Fully Adjustable Front Control Arms DTM Style

[AndrewLang]

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?

That's correct Lee, If we modified the subframe to have the double sheer mount style like in some of the photos above then the wishbone would have plenty of vertical travel but as of right now its a problem. Even with your 1 inch spacers off my shock has too much droop to connect it all together without having the arm being the limiter on droop, which I don't want, the shock should be the limitation on droop. I'm trying to figure out right now how much I need top raise the strut top to make this all work the way I want. currently it looks like over 1 inch would be necessary.

[LeeVuong]

Hi andrew.

I am sure you have seen this before.

http://www.s14.net/forums/showthread...666#post309666

It seems there's room to move the onner pickup-point by 1/2" if using a U channel and welding it into the subframe. The U channel would go into the subframe, necessitating to cut thru the metal ro insert that U channel, but it would also clear the area where the bending would happen.

I will inclue a drawing in the next minutes.

[LeeVuong]

[AndrewLang]

Hi andrew.

I am sure you have seen this before.

http://www.s14.net/forums/showthread...666#post309666

It seems there's room to move the onner pickup-point by 1/2" if using a U channel and welding it into the subframe. The U channel would go into the subframe, necessitating to cut thru the metal ro insert that U channel, but it would also clear the area where the bending would happen.

I will inclue a drawing in the next minutes.

Lee,

I hadn't actually seen that thread before but yes. Since you have the drawing is this a part you have made and sold? I'll shoot you an e-mail for more information. I was planning eventually to do this and trying to raise the pickup point and make that double sheer attachment but for now I didn't think I have the time as I have a race in two weeks, but if there's some kind of weld on kit that would save me a lot of time.

[sprytel]

This is essentially how I installed them on my car. I tried to maintain the same geometry as the factory parts, meaning I didn't sink the pivot axis up into the subframe as others have suggested. Not because I don't believe that it could help, it was more of my fear that I'd screw up something up and make it worse that it was.
As it turned out, the system works great for me as is, so I don't see the need at this point.

[LeeVuong]

Nice job. ;-)

[AndrewLang]

This is essentially how I installed them on my car. I tried to maintain the same geometry as the factory parts, meaning I didn't sink the pivot axis up into the subframe as others have suggested. Not because I don't believe that it could help, it was more of my fear that I'd screw up something up and make it worse that it was.
As it turned out, the system works great for me as is, so I don't see the need at this point.

Raising the front attachment point without raising the rear attachment point would change the anti-dive characteristics of the design. Ideally you'd move up all suspension attachment points up together to lower the chassis to the floor without changing suspension geometry, unless that's part of what you're going for. Did you use the supplied hardware from AKG in that joint or did you source something else?

[sprytel]

just to be clear, that photo is not of my car, that was just used to illustrate the concept.
The photo in my post does move the pickup point up into the subframe, I cannot attest to how that person treated the rear pick up point.

Sorry for the confusion.

I don't think I have any pictures of my front subframe after it was modified.

[AndrewLang]

Ok I finally got this done. About time, we race next weekend...

[inastrangeland]

What suspension are you running? How much did you raise the front shock towers. What are you running on the rear.

[AndrewLang]

ast 4200. shock tower is raised approximately 1.25". AST suspension tends to have alot of travel for a race suspension. On the E30 it results in a huge amount of droop travel since the suspension mounting points are relatively low. On the rear I run the stock spring and damper location. But I am running out of bump travel, the shock is about an inch from the bump stops right now. In the near future we will also rebuild the rear shock mount location.

[inastrangeland]

Are you planning on rear coilovers? I would be interested in knowing what modifications are needed to get better suspension travel in the rear.

[TBest90M3]

boy, Andrew, when you put your mind to something you get it done yesterday, lol. That's awesome. Great stuff. Can't wait to hear how it works for you. The AKG arms look wicked too.

I'm running a rear coilover. The rear coilover bolts into the rear cage tube (the tube that connects the rear shock towers). You can machine an end-bung that any off-the-shelf race coilover/shock can bolt to, from there sleeve them into the end of the rear shock tower tubes and weld. I notched the frame rail a bit and boxed out the rear shock towers... Gained quite a bit of tire clearance doing it this way.

[AndrewLang]

That's an interesting solution. I happened to come across an E46 over the weekend that was for sale and the owner said it was originally sold by BMW motorsport. The cage was supposedly built by Matter. I took a ton of photos for myself and these seem relevant to where this discussion has gone.

[LeeVuong]

I love what is done to strengthen the rear towers. Simple triangulation.