Which shock?

[Vetruck]

anyone know the size diameter of MB-Arts adjustable camber arm tube?
when i need to buy replacement rod-ends, i want to buy HQ ends.
so what size rod-ends do i need to get?

thanx

The MB Arts says on their site they are using 1" solid bar 6061-T6 and talk up their ass in marketing hype how theirs are so much stronger than "sprintcar arms". Got news for MB Arts- the Coleman arms fall into the catagory of racing aluminum trailing arms like all the other manufacturers (Allstar, Coleman, etc) which all happen to be 6061-T6 ALSO.

These links are in compression and tension. The weakest part of the aluminum is the same on both MB Arts units as well as the so called sprintcar arms (self procliamed term by MB Arts- they are alumunim trailing arms...period) That weakest section is the thread bore size and the threads. The smaller the thread bore, the weaker the threads will be. THe MB Arts arms use either a 5/8" bore (smaller)or the same 3/4" bore at best as the Coleman arms. Now when you look at the wall thickness of a 3/4" bore into a 1" bar stock, that leaves .125 wall thickness AND THEN the threads are cut into them making them even thinner. Most likely the MBarts arms are using 5/8" shank rodends, not the 3/4" shank ones I listed. So lets take the 5/8" bore into 1" bar and we have .1875 walls prior to threads cut. The Coleman arms are 1.125 with a 3/4" bore and thus the same .1875 wall..YET the Coleman arms have a larger bore and thus a larger shank thread surface area- thus stronger. Low and behold, MB Arts marketing hype is false about so called sprint car arms being inferior.

Now lets look at the 5/8" shank/ 1/2" centerbore heat treated alloy rodends that are teflon coated. lets take the best 5/8" vs the best 3/4" and compare the strengths of the pivot ball and race (we already learned the shank threads are far stronger on the 3/4"). I can see in the pictures of the MB Arts rodends that he is is also using stepdown spacers so the center bore is a little larger than 1/2" to do so. Thus if he is using 5/8" shank rodend they are a 5/8" bore. The best ones availible are the HML10HT's which are 40,572 (remember the larger 3/4" are 55,692- much stronger).

HOWEVER, I highly doubt that MB Arts is using the high dollar units, they are most likely using the HML10T's, not the HML10HT's which are half the price and only a strength of 17,995

In Conclusion, even if MB Arts did in fact use the larger and best 55,692 load rodends, the thread bore for the shank on their 1" diameter bar links would be far inferior- or else they are using the inferior smaller rodends. They definately are inferior one way or the other- calculations show they can NOT be as strong as the pieces I listed- and they charge you more.

Let me take MB Arts disclaimer and use the same "Public Service Announcement" and use it against them....what a joke, its's all about scare tactics and marketing hype.

[Vetruck]

The MB Arts says on their site they are using 1" solid bar 6061-T6 and talk up their ass in marketing hype how theirs are so much stronger than "sprintcar arms". Got news for MB Arts- the Coleman arms fall into the catagory of racing aluminum trailing arms like all the other manufacturers (Allstar, Coleman, etc) which all happen to be 6061-T6 ALSO.

These links are in compression and tension. The weakest part of the aluminum is the same on both MB Arts units as well as the so called sprintcar arms (self procliamed term by MB Arts- they are alumunim trailing arms...period) That weakest section is the thread bore size and the threads. The smaller the thread bore, the weaker the threads will be. THe MB Arts arms use either a 5/8" bore (smaller)or the same 3/4" bore at best as the Coleman arms. Now when you look at the wall thickness of a 3/4" bore into a 1" bar stock, that leaves .125 wall thickness AND THEN the threads are cut into them making them even thinner. Most likely the MBarts arms are using 5/8" shank rodends, not the 3/4" shank ones I listed. So lets take the 5/8" bore into 1" bar and we have .1875 walls prior to threads cut. The Coleman arms are 1.125 with a 3/4" bore and thus the same .1875 wall..YET the Coleman arms have a larger bore and thus a larger shank thread surface area- thus stronger. Low and behold, MB Arts marketing hype is false about so called sprint car arms being inferior.

Now lets look at the 5/8" shank/ 1/2" centerbore heat treated alloy rodends that are teflon coated. lets take the best 5/8" vs the best 3/4" and compare the strengths of the pivot ball and race (we already learned the shank threads are far stronger on the 3/4"). I can see in the pictures of the MB Arts rodends that he is is also using stepdown spacers so the center bore is a little larger than 1/2" to do so. Thus if he is using 5/8" shank rodend they are a 5/8" bore. The best ones availible are the HML10HT's which are 40,572 (remember the larger 3/4" are 55,692- much stronger).

HOWEVER, I highly doubt that MB Arts is using the high dollar units, they are most likely using the HML10T's, not the HML10HT's which are half the price and only a strength of 17,995

In Conclusion, even if MB Arts did in fact use the larger and best 55,692 load rodends, the thread bore for the shank on their 1" diameter bar links would be far inferior- or else they are using the inferior smaller rodends. They definately are inferior one way or the other- calculations show they can NOT be as strong as the pieces I listed- and they charge you more.

