upper control arms [Archive] - Chevelle Tech

: upper control arms


chris454ss1970
Jun 5th, 03, 2:04 PM
I'm needing some opinons here. Has anyone boxed in a factory pair of upper control arms? I'm looking for pros and cons on this subject. I don't really have the cash right now to buy a set hotchkis. I've got a set of SSM bars for the bottom control arms. The money I've got set aside I was going to get my 12 rear set up. Thanks for the help guys, Chris. :D

Slo307
Jun 5th, 03, 3:41 PM
Why but hotckkiss the Edelbrock adjustables are less $$ & have a ball joint end to reduce the binding. I like my edelbrock arms. Yes I have boxed many upper and lower arms. I also put new bushings in at the same time so I can not say if the boxing was the improvement or the rebuild.

1966_L78
Jun 5th, 03, 4:20 PM
Why box the upper arms?

If you really want them, go with the Edelbrock/Currie with the spherical ends...

BUT, even then, the suspension will bind.

Due to the different angles the two arms swing through under normal suspension action, either the bushings or arms have to be allowed to flex... By going with a stiff boxed upper arm and stiff (Poly) bushings, that flex will likely get transfered to the frame or the rearend... Personally, I don't like all that stress going to the 35+ year old frame with its relatively thin crossmember holding those upper arms... Somethings got to give, and I have heard of these cross-members cracking...

the one spherical joint helps a little, but not really that much because the arms are still rigidly attached to the rearend housing...

Some suspensions companies (Global West) do not even offer boxed upper arms for this reason.

I switched back from stock uppers/Poly to stock uppers with rubber, and the car actually handles nicer with a nicer ride too... Its not as stiff, but that bind was really too stiff...