Any idea what that would be? I'm starting to feel kind of leary about the Hotchkis setup just from reading this.
Honestly, no. Hotchkis is the only manufacturer that redoes the front anchor to improve camber gain (at the expense of anti-dive, but with 1.12" torsion bars that's not something I need). Firm Feel, Magnumforce, and a few others make tubular uppers with bushed ends, so that may be an option.
I just installed a set of offset bushings in the stock UCA's on my Duster. I was just going the "cheap" route, since I've got too many projects at the moment, but I'm impressed with the results. I just did a rough alignment myself, but it drives straight, turns well, doesn't pull, and appears to have a good amount of negative camber as it sits (at least -.5*, I can see the angle on the wheels). So when that goes to the alignment shop I'll figure out exactly where I'm at, I was waiting for the new torsion bars to settle out a little first to dial in the ride height. If I can get decent numbers with the stock arms and offset bushings, that may be an option too. The Duster is going to get a manual steering box when I swap the engine, so I don't need as much caster. Really, the biggest reason to run tubular arms is to get the alignment to modern specs at a decent ride height. I'm sure they flex less, and they're probably lighter too. But, those are things that show up when you start comparing lap times, not nearly so much when you're street driving. I'm not saying they aren't an improvement, they definitely are. But I'm becoming less convinced that they're worth the trade off on daily drivers, where you're seeing more mileage and worse conditions than most weekend cruisers.
If you turn the ball around is there a groove on that side too? I'm thinking that is a grease groove ( and no grease?)
No, its wear. There i
s another groove, but its 180* out on the same side as this one and not as deep. Hard to show it in the pictures, but there's nothing uniform about the grooves, they aren't machined, they're worn in. Not coincidentally, they grooves are the same length as the shoulder of the heim joint between the failed seals, and there's a matching worn section on the inside of the heim. When you rotate the ball so the grooves are back inline with the shoulder of the heim (like they were on the car), you can feel the ball catching on the inside of the heim instead of rotating smoothly. In fact, the seals are really only pulled out on the very ends where they overlap the damage on the ball. I almost wonder if the seals were pulled out by the damaged ball, instead of the seals popping out and causing the damage to the ball.
I'll post more pictures of the heim tomorrow. I've got some other things to take care of, but I'm interested to see what the other 3 heims look like too. I didn't notice the seals popping out on the others, so maybe this one was defective somehow.
I'm looking at these as replacements. Seem like a step up, but still readily available...
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/HAL-PCMR10T/Brand QA1 Precision Products
Manufacturer's Part Number PCMR10T
Part Type Rod Ends
Product Line QA1 PCM Series Rod Ends
Summit Racing Part Number HAL-PCMR10T
UPC 806990003119
Rod End Thread Size 5/8-18 RH in.
Rod End Attachment Male threads
Rod End Construction 2-piece
Rod End Style PTFE lined
Jam Nut Included No
Thread Length 1.625 in.
Rod End Head Bore Size 0.625 in.
Rod End Head Diameter 1.500 in.
Rod End Head Width 0.750 in.
Grease Fitting No
Rod End Centerline Length 2.625 in.
Heat-Treated Yes
Rod End Ball Width (in) 0.750 in.
Rod End Misalign Angle (degrees) 26 degrees
Rod End Static Load Capacity (lbs) 15,200 lbs.
Rod End Material Chromoly
Rod End Finish Black oxide
Quantity Sold individually.
QA1 PCM Series rod ends feature a 2-piece, chromoly steel design and a heat-treated, black oxide coated body for corrosion resistance. The ball is heat-treated as well with a precision-ground, hard chrome plated finish. QA1 PCM Series rod ends are built to last.
