TheSamba.com :: View topic

Thu Oct 28, 2004 6:16 am

I have new 3*3 boxed arms on my buggy.
On extended hight I have negative camber (16" clearance with 30*9.5 tyres).
Is there a solution?

Thu Oct 28, 2004 7:36 am

longer drive axles

Thu Oct 28, 2004 7:49 am

the only solutiom to this is to re-do the pivots. if you like it jacked up like that, you will have that positive camber problem unless you move the pivots. just for curiositys sake, are you positive the arms are on the correct sides, and not upside down? only reason i ask is i have a freind that actually did this on his buggy. he had the same problem. once we flipped the arms over, it still had a little camber at full droop, but not near as much. just something to think about.

Thu Oct 28, 2004 8:02 am

I bolt them like this picture (left side).

I use a superbeetle rear, the pivot is in "stock" position.

What is "long axles drive"?

Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:37 am

the drive axle coming from the tranny can be swapped to a longer unit. not sure it would help your entire situation but it may help decrease the operating angle

Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:45 am

longer drive axles should have nothing to do with that. either they are on upside down, were manufacutred improperly, or you just have your pre-load set way too high for the current pivot points

Thu Oct 28, 2004 12:10 pm

what size motor is in that thing?

Thu Oct 28, 2004 1:33 pm

the camber don't change if I swap the two arms.

Is it a solution moving pivot point down?
where?

I have a small engine:
1835, 2*40 IDF, 044, CWcrank, W110

Need a lifting :-(
I will mount a stroker crank next year :-D

Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:15 pm

Your problem exists in the trailing arms themselves. There is no way to change the angle on the trailing arms without cutting them apart at the bearing carrier or at the pivot point and re-frabricating them back together. The problem is you are dealing with only a few degrees of angle so you must do some extremely accurate measuring before welding everything up. The manufacturers use a Jig when building the arms to assure accuracy. On my car I have one trailing arms with more angle than the other, nice huh? I would suggest using the trailing arms you have or selling them and purchasing an alternate set.

SHMO

Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:44 pm

My car has a little difference in the angles from left to right also and so does my friends. I think they are built that way from the factory and you just dont notice it much until you put on 3x3's.However i did have another friend that put 3x3's on his car and had the preload so tight that the rear of the car sat just like the picture.By the way I'm a little confused. That picture has positive camber not negative, and did you put on longer axles?the stock ones won't work.

Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:51 pm

baja5, are you on a stock pan?

Thu Oct 28, 2004 7:04 pm

That's affirmative good buddy. Stock 69. My friend is on a stock 71 pan and both cars have the same rear difference in camber from right to left.Weird huh? nothing looks bent, and now 3 cars that have it. I'd bet it's a normal characteristic from the factory in the way the pivots were mounted.

Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:38 pm

All the 3x3's I have seen on buggies in my area have positive camber, including mine(but it is very slight). I think it is the way the pivots points are placed on the trailing arms themselves. I have heard that some 3x3 manufacturers mount the pivot points to will minimize positive camber, but I don't know who specifically.

Daniel

Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:01 pm

well i just got my 3x3's in the mail so i will let you know when i mount them if they are the same way as those others. should be an interesting little experiment, how about a poll to see how everyones 3x3 arms have worked out?

Fri Oct 29, 2004 11:21 am

if you look at the stock pivot points, they are not lined up in parallel with the torsion housing. It is setup to provide a little bit of camber at lift but the above picture looks like an extreme amount.

ft_irwin_73baja wrote: well i just got my 3x3's in the mail so i will let you know when i mount them if they are the same way as those others. should be an interesting little experiment, how about a poll to see how everyones 3x3 arms have worked out?

where did you get your arms? are they boxed or tubular?

i know a couple of you are running BCR arms. what about the rest of you? purchase point, manufacturer, and tubular or boxed?

Fri Oct 29, 2004 1:56 pm

The ones I have were made by another buggy guy that lives about 15 miles from my house. They're pretty stout, made out of rectagular tubing. I wish I could have gotten some of the boxed ones, but I didn't have the cash. I only paid $100 for them (just needed bearing housings). He makes them for all the buggy shops in my area, and they usually go for $350.

Daniel

Fri Oct 29, 2004 2:06 pm

The picture i use is not good (arms are swapped ) :oops: :oops:

The camber is less now but still important.
I have a toe problem too. Tomorrow I will tune.

I use urethane bushing, is it a good choice with these arms?

I get my arms at mooreparts (boxed)

Fri Oct 29, 2004 2:19 pm

I like polyurethane bushings personally. I have heard that others do not for some weird reason.

Fri Oct 29, 2004 2:58 pm

Most manufacturers use a jig when fabricating trailing arms. Once the arms are "tacked" together they are often pulled off the jig and final welded. That weldng heat can easily throw things out of whack. The camber difference most of us notice is actually very minute, maybe a degree or two. However, when you factor that degree or two into a tire thats say 31 inches tall the difference becomes very apparant. Now, some companies or individuals that build trailing arms do not use jigs. They just measure and wing it, making the margin of error even greater.

Baja 5,
I think the difference in camber you and your friends are experiencing is probably due to the trailing arms not being symetrical. Either that, or you all have bent torsion housings. That is about the only two ways the camber can be effected.

Like Brad said,
VW trailing arms do swing in an arch, meaning the camber changes several degrees during suspension travel. When building trailing arms you can take out some of the positive camber. The problem is you give up alot of CV angle. Obviously any camber change in the tires is also directly impacted into the CV joint angle. So, you might get the tires to stand up straight, but your CV's will be working at a much greater angle, and that's great if your CV's can handle it. However, most of us want as much possible CV angle as we can tweak from our setup, and that makes for a "catch 22" kind of thing. For most of us, you can't get away from positive camber unless your willing to give up some travel or build a completely custom suspension.

Macfly,
by looking at your Manx I would guess your torsion bars are set so tight that you have ZERO droop. With a setup like yours, you should have at least 3 to 4 inches of droop when the car is sitting on the ground. If your suspension is fully extended while the car is sitting on the ground you are not properly setup. Your ride will be harsh, your CV's will not live as long and your cars performance will not be ideal.

SHMO

Fri Oct 29, 2004 3:01 pm

i got mine from Prowlers and they are boxed, paid 320 for them but i feel it was worth a little extra money to stay away from latest rage. i have seen the latest rage go for as little as 265 but someone in these forums pointed out the fact that cheap arms are, well, cheap. believe me, i dont have a big budget baja by any means but i believe that some of the stuff you buy for your car does need to be good quality products.

for you guys with the BCR arms, do you remember when they took down the plans for their arms from their site becouse they "had some problems" with the design? i wonder just what problems they were refering to, hopefully you guys got your arms after they fixed the design.