Let me take MB Arts disclaimer and use the same "Public Service Announcement" and use it against them....what a joke, its's all about scare tactics and marketing hype.

just a FYI- I am quite well known and respected in the GM aftermarket parts world. I have taken down many aftrmarket vendors on car forums just like this in personal debates and facts (UMI, Hotparts, Founders Perf, PAracing, Racecraft, Chisholm- to name a few)

[John Jones Jr.]

just a FYI- I am quite well known and respected in the GM aftermarket parts world. I have taken down many aftrmarket vendors on car forums just like this in personal debates and facts (UMI, Hotparts, Founders Perf, PAracing, Racecraft, Chisholm- to name a few)

[Denlasoul]

just a FYI- I am quite well known and respected in the GM aftermarket parts world. I have taken down many aftrmarket vendors on car forums just like this in personal debates and facts (UMI, Hotparts, Founders Perf, PAracing, Racecraft, Chisholm- to name a few)

Great to have you here. Wish I could reciprocate!

[Vetruck]

Great to have you here. Wish I could reciprocate!

You guys do. I have actually been sick this week so I have computer-itice LOL

Some of stuff I type I have been told in past on other forums I come off rude or arrogant. Please understand I love teaching this stuff- but I have terrible typing skills and just give alot of robotic sounding answers as I two finger peck at the keys. I like to stick to facts or first hand experience.

I know so many people tha tfisrt come to know me on the compter and have told me they though I was an ass, then to later get to know me in person and say I am nothing like how I type. I've gotten better over the years, but I still need to build on expressing myself in text- hence why I am typing this message.

My goal when I post? Is to try and help others arm themselvves with information as to better and more wisely spend our hard earned money. I need to learn this car, it's why I am here. I have vast knowledge of chassis dynamics, I just need to learn the hands on settings and perameters of the w202 platform and it's individual strengths and weaknesses. That is where a forum like this and all of your combined experiences with repairs and modifications help me get there quicker without as mnuch trial and error in spending money and finding out later the hard way. Its like how i have been researching the camber fixes with these cars and how much is needed or not based on how low the car goes. I have not seen any speadsheet documenting bumpsteer, camber curves, etc on both front and rear suspensions. I see lots of data on wheel offsets and rear camber arms, but also rear about tire rubs, bad wear, etc. I like to do things right. When I do not know something, I try and studfy it for awhile until I decide just what I am going to do to something- once I do I bit the bullet and get it all done fairly quickly.

With all thatsaid, these cars look very simple. I think people just go too low with them getting this "stance thing". It appears looking at the geometry of the rear 5 link that the 2 front parallel bars have adequate geometry to lower the car an inch easy and still retain good travel and articulation without pulling the rear assembly forward shortening and lengthening the wheelbase as it articulates. Nor does an extended camber link casue the travel to go into camber curve neutality or even camber loss- so that so far looks good from what I see. The geometry of the rear toe bars will depend on high speed aero squat of the chassis, as well as overall travel. If the car does suffer from aero squat (hard to get a tape measure reading of the fender lip to the ground distance at 80mph -LOL- so its all about feel) then the low speed stuff can be dialed to a rear toe staic setting of 0*. Body roll alone in a corner will promote an outer wheel toe gain and thus help induce roll understeer keeping the car stable and tight into and through a corner, and high speed squat hopefully will only slightly induce the needed toe-in settings for high speed stability. Its got to be set at optimum arm level geometry- so what ride height is that? if will be dependant of gauging suspension travel via zipties cinched around the Koni yellow shock shafts as indicators when I install them hopefully tomorrow or Wednesday (If they get here- I am waiting for the UPS guy as we speak). Ill start taking fender lip readings, arm angles, and overall travel readings in strightline travel as well as hard cornering roll. Its done by gounding the ziptie to the shock body and then drive itno what situation you want to study. If you want high speed stright stuff then gently drive it over and merge onto the freeway easy and run it up to speed without straining the car into any corner. Gently bring it back intot he garage bay and reach uner and measure the distance of the normal suspension travel over higher speed freeway bumps combined with aero squat. Tells you how much the suspension is traveling. Then reset the incicators and run it around a skidpad (large parking lot will do). Check the indicators both left and right circles indicidually- record the travel. Then lastly you can set them and dive hard on the brakes stright line from about 30-40 mph and see how much the front dives from brake squat.

Compare all of that data and it will tell me what the spring rates are doing balance wise betweeen coils and swaybar needs. I can tune a little with the Koni rebound settings, but that is mainly for ride quality since the main focus is for the little lady to be comfortable as well as have safe handling in case of emergency when she commutes in this car.

I will most likely build this car pretty radiical in handling, but it will all come with necessity of wanting to lower it a little for looks as well as safety (ie- the typical lowered cg or center of gravity). I do it for a better and safer ride, not for look and a crappy ride. it's why it all takes time to learn these cars so it's done right the first time- cuz god know I'll here about it if the car rides like crap when I lower it. I need to make sure I am getting enough data to do it right as well as have the money on hand for any unaticipated quick purchases to correct unforseen geometry problems- It unfortunately cost money to do things the right way...and thats why I try and be detailed and help.