Tall Spindle Control Arms [Archive] - Chevelle Tech

: Tall Spindle Control Arms


67_LS1
Dec 26th, 00, 3:13 PM
Does anyone make control arms for use with tall spindles that look more like the stock ones? Any other stock model ones fit?
Thanks,
Dennis

------------------
1967 Chevelle convertible with a 1999 LS1 engine and a 4L60E transmission.
Also, looking to purchase a Posi rear-end, 10 or 12 bolt, prefer 3.08 or 3.36 ratio, for a 64 thru 67 Chevelle.

Jeff 74
Dec 26th, 00, 8:08 PM
I think the Chevelle Report had a story on tall spindle install and they swaped upper arms side to side, I also rember they had to grind arm to clear steering shaft

67_LS1
Dec 28th, 00, 8:19 AM
I couldn't find the Chevelle Report. Any tips on where this would be?
Has anyone even seen shorter upper arms that look stock?
How much shorter are they?
Are there other differances that would keep someone from modifying the originals?
Thanks,
Dennis

------------------
1967 Chevelle convertible with a 1999 LS1 engine and a 4L60E transmission.
Also, looking to purchase a Posi rear-end, 10 or 12 bolt, prefer 3.08 or 3.36 ratio, for a 64 thru 67 Chevelle.

Bill68Wagon
Dec 30th, 00, 1:31 PM
Try this: http://www.angelfire.com/tx/lonestarclassics/tallspindle.htm

Good info here!

------------------
Bill Woltz
Concord, CA
68 Nomad
http://pages.prodigy.net/asps400/Billswagon/Bills68Wagon.htm

Brob
Jan 2nd, 01, 2:34 PM
You can use the stock A arms. You use camaro upper ball joints and machined ball joints for the lower A arms. Malibu Performance sells the lower machined ball joints. They sell a whole kit with tie rods etc a little pricey. Be sure and use Moog for the uppers you do not have to drill larger holes.

Do a search on this topic somewhere there are Moog part number for converson.

------------------

Jeff 74
Jan 2nd, 01, 7:47 PM
I found the old chevelle report, stock arms will work but you might not get enough caster, swaping arms side will get more caster but it will only work if ft. end is lowered

67_LS1
Jan 3rd, 01, 7:58 AM
Don't the upper arms need to be shorter in length to take advantage of increased negitive camber?
A large shim pack will allow you to use tall spindles, but will this cure excessive the outside tire wear that our cars have?
Is the Chevelle report on the web somewhere that I can read it?
Anyone have a copy they can send me?
Thanks for all of the input.
Dennis

------------------
1967 Chevelle convertible with a 1999 LS1 engine and a 4L60E transmission.
Also, looking to purchase a Posi rear-end, 10 or 12 bolt, prefer 3.08 or 3.36 ratio, for a 64 thru 67 Chevelle.

Brob
Jan 3rd, 01, 10:38 AM
I had a couple e mails requesting this part number, so here it is for everyone .

Part number for the problem solver shaft kit. Provides additional camber adjustment.

Fits 1964 to 1988 Chevelle & Malibu, El Camino and Monte Carlo, Moog K5250


------------------

67_LS1
Jan 3rd, 01, 11:25 AM
Thanks for the part number. I'll look at these also.
Does anyone know how much shorter the short upper control arms are?
Dennis

Schurkey
Jan 3rd, 01, 4:08 PM
Another, much cheaper solution, is to use longer bolts to attach the controll arm cross shafts to the frame. I just can't see dropping $80 or so for fancy Moog offset cross shafts when $4.00 worth of grade 8 bolts works just as well on my small block '68 Camino.

Of course, there are some drawbacks: The original bolts have a knurled section where they press through the frame bracket. That keeps them from turning when the shim packs are adjusted during alignments.

It takes a pile o' shims to align the tall spindle conversions when you use the original style controll arms, and if you have a big block (especially Oldsmobile, I'm told) you may have some clearance problems. I can't imagine having problems getting camber and caster adjusted properly, provided you have room for all the shims needed.

[This message has been edited by Schurkey (edited 01-03-2001).]

Cardiac
Jan 3rd, 01, 11:37 PM
Check with www.globalwest.net (http://www.globalwest.net)