Zl1 suspension upgrade

[Nor Cal ZL1]

Originally Posted by ZO6 Bryan

I see nothing in that illustration to control the camber curve other than the position of the LCA.

[ZO6 Bryan]

Originally Posted by Nor Cal ZL1

I see nothing in that illustration to control the camber curve other than the position of the LCA.

The camber will continue to gain until the lower control arm passes perpendicular with the strut. Not after it passes horizontal to the ground as you may have been thinking.
But maybe that's what you meant.

[Nor Cal ZL1]

[QUOTE=ZO6 Bryan;8075858]The camber will continue to gain until the lower control arm passes perpendicular with the strut. Not after it passes horizontal to the ground as you may have been thinking.

The effect of the LCA passing horizontal has to pull the bottom of the assy inward either reducing the total gain or stopping it. There is no way possible the the arm pulling towards the piviot point instead of pushing away as in stock configuration has any camber gain advantage over the engineered design.

[ZO6 Bryan]

No look at that diagram again. You would be right if the strut was straight up and down vertical. But it's not. It is angled into the car. The lower control arm will push out until it becomes perpendicular with the strut. Then it will pull in. Not the point when it's horizontal with the ground. This point is a lot higher than the horizontal to the ground you are talking about.

[ZO6 Bryan]

Once it passes this point.

[Nor Cal ZL1]

Originally Posted by ZO6 Bryan

Once it passes this point.

Bryan to a degree I can agree with this.
However the effective length of the LCA has been shortened as it is now traveling inwards toward the pivot point of the LCA. This is drawing the assembly and the bottom of the tire towards the car. At that point the gain is minimized, or neutralized as compared to the LCA in the proper position of lengthening as it travels through the arch of travel, which will push the bottom of the tire away from the car and have greater gains.

[jkidcusto]

I would spend money elsewhere. Money on power comes to mind.

[CompulsiveZL1]

I did the Eibach Pro Kit .5 front and .8 rear lowering and love them. Not too low and works well with the Mag ride. I road course my car - only - so cant speak for the drag strip. Thanks.

[PGZL1]

Would BMR's rear lower control arms improve both 1/4 mile performance as well as handling?

[jessrayo]

Originally Posted by PGZL1

Would BMR's rear lower control arms improve both 1/4 mile performance as well as handling?

The thing with the ZL1 is the camber rates on the rear can be set for drag racing or for cornering. The car launches better with no camber but corners better with a lot of camber. BMR makes a set of adjustable camber lower control arms. I have not purchased them yet but I have been very close to pulling the trigger.

So I guess the short answer is they would only if you changed the alignment for whatever you planned on doing with the car. Actually BMR uses a better bushing material than stock and the parts have more torsional rigidity so if you compared a stock car at a certain alignment setting and then drove the BMR, it would be a little stiffer. Should corner better.

[djdyj]

The car is a handling champ and a magazine darling in that regard. I would spend money elsewhere. Money on power comes to mind.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Nor Cal ZL1

Bryan to a degree I can agree with this.
However the effective length of the LCA has been shortened as it is now traveling inwards toward the pivot point of the LCA. This is drawing the assembly and the bottom of the tire towards the car. At that point the gain is minimized, or neutralized as compared to the LCA in the proper position of lengthening as it travels through the arch of travel, which will push the bottom of the tire away from the car and have greater gains.

If you start at "full droop", camber gain for a strut suspension slows down over the entire range of suspension travel. In the attachment, the red trace approaches zero.

It's probably possible for camber gain to go all the way to adding positive camber with further bump travel, but it's unlikely as doing so would involve an unusual bump position. How much of that position starts out as revised suspension height may not matter, as you're likely to run into the bump stop first.

Here's a graph I put together maybe 8 or 9 years ago (obviously not for a 5th gen Camaro) that should at least illustrate this.


Norm

[ZO6 Bryan]

Correct. You will hit the bump stops long before camber starts to go positive. It will never reverse direction, but it will slow.

[jon6.0]

Originally Posted by jessrayo

The thing with the ZL1 is the camber rates on the rear can be set for drag racing or for cornering. The car launches better with no camber but corners better with a lot of camber. BMR makes a set of adjustable camber lower control arms. I have not purchased them yet but I have been very close to pulling the trigger.

So I guess the short answer is they would only if you changed the alignment for whatever you planned on doing with the car. Actually BMR uses a better bushing material than stock and the parts have more torsional rigidity so if you compared a stock car at a certain alignment setting and then drove the BMR, it would be a little stiffer. Should corner better.

I did the Firestone Lifetime Alignment. I talked to them beforehand and made sure they would do my settings and not what the book said. They just asked that I not come in monthly to change my specs. I'm doing a drag setup for the racing season here in Az and won't change it until I put some G-Force Rival's on next spring.