|
|
01-01-2024, 06:16 PM | #331 | |
Brigadier General
3916
Rep 4,180
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-01-2024, 07:55 PM | #332 |
Colonel
1548
Rep 2,072
Posts |
Interesting, I’ll have to look at the difference. Either way though, this is a track only car so I’m not super worried about the longevity of the boots. Thanks!
__________________
Current '21 DG X5MC, '22 X5M50i, '11 E90 M3
Recent Past '12 E92 M3 ZCP, '08 E93 M3, '18 F80 ZCP, '04 E46 M3 I think I have an M3 problem. |
Appreciate
0
|
01-02-2024, 09:43 AM | #334 |
Captain
503
Rep 649
Posts |
I'm also fairly sure that the GC just uses a standard bearing and conical washer like the OEM arm solution?
SPL is the only one I've seen that is definitely a conical seat on the bearing itself. Happy to be corrected though. |
Appreciate
0
|
01-02-2024, 10:03 AM | #336 |
Colonel
1548
Rep 2,072
Posts |
yeah, looking at another thread they include a conical washer. thing is though, i'm wondering if the issue really is the size of the bearing. if the GC arms have a bearing that's more in line with the OE size, it would be a smaller lever arm than the meyle / lemforder solution.
__________________
Current '21 DG X5MC, '22 X5M50i, '11 E90 M3
Recent Past '12 E92 M3 ZCP, '08 E93 M3, '18 F80 ZCP, '04 E46 M3 I think I have an M3 problem. |
Appreciate
0
|
01-02-2024, 06:52 PM | #337 | |
Major
1395
Rep 1,300
Posts |
Quote:
I must say that I'm not too impressed with the quality and design (mostly design) of the GC rear arms. I mean like they'll work fine, but design could be improved. If I were to do it again, I would go SPL and add rubber covers on the rod end. https://www.race-parts.com/raceparts...e-rubber-boots |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-11-2024, 04:58 AM | #338 | |
New Member
5
Rep 10
Posts |
Quote:
Originally the cone of the bearing sits in the cone of the steering knuckle. This has the advantage that shear stress can almost never occur on the screw. As soon as the bearing would shift, it would only increase the force on the screw in the longitudinal direction. If you now install an adapter, this advantage is eliminated and the bearing can move on the flat side. This creates shear stresses and the screw can tear off. Even increasing the tightening torque wouldn't do much as this place is simply not designed for it. Only a huge increase could make a difference, but the screw and thread won't be able to withstand that. At this point, in my opinion, there are only two correct solutions. 1. Uniball arms where the cone is integrated 2. Also provide the bearing with a cone and install a washer that has a cone on both sides |
|
Appreciate
2
leftfootbr8king569.50 amg6975503.00 |
01-11-2024, 02:16 PM | #339 | |
Lieutenant
570
Rep 512
Posts |
Quote:
Agreed, 100%. After one of my passenger side bolts sheared and sent the car into a spin while my drivers side bolt was loose I went with option 1. people keep insisting these things are fine. If this failure’s consequences were just an inconvenience (like a failed throttle actuator) then go ahead and see what happens. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-12-2024, 10:11 AM | #341 |
Dont listen to me
808
Rep 578
Posts |
after reading this thread three separate times, my current opinion is that leaving my two OEM upper arms alone and dealing with a little more deflection is better than any gains I might see by changing the two rubber outer bushings to bearings with the possibility of suspension failures that lead to crashing Especially if I do the trailing arm and lower spring/camber arms with all bearings.
I'll change the lower spring arm and trailing arm rubber bushings out, but only way I'd mess with the two upper arms is by going with SPL Parts arms (or equivalent). It's just not worth it for my simply HPDE track car.
__________________
Instagram: @thatwhitem4
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2024, 01:56 PM | #342 |
Enlisted Member
32
Rep 38
Posts |
Based on all this research and the fact that I already broke one bolt mid corner on the race track, I'll be removing my spherical bearings and replacing them with Powerflex bushings instead. Seems like these should fit properly, and without the high risk of bolts snapping.
|
01-21-2024, 02:53 PM | #343 |
Colonel
1548
Rep 2,072
Posts |
So I got my missing groundcontrol washers, and ended up with a set of ones meant for the spherical conversion (bought them before changing my mind). it's an interesting comparison
the GC ones are 1.5mm thicker, and have an odd lip on the flat side. i was going to say that it mates up with the spherical bushing inside the arm, but it doesn't -- the opening is smaller than the OD of the bushing. hopefully they aren't just wrong, but not sure what the purpose of that cut out is.
__________________
Current '21 DG X5MC, '22 X5M50i, '11 E90 M3
Recent Past '12 E92 M3 ZCP, '08 E93 M3, '18 F80 ZCP, '04 E46 M3 I think I have an M3 problem. |
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2024, 04:41 PM | #344 |
Brigadier General
3916
Rep 4,180
Posts |
So in theory the GC arms would still introduce the same abnormal shear forces on the bolt as the spherical conversion.
Interesting to see the PF bush has the tapered washer integrated with the inner sleeve. That