So I am thinking about using some ball joint spacers in a pretty nontraditional way. I have my 69 bonneville that I am converting over to disc brakes up front; the car was available with disc brakes that year but parts are hard to find, very expensive, and outdated. I could use 67-68 spindles, custom caliper brackets, and once again outdated calipers. I have done some digging around and after a couple of trips to the junkyard I think I might be able to swap in some later model spindles from a 94-96 impala/caprice. The steering arm is in the front where mine needs to be in the back so I figure I can just swap the sides to get it where I need it. The only hang up so far is that the ball joint mounting points on the impala/caprice spindle are an inch shorter from top to bottom than that of the original mounting points; I think it was 9.5" vs 10.5". If I add 1" thick ball joint spacers to the later model spindles it should make up the difference and give me everything I want from the later model brakes, as well as 5x5 bolt pattern. I would like to get some thoughts on this from the hambers to see if there is anything I should watch out for or etc.
If you swap spindles side to side your ackerman angle on the arms will be backwards- not a good thing. In case you don't know akerman is what makes the inside tire turn more than the outside tire when going around a corner. With it reversed you'd have some strange handling and tire wear. Might be able to heat the arms and bend to correct it depending on the metal.
Ackerman is not the only issue. If you move the pivot points in the suspension, in this case, the ball joints, you are altering the suspension geometry. Without some serious measuring, and some serious math, you are just guessing at the outcome. On some cars, benefit can be had by rearranging pivot points (Mustang, Comet, Cougar, Falcon, etc.), but that is a time-tested, well researched, MINOR alteration, not a random WAG. Your subsequent handling and steering could be somewhere between annoying, difficult and deadly.
Without pictures of the spacers you intend to use its a bit hard to visualize...but I'll try anyway! LoL 1" spacers would seem to indicate you intend to put them between the arm and the ball joint. This will raise the upper control arm...but do nothing to change the issue of the spindle being 1" shorter. The pivot points will retain the same relationship with or without that type spacer. Draw it on paper or a blackboard and it will be easier to see...
If you put a spacer between the control arm, and the ball joint, you have moved the pivot, and altered the suspension geometry. It does NOT just raise the control arm, it changes the effective length, and its position in the arc-of-motion of the suspension cycle. This WILL alter the camber curve, and produce results that are unlikely to be ideal.
Nope...the spindle is still just as long (or short) and the ball joint is still the same size/length and attached to it...with the pivot ball still in exactly the same location. The distance between the upper and lower balljoint has not changed. The arm has moved up is all. Now if he used a C type spacer between the spindle and the ball joint tapered shaft it WILL change the distance between the balljoints and the camber curve etc will be changed. However...those are longer than 1".
The replacement spindle is shorter than the original, so the spacing from stock, to new has indeed been altered. Using a spacer, between the balljoint and control arm, to move the control arm back up does not help. The spindle would somehow need to be made taller.
Ahhhh...NOW I understand how we are confusing each other, I think! LoL We actually agree with each other but we are coming from different sides of the question. What you are saying is the spindle being shorter has altered the camber curve etc already...I'm saying adding a spacer above the balljoint won't get the camber curve back to original. Same thing...different ways of explaining it!
Exactly. That, and randomly altering the camber curve is not a good idea. I have been screwing around with camber for about 25-years, with some success, and some mixed results. My I fitted my proto-pro-touring '69 Malibu with later Camaro disc spindles, to alter the camber curve, in 1988. My current DD has relocated control arms, spaced, and wedged balljoints. It can be done, but doing it wrong, can render a car un-drivable. Ask me how I know.
Definately...though you would never say it by how often stuff like that gets done with no consideration for the geometry at all! Theres a lot more to think about other than convenience or money saving.
I see now that the spacer will leave the control arms at the stock setting but the point at which the top of the spindle pivots (the ball joint) will be an inch lower, upsetting the geometry. Oh well, it was worth a thought.
The Jalopy Journal
