Its lookin' like it time for an upgrade - Passed the road test!

[HP2]

The washers account for manufacturuing variances, bushings relative location, and old age settling in these cars. You may or may not need them. If you put your control arms in and they have fore/aft slop before tightening things up, you may need a washer or two. If the arms are already snug in their final position without the washers, then there is no way you will be able to get the arm in with washers, which would produce binding during suspension cycling.

My current car did not need any washers. My last one needed one on one side and two on the other.  With factory assembly tolerances that allowed up to .25 inch variations in some places, it is a judgement call on if you need them or not.

[BIGSHCLUNK]

Jason is right, the washers fit inside the bushing. Yes it's a tight fit, you won't be able to push them in with your hand. I pressed them in with a vise. A little awkward, but I held the uca (with bushing installed) with the inner and out bushing washers in between the jaws of a vise then tightened it up until the washers bottomed out.

Scott, so you just "vised them in"? ..  worth a try. It also kinda threw me off that the washers wernt offset also. 

[BIGSHCLUNK]

The washers account for manufacturuing variances, bushings relative location, and old age settling in these cars. You may or may not need them. If you put your control arms in and they have fore/aft slop before tightening things up, you may need a washer or two. If the arms are already snug in their final position without the washers, then there is no way you will be able to get the arm in with washers, which would produce binding during suspension cycling.

My current car did not need any washers. My last one needed one on one side and two on the other.  With factory assembly tolerances that allowed up to .25 inch variations in some places, it is a judgement call on if you need them or not.

I think you would have to use both of them, cause the bolt is one sloppy fit by itself (refer to the pic). It dosent make allot of sense to me that the factory bushing would use the entire bushing sleeve as the "contact area" for the bolt (for adjustment) and the offsets would use that (3/32's???) from the flare of the washer. Just sayin'    Hmmmm   

[dodj]

The washers account for manufacturuing variances, bushings relative location, and old age settling in these cars. You may or may not need them.

Have a hard time believing that. Where they are going to be installed has nothing to do with 'settling' and old age.
They were designed to be used with the bushing and should be IMO. Without them, the small diameter bushing sleeve would 'bite' into the 'shock tower' part of the frame and make adjustment difficult. 

Without the washers, you would have a very sloppy UCA.

[CUDA JAS]

Have a hard time believing that. Where they are going to be installed has nothing to do with 'settling' and old age.
They were designed to be used with the bushing and should be IMO. Without them, the small diameter bushing sleeve would 'bite' into the 'shock tower' part of the frame and make adjustment difficult. 

Without the washers, you would have a very sloppy UCA.

 

[BIGSHCLUNK]

This is from bbodies- seems to be contrary to the diagram I've seen here and on abodies... I'm getting more confused as I go.

I've installed MANY offset bushings like that. Whoever told you to press the washers in with a vice is dead RIGHT. That's how you do it. Once they are pressed all the way on, they will fit. However, I will say this. I don't know how you installed all the bushings. But the correct way if you are trying to increase caster is with the arrows facing the FRAME on the front bushings and the CONTROL ARM on the rear bushings. This gives the biggest caster increase. If you point the arrows all toward the frame, all you have increased is the camber.

so which way is it?? I'd like to get these hung tonite!

[CUDA JAS]

here is a link to a dicussionon the offset bushings on Moparts.

http://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=QuestionAnswer&Number=5399303&Searchpage=1&Main=5399303&Words=+runningman&topic=&Search=true

This seems to be the accepted way to install the bushings.

I am not sure if yours are the same way, because I can not determine the orinatation of your arms in your pics.

Did you install the bushings as per the directions in the box?

Jason

[brads70]

This is what I have drawing wise?

[HP2]

Okay, went out, took a look, and verified I actually have all of those washers in my current car. Not sure why I recalled differently.

I did install them OPPOSITE of the Moog instructions for improved caster.

I'll stop polluting the thread now.

[dodj]

Brads pic above is for more pos caster, and that is what you want. In effect, when the bushings are put in that way, the rear of the UCA ends up being a little closer to the centreline of the car, and the front mount of the UCA is held out a little further from the centreline of the car. This slight difference in mounting position (from stock), effectively moves the upper ball joint a little bit towards the rear of the car, giving you more positive caster.
MOOG never envisioned their offset bushings being used this way, that is why their instructions confuse the issue - toss them.

[CUDA JAS]

SO I get what everyone is saying....the rear of the UCA ends up being a little closer to the centreline of the car, and the front mount of the UCA is held out a little further from the centreline of the car.

But that diagram and the picture with it is still confusing...the arrow is on the big part of the bushing, if you install it pointing away from the car (towards the fender) in the front of the UCA are you not effectively moving the front of the UCA in towards the centerline of the car???

Or am I missing something here.

Yes I know that i posted a link to the same info, but the more I look at it in preparation to install my bushings the more confused I get?

Jason

[BIGSHCLUNK]

I'm gona be on sucide watch here pretty soon. 

I think that diagram is azz backward!!!!!!!!!  The direction of the holes should be the way the arrows are NOT the direction of the arrows.......  ()

I talked with a customer who owns an alignment shop this morning, and that was his thought. BUT not until after he asked me why are you screwing with it to begin with? He said these wear really fast. (remember my comment about the "contact" area???) And seeing I HAVENT had alignment issues, I should run stock and be done with it.  BTW this guy owns a MOPAR, just sayin'

Feel free to chime in suicide watch dosent end till 5PM CST 

[CUDA JAS]

I'm gona be on sucide watch here pretty soon. 

I think that diagram is azz backward!!!!!!!!!  The direction of the holes should be the way the arrows are NOT the direction of the arrows.......  ()

I talked with a customer who owns an alignment shop this morning, and that was his thought. BUT not until after he asked me why are you screwing with it to begin with? He said these wear really fast. (remember my comment about the "contact" area???) And seeing I had alignment issues, I should run stock and be done with it.  BTW this guy owns a MOPAR, just sayin'

Feel free to chime in suicide watch dosent end till 5PM CST

Oh man...i am sorry I hope I did not start this.

 I am an idiot.  The diagram is right.  Of course the UCA moves int he direction of the arrow.  The Bolt has to go throught a fixed point (the mountign int on the inner fender) and if the narow portion of the bushing is closeste to the frame, it will push the arm out towards the fender.  And the oposite wodul be true on the rear of the UCA.

I guess i was not thinking 4th dimensionally (back to the future reference)!!!!    

Sorry about that. 

Jason (AKA DUMAZZ)

[brads70]

In regard to the bushing arrow and installation ..... the goal is to have the center of the upper ball joint ball back further than the center of the lower ball joint ball ( looking at it from the side) giving more castor.
We don't use bias ply tires anymore and need more castor for radial tires. Clear as mud? 

[72bluNblu]

The diagram is right. Now granted I printed it out and laid it on the hood of my car so the diagram "front of car" was pointed forward to keep things straight. Not sure why the diagram puts the front of the car facing down, but if everything is oriented properly the diagram is correct to maximize positive caster. I'd alter the diagram to put the "front of car" arrow "up", but at this point I think it would just really confuse everyone.

And yes, the additional + caster is necessary for a well handling car running radials. You can get by without it, but the car will feel much more stable with more positive camber.

Just print the diagram out, put the "front of car" arrow pointing to the front of the car, and tape the sucker to the hood. Then you can hold the UCA's up to the car and make sure everything is where it needs to be and makes sense.