Garage Storage Organization and Garage Cabinets

csracer · 08-10-2004, 12:02 PM

Ok guys , just want to compare notes with anyone that has installed the cast control arms/k frame onto a 89-91 body style daytona shelby or ES. I just put the wheels on and they are really far forward to the point that they were rubbing in the fender/air dam. they are visibly not centered in the wheelwell. I know that the cast arms have the ball joint moved further forward and increased caster but even after loosening the k frame bolts and pushing it as far back as it can go i am still running with minimal clearance. anyone have this problem?

SilverShelbyZ · 08-10-2004, 12:26 PM

I've never heard of this problem, Chris. I actually had my older style K-frame out of the car like a week ago and put it next to the newer double hinged one and there wasn't enough of a change in the position of the balljoint for me to actually see it.

I can't remember what size wheels and tires you're running, but how much clearance did you have in that area before you did the swap?

csracer · 08-10-2004, 10:47 PM

i was having the problem with the stock pumpers with 205/55/16's and with my race wheels with 245/45/16's which are actually about 3/16" shorter in overall diameter than the stock ones.

anyway, I spent the evening swapping suspension parts and here is what i found. I pulled the entire 93 k frame / control arms, put the cast arms on my known good 89 k frame, same problem. Then I put a stock 89 stamped arm on and no more problem, i now have approx 1/2" clearance at the closest point to the body when turning the wheel, where the cast arm had no clearance it was touching. The wheel also appears more centered in the wheel well.

So there is something up with these cast arms that I have, this one has me stumped, maybe there are different cast arms. the ones i have do have the big bushings in them as i was able to put new moog poly bushings in them. for now I am back to the stamped stuff.

Vigo · 08-10-2004, 11:02 PM

id be interested to know what this turns out to be.

1985ShlbyChrger · 08-11-2004, 12:28 AM

What did you get the 93 K frame out of? THere are different cast control arms. I think the Dynasty? had different arms. Take a pic and I can tell you if they are the wrong ones. They are differently shaped. I will take pictures at the junkyard this weekend of the differences.

csracer · 08-11-2004, 09:15 AM

Thanks, if you could get a pic of the differences that would be cool. there aren't many u pick it j-yards in the detroit area so I got it from one of the auto recyclers here that pull the parts themselves and warehouse them, anyway I was told the k frame/controls arm assy. was from a Shadow, but I have no way of knowing for sure. I will get a pic of the ones i have.

minimopar · 08-11-2004, 12:04 PM

I have the Shadow assembly on my Daytona and it also pushed the wheels forward. It is my understanding that if you also swap the knuckles, the wheels will be back where they should be.

csracer · 08-11-2004, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by minimopar

I have the Shadow assembly on my Daytona and it also pushed the wheels forward. It is my understanding that if you also swap the knuckles, the wheels will be back where they should be.

nope, i have the 91 and up knuckles with the r/t calipers.

Turbodave · 08-11-2004, 05:09 PM

This is interesting, I've had a set of cast arms off a 91 Daytona on my 89 Shadow for a couple years. I didn't really notice that my wheels were any further forward than normal, but the Shadow has a different shape to the fenders than a Daytona so it may not be as evident. I do remember my Caster numbers being out of spec when I had it aligned after all this work, and the car has always had some wicked torque steer, I wonder if the cast arms are the cause of this. I remember comparing the two style arms when I had them off the car and didn't see any difference in the placement of the ball joint relative to the lower control arm bushings, but I didn't measure anything either.

SilverShelbyZ · 08-11-2004, 07:42 PM

Hey Chris, do the arms have a PN on them?

csracer · 08-11-2004, 09:48 PM

hera are some pics of my cast control arms. The second one has the part number.

minimopar · 08-11-2004, 11:08 PM

The wheels are moved forward about 3/4 on an inch. It's less than that now after I straightened out the front end...maybe less than 1/2 inch. Definately not centered in the wheel wells though.

1985ShlbyChrger · 08-11-2004, 11:34 PM

They look like the Dynasty arms. I am going down to the yard this weekend, so I will try to grab some pics while I'm there. I hope they didn't crush the cars.

firebaron90 · 08-12-2004, 01:46 AM

No they are not the Dynasty arms....those arms have a SMALL front bushing. The MOOG bushings would not fit in the Dynasty arms. This is weird. I have to look at my baron, as i have done this swap, and the wheels sit fine in my lebaron. I actually took the arms off of my 92 shadow. I scored a set off of a spirit, rebuilt them with new hardware, and installed them on the shadow, then rebuilt the 92 arms, and put them on the baron. Both had the same part number, and both sit fine on the car.

joe

csracer · 08-12-2004, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by minimopar

The wheels are moved forward about 3/4 on an inch. It's less than that now after I straightened out the front end...maybe less than 1/2 inch. Definately not centered in the wheel wells though.

those measurements are about the same as what i came up with. what did you mean when you said straightened out the front end?