This past winter I rebuilt the front suspension (springs, kingpins, bushings) on my C1 (62). Now my auto shop says the camber to much too negative (inclined toward the car) at maximum positive adjustment. (Yes, I had to show them where to stick the allen wrench.) This if the first alignment since I purchased the car, so I don't know if the problem pre-existed. Any ideas? Thanks...Ed
-
-
Re: C1 (62) Steering Camber
Ed,
I ran into a similar problem with my 58. Turns out, the front coil spring wasn't fully seated in the upper housing. It's kind of a tight fit and easy to install slightly out of alignment. You also may want to check the steering knuckles and make sure the kingpin has the correct clearance. I also found uot one of my steering knuckles was "egg-shaped" from wear and the camber was way out of tolerance. Also, Make sure yours isn't bent. I also had to install (weld) new upper control arm retainers in the suspension crossmember as these were completely shot. I guess the previous owner(s) never greased the front end. All these changes have a big impact on front end alignment. You might want to check these. Good luck -
Re: C1 (62) Steering Camber
1. Something's bent.
2. More likely, the "A"-arm isn't centered on one of the shafts. Probably the upper outer.Comment
-
Re: C1 (62) Steering Camber
Hi Chris,
Thanks for your comments. I don't quite understand your comment, "the "A"-arm isn't centered on one of the shafts." The upper/outer shaft is held in place by two nuts with inner and outer threads. The shaft screws into the inner threads, and the outer threads screw into the control arm. Unless there is a lot of free play (mine seem tight), I don't see how they could get off center. Can you explain? Thanks...EdComment
-
Re: C1 (62) Steering Camber
Maybe I'm thinking of the lower outer.
When I did mine, I removed and replaced both the lower and upper outer pins/shafts. When I went to put the new ones in, I remember thinking that the "A" arms needed to be centered on the pins/shafts in order to provide the eccentric adjusting cam the range it needed. There is also a mention of this in the ST-12.
The pin/shafts can be started in the end nuts/bushings before those bushings are threaded into the "A" arm. Depending on how you start threading, the pin/shaft can be positioned more forward or rearward. In this way, you'll center the adjusting cam to allow the range of movement you need.
In rereading this, I realize that I'm not explaining this very well. Look at the ST-12 again. I do distinctly remember something about this in there.Comment
-
Re: C1 (62) Steering Camber
Hi Chris,
I believe I understand the "centering" to which you refer. This is the "front to back" centering of the spindle on the upper/outer control arm threaded shaft. This alignment controls caster, the front to back tilt of the top of the tire relative to the bottom of the tire.
My problem is camber, the side to side tilt of the top of the tire relative to the bottom of the tire. This adjustment reaches minimum and maximum values during one rotation of the threaded shaft. In my case, rotating the shaft to move the top of the wheel away from the frame does not move the wheel out far enough to give the zero to positive 1/2 degree camber called for the in the manual. My maximum camber is -1/2 degree. This camber leaves the top of the wheel tilted in towards the frame and will cause wear the inside edge of the tire. Since both front wheels have the same problem, something must be assembled incorrectly. Fortunately, I don't give up easily. Thanks...EdComment
-
Re: C1 (62) Steering Camber
couple shots in the dark for you:
Were the upper inner bushings in the cross-member replaced and perhaps not located properly?
Is ride height modified from original spec?
Then there's the old reminder from laboratory classes - is it possible there is an error in the test procedure or equipment?
-kComment
-
Re: C1 (62) Steering Camber
Hi Karl,
In response to your comments:
1. Were the upper inner bushings in the cross-member replaced and perhaps not located properly?
A1. I had the upper control arms out, but I left the threaded shafts in the cross-member. Other than wear, I did not think there was any adjustments on the upper/inner control arm pivot points.
2. Is ride height modified from original spec?
A2. I installed repacement coil springs, but I did not (on purpose) do any modifications. Of course, I do not know if any pre-conditions existed. I really need to figure out how to measure the ride height to see if the springs are causing the problems. Do you know of a way to make this measurement?
Thanks...EdComment
-
Re: C1 (62) Steering Camber
Ed: There are alignment and ride height specs in the AIM at the end of the front suspension section. 1961 AIM says 10.17" (design load) or 10.68" (curb wt) from level ground to center of lower inner shaft. -Karl
PS: can't help noticing the camber spec therein is 0* +/-0* 30' i.e. according to that, your 1/2* reading is in spec (albeit BARELY and not optimum performance alignment - but nevertheless technically a GO on the spec in my '61 AIM) FWIWComment
-
Re: C1 (62) Steering Camber
Time to get an AIM. I just measured mine. 12.5 inches. I knew the front end was too high. Now to find out what is causing it. I put in new springs last summer from CC. Time to check them out. Thanks...EdComment
Comment