit light due to less of a contact patch with the road but it was REALLY light!
I thought maybe i didn't wind enough castor in to get the wheels to self center but looking at the control arm angle it was definantly angled towards the front of the car.. I could have wound more castor on but i dont want to distort the control arm bushes too much and i dont think the castor is the root of my problem..
So after driving around a little i chucked my original lca's and tierods back in as i think i might shorten the sigma arms a little for slightly less camber and also try and work out why it drove so weird...
So anyone with any clues or ideas please post!
Thanks,
Mark.
Oh yeah and another thing - the sigma LCAs dont have steering stops so i found i had a significantly smaller turning circle.. pretty funny it would almost spin on the spot!

[sam-131]

well after being called dogy somebody finaly tryed it for them self's the balljoint taper is a few thou in diffrence you really must see it to know whats going on in short there noting to worry about

rolla i rekon you nock up a set of ajdie lca's it's a walking the park if you handy with a welder that way you can dial in how much camber is needed

here's a guide i found ages ago when i was making a set for my fiat
http://users.bigpond.net.au/lachlan/...sejoint_v.html

[RobertoX]

So after driving the car with the sigma LCAs in i wasn't too impressed..
To sum it up, turn in was great, there was a definate improvement with the introduction of some negative camber.. BUT
- Turn the wheel to go around a corner and there was no self centring effect at all It would just keep steering towards the gutter and i had to manually steer it back to straight!
- Steering was lighter than light, i can understand it being a bit light due to less of a contact patch with the road but it was REALLY light!
I thought maybe i didn't wind enough castor in to get the wheels to self center but looking at the control arm angle it was definantly angled towards the front of the car.. I could have wound more castor on but i dont want to distort the control arm bushes too much and i dont think the castor is the root of my problem..
So after driving around a little i chucked my original lca's and tierods back in as i think i might shorten the sigma arms a little for slightly less camber and also try and work out why it drove so weird...
So anyone with any clues or ideas please post!
Thanks,
Mark.
Oh yeah and another thing - the sigma LCAs dont have steering stops so i found i had a significantly smaller turning circle.. pretty funny it would almost spin on the spot!

possibly due to the reduction in scrub radius intorduced by inclining the strut more?
This inclination is bad as it introduces positive camber when the wheel is turned (or at least reduces the amount of negative camber gain) you pretty much need the extra castor just to counteract this.
Using some camber plates up top to reduce the amount of camber can help both the excessive camber problem and also reduce the KPI/SAI.

On my sprinter (with sigma LCAs) I found that a little extra castor and a little less camber made a huge improvement, the steering is quite light now but it self centres quite reasonably.

Also with the taper on the ball joints, the taper is the 1 thing that keeps the steering arm properly attached, the bolt is only there IMO to install the steering arm and as a secondary safety retention. Think about how much force you often put on with the ball joint seperator!

Rob

[poorolla]

hmm interesting...
So i have a question then.. Do you think the situation would be improved at all if i shortened the sigma arms by 10 to 15mm?? They are currently 30mm longer than standard and the camber was a little too much for my liking being my daily driver..
Shortening the arm by 10-15mm should have a similiar effect as moving the strut top outwards so it should help somewhat shouldn't it?
Thanks for the reply i appreciate the help!
Mark.

[RobertoX]

Yeah it should have a similar effect, if you start at zero camber then add 30mm to the the LCA and find you have too much camber then you reduce their lenght by half then you should have roughly half the camber.

Although you dont get the track increase which you retain when you reduce the camber by using the adjustable tops

[Celica RA45]

you guys amaze me just by some mx62 lower arms from a cressida use the ball joints from them and get the steering arm section reemed out for the ball joint to go ,finished end of story

[willwal98]

Sorry for the stupid question but how long are the mx62 lower arms?

[Celica RA45]

about 32 mm longer than std ra40 1s ,thats each side

[barned01]

hmmm mx62 control arms + ra60 strut (inherently more positive camber than standard ra40 strut) = brake upgrade?....
the legalities of increasing the width by 64mm might be hard to explain though, or could this be salvaged with some decent offset wheels.

or am i so on the wrong page here and should just walk away now before i make a huge fool of myself.

[AE86slut]

- Turn the wheel to go around a corner and there was no self centring effect at all It would just keep steering towards the gutter and i had to manually steer it back to straight!
- Steering was lighter than light, i can understand it being a bit light due to less of a contact patch with the road but it was REALLY light!

Did you bother doing any sort of alignment of the toe settings? Sounds like it's toe'ing in to me.

Cheers,

Jeremy.

[Celica RA45]

by increasing the front track by 32mm each side you are making more neg camber not positive camber then you buy some T3 camber adjusters and then also get a fw alignment for your car ,from memory i think i had to file 1 hole on lower arms for the radius rods to bolt up