Does anyone have a source for weld in camber boxes that will work on a 914? Time to beef up the front end a tad I think.

SmartRacing

Tony @ TC Design has some pictures on his site of an install he did....

more pics @ monster V8 mods

http://www.ground-control.com/

Hey, John.... you may not remember me, but I used to auto-x in San Diego with you (SCCA) a few years ago. My 914 was yellow then. You drove it once around the parking lot to check the shifter slop for me...

Anyway, I made my own weld-in camber plates, which wasn't too bad, but if I did it over again, I'd go with the ground control units, even though they aren't weld-in. They have a better bearing system in the upper mount.

Check out this thread: Camber plate discussion

I'm not sure if the Ground Control camberplates are the same design as in the scetch below, but if they are, it's a crappy design IMO

the upper spring hat is machined to a concave surface
the bottom of the camberplate is machined to a mirror convex surface
these two contact (specially under load)
supposedly, they did this to take the load off the spherical bearing

because everything binds up now, they incorporated a needle bearing in the spring hat so you can still steer the car (axial movement of the strut)

when sideloaded, the design will now pivot over the top of the spring hat / bottom of the camberplate instead of the spherical bearing
because of this, you will crush both the needle bearing and the spherical bearing and have the possibility of bending the shock shaft

it totally defeats the purpose of a uni-ball setup (friction/binding free movement)

Hi Kevin, I do remember, so I guess I'm not as old as I thought!!?? I had seen these sites, but I was hoping maybe there was someone local? I am not sure which plate I'm going to use once the box gets welded in so that will take some thought. Thanks guys for the help. Oh yea Mike, I mailed the original hub back to you yesterday and I need a price for the studs, you can call me at work if you want.

QUOTE (Jeroen @ Apr 20 2005, 05:26 AM)

when sideloaded, the design will now pivot over the top of the spring hat / bottom of the camberplate instead of the spherical bearing because of this, you will crush both the needle bearing and the spherical bearing and have the possibility of bending the shock shaft

Hmmm. I don't see what you're saying.

One of the problems with my current (most) spherical bearing only setup is the spring loads put the spherical bearing into thrust, which they are not designed to do. This system accomodates that thrust load much more appropriately.

I didn't think so until I understood how they work.

Now, the down side of this ground control deal, IMO, you give up front suspension travel.

Thinking about side loads.... Loads are tranmitted to the spherical bearing in both cases, even if you create this stack to deal with the thrust loads.



P.S. I enjoy these debates because we all learn from them.

AircooledRacing.com

Tell Steve Fred sent you.

QUOTE (Jeroen @ Apr 20 2005, 05:26 AM)

I'm not sure if the Ground Control camberplates are the same design as in the scetch below, but if they are, it's a crappy design IMO the upper spring hat is machined to a concave surface the bottom of the camberplate is machined to a mirror convex surface these two contact (specially under load) supposedly, they did this to take the load off the spherical bearing because everything binds up now, they incorporated a needle bearing in the spring hat so you can still steer the car (axial movement of the strut) when sideloaded, the design will now pivot over the top of the spring hat / bottom of the camberplate instead of the spherical bearing because of this, you will crush both the needle bearing and the spherical bearing and have the possibility of bending the shock shaft it totally defeats the purpose of a uni-ball setup (friction/binding free movement)

Most spherical bearings are not made for high axial loads. This is not a problem with torsion bar suspensions since the load on the spherical bearing is radial, except for the damping forces of course. If you are using a coil-over setup, which would apply high axial loads, the Ground-Control style which you have pictured is what is needed.

Oh, and as far as crushing the needle bearing or bending the shaft, that would depend on the amount of friction between the convex/concave surfaces. I'm not sure that would be a problem. The radius of the convex/concave surfaces should equal their distance from the center of rotation of the spherical bearing for a proper design.


Andrew

as long as there's no or little load (up down movement), the shock shaft will pivot on the spherical bearing (like it's supposed to)
but under little or heavy load, the convex/concave surface will bind and eventually lock and that is where the pivot point will be then
from this point on, if the strut is sideloaded, the spherical bearing will still be sideloaded and since it is no longer a pivot point, it will just be mashed against it's retainer

the convex/concave surfaces will NOT slide over each other leaving the sph.bearing the pivot point. they will bind and lock
BAD design...

Yes,


Aircooled racing, Ask for Steve 717 432-4116, they come with the spherical bearing and you need to cut the metal out and weld them in, I used his stuff, and it worked out very well, I used a combination sawsall and cut off tool to get the box to fit. it really is not a bad job. The forward outside of his camber box meets with the body seem and after cutting the hole a touch small I ground it to fit, it was very doable. the biggest issue was getting the camber box a the proper angle. This is key.

Erik Madsen

Mine are from The Racers Group. But as you can see in the photo, I had to modify the gas tank.

Steve

Thanks Steve, I had seen yours once when the car was at Black Forest. My stock tank is gone so that is not a problem. I have to worry about my new blurple paint.....