paradocs98

Just placed an order with Tarett to get all the appropriate suspension pieces needed for a proper track alignment. I ordered adjustable thrust arm bushings as well as inner monoball bearings for the front lower control arms, and a set of shims to increase camber all around. I also ordered adjustable rear toe links, the ones that are lower profile and allow 19" wheel clearance.

Tarett is suggesting that I consider front tie rods so that a safe amount of tie rod thread engagement is retained after adding front camber. Have others found this to be necessary? Or can you get -2.5 deg front camber using a combination of LCA shims and top strut mount camber plate adjustment, without having to worry about running out of tie rod threads? Am I understanding this correctly?

Thanks in advance.

myBailey07

I know of others that have gotten to -2.5 without needing them doing what you mention above, so my guess is you're okay. I got them to be safe as I think -2.5 is probably about the limit you can go without needing them. I since then went to -3 front and am happy that I got them, simply for the adjustability options it gave me.

Not sure if I helped or confused the topic even more...

jphughan

I got to -2.5 with just shims and thrust arm bushings, and my top mount is only about halfway inboard even though my car only got -1.5 stock while others were able to hit -2. So I doubt you'd need the tie rods and you shouldn't even need the monoball ends unless you wanted them for some other reason, though Orthojoe said the Cup monoballs worked better in the front since they include a thick shim and longer LCA studs, although it might be overkill for your camber target. Then again, if you're going aftermarket anyway....

My aversions to the tie rods were my desire to keep the car as stock as I can, needing to pay for parts that I may not need, and the fact that these tie rods allow bump steer adjustment, and from what I've read, those parts compared to more OEM-style parts tend to have shorter lifespans, increasing their true cost further -- which is doubly annoying if you don't care about bump steer adjustment and don't even need the tie rods. But I haven't found any options that don't include bump steer adjustment, unlike toe links where there are some that have it and others that don't.

myBailey07

Spot on^^ Without reading through OJ's thread I don't understand the need for the monoball ends, unless it is handling related? I have -3 upfront now and they were not an alignment limitation?

jphughan

Apparently they do sharpen up handling (more noticeable in rear than front at least on 911s where there's more information about them), but Joe said when you add solid thrust arm bushings, any preload that was there is transferred to the rubber in the LCA ends, which is why he wanted to make those solid -- but that begs the question where the preload moves at that point, which he didn't specify and I didn't bother asking about. Still, I think the main reason was the built-in shim and longer studs since he might want to go past even -3. Out of curiosity, do you know how much shim you're running in your setup and how much LCA thread penetration you have left? Have you decided to stick with -3 after all? I thought for a while you were thinking about going back to -2.5.

usctrojanGT3

If you lower the car a bit you might be able to get -3 camber on the stock toe links.

myBailey07

Good feedback^^ Thx! I'll measure next time I get under the car. Don't know top of my head. I'm going to stick with -3 up front as I like the turn-in and tire wear more. My challenge is the rear in that at -2.5 I am rubbing on the right side at TWS with the 20's as the shims pushed the wheel out a tiny bit too much. I backed the rears down to -2, so I am -3/-2 now. I talked to a bunch of smarter folks and none saw a problem with that, so I am just going to leave it and just drive the car. Tired of chasing alignment....just wanna drive

Bill Lehman

I don't know if I buy into the thread engagement issue promoted by Tarett but I bought the tie rods anyway. The tie rod does offer bump steer adjustment which would be important if you lowered ride height.

orthojoe

According to the shop that installed the monoballs (on the GT3, but it's the same front suspension), he had to force the OEM rubber bushing to slide in, whereas when he installed the monoball, it slid in perfectly with no 'forcing'. He is a bit of a perfectionist, but he maintains and raced GT3 cups, and he really didn't like doing the install without the monoballs. BGB is a proponent of them as well. Apparently, in the rear, it made a huge difference in their race cars.

I don't think it's a must, but it's good to do

mooty

if you lower a bit, you will have lot more camber without tie rod. but you will have other issues.
it's not a part here and there. there are a lot of moving parts. have a good shop figur it out for you. that is why you pay them. i have ran many platform. on each platform i hear push, lose, not driveable etc... strangely every platform i had drove great.....

orthojoe

+1. That is the truth. Fwiw, my gt4 drives great

stingray84

After much internal debate and discussion with orthojoe, I bought the tie rods from Ira@tarett. He and Orthojoe both said its a safety issue running stock tie rods as the thread engagement is not enough at high negative camber. I further probed between caster puck and tie rod, which one is more important. The answer I got is tie rod as its related to track safety. I don't want to take chances when it comes to safety so I say **** it even though it could be an overkill. I'm already spending more than 2k on suspension parts and alignment labor. What's 500 for a peace of mind?