Fully Adjustable Front Control Arms DTM Style

[LeeVuong]

I completely trust AKG's work and client support. They are old school and highly reliable. BTW AKG's acronym is the owner's initials, Andreas Kritikos. My Greek friend who also races and owns a BMW independent shop has known Andreas for close to 30 years.

[AndrewLang]

I'm going to have to agree with Lee, so far AKG has been spot on on customer support (and I've needed it). One fault is that instructions don't come with the kit but AKG is always a phone call away from some technical support. I removed the subframe and supported the engine from the top in order to more easily extract my control arms. As we all know these things can really be a pain to get out. Fortunately mine had torn boots already so I wasn't too worried about getting them out without hurting them, but still, it took quite a few hammer strikes to get them out of the subframe.

When I started playing with getting the arms mounted into the subframe I damaged one of the stainless steel inserts (compressed it) and AKG sent me another one via overnight shipping to replace it. Totally my fault that I ruined the piece and I was happy to pay them for the parts. Its good to know that spare parts are a phone call away if they are needed in the future. You'll need a 12mm allen wrench which can be a little hard to find at hardware stores.

Other than that things have gone pretty easy, when you play with the parts it becomes obvious how it should all go together. I found that my suspension sits a bit too low when at full droop to connect the main arm to the strut. Simple solution is to remove the 20mm bump steer spacer from Lee. The complex down the road solution is to raise the strut tower tops about an inch.

[LeeVuong]

I like how your car develops. ;-)

[AndrewLang]

I like how your car develops. ;-)

Thank you Lee, perhaps you noticed that the new BBK is on :-).

[sprytel]

wow, that must be the new "limited edition" kit. It is significantly different in design to the other version that I have.

[AndrewLang]

wow, that must be the new "limited edition" kit. It is significantly different in design to the other version that I have.

Yes, apparently there is about a 1.5 lb reduction on the limited edition, its made of 7075 aluminum which has a little better "strength" which is what they say allowed them to make it lighter.

One thing I am noticing is that the mounting orientation of the subframe isn't ideal as it has a smaller "range of motion" which limits suspension droop. If you compare the photos on my car to Houlbt's photo of his solution this is the main design difference. His system allows for much more vertical travel of the suspension which I think would be a better way to do it.

Houlbt, do you have any close up photos of how that subframe mount work

Edit -

I think the ideal solution would be to completely modify the subframe to raise the mounting location up into it and use a bolt parallel to the ground to attach the subframe link. You probably would also need to make a custom frame mount so that you could move it up without having interference with the frame. Just a thought.

[SP-M3E30]

I think the ideal solution would be to completely modify the subframe to raise the mounting location up into it and use a bolt parallel to the ground to attach the subframe link. You probably would also need to make a custom frame mount so that you could move it up without having interference with the frame. Just a thought.

You're right. It's also my opinion. On the first version of the adjustable front control arm of AKG it was already designed like this, and in my opinion it's not the better solution because of the limited displacement for the spherical bearing.


Honnestly you should modify the subframe like this one :

[inastrangeland]

If you look at John's (s14power) version, he has raised the mount on the subframe to get better travel...

[AndrewLang]

You're right. It's also my opinion. On the first version of the adjustable front control arm of AKG it was already designed like this, and in my opinion it's not the better solution because of the limited displacement for the spherical bearing.


Honnestly you should modify the subframe like this one :
[ATTACH]6549[/ATTACH]

That actually looks quite simple to do probably will put that on the winter project list.

[LeeVuong]

Hey Andrew.

Let me hit you with a silly question. It seems you saved about 0.4kg on the assembly. Except for that small weight saving, is there any other advantage on a track-dedicated car? Wider track? Extra caster?

[julien]

hi lee,

it's 5.6lb 2.54kg for the akg. Andrew save 0.18kg.




the John product are lighter and different than the akg

[AndrewLang]

Hey Andrew.

Let me hit you with a silly question. It seems you saved about 0.4kg on the assembly. Except for that small weight saving, is there any other advantage on a track-dedicated car? Wider track? Extra caster?

Lee,

Personally, if I could continue using the stock control arms I would, to save the money. However, I am trying to run 255/35/18 hoosiers and I need all the adjustment I can get, mostly moving the wheel forward in the wheel well. The spherical bearings also open up my options for making custom attachment points. This should allow me to raise the attachment points on the subframe and frame rail to compensate for lowering the car excessively. I also like the triangulation of the wishbone which is more ideal for lateral loads vs the OEM style. The OEM arm is a compromise design to allow street cars to make sharper turns.

The biggest reason for me is easy track width, camber, and caster adjustments. I like to try different setups all the time.

[Mpassioned]

I've been runnning the AKG arms for about a year now without issue.
I am really happy with the steering feedback and how the car turns in, as opposed to the stock set up. I feel like the car is more like a big go cart now, compared to the feeedback the stock metal control arms gave me.
I am very happy with their products, (engine, trans mounts, and DTM shifter) as I have used them for some time.

[AndrewLang]

Progress on the install has stalled as I try to figure out how I'm going to get past what I call a compatibility issue. The AST 4200 suspension I have has "too much droop" for these arms. The droop travel is limited by the way the arms mount to the subframe and I'd hate to have the weight of the whole strut on that bearing as it bottoms out. The easy solution is to install some kind of droop limiter on the strut. Also, I think I can get it all to fit if I remove my roll center spacers but I'd like to keep these in place if I can. I'm going to try to implement the solution I've been wanting to do for a while which basically involves raising the top of the strut by about an inch or so.

I'm also working on rewiring the entire car with a standalone EMS so that's taken priority for now.

[LeeVuong]

Hi Andrew

Do you mean the control arm's end (at the knuckle) is too high, and you that you have a bind near the attachement point on the subframe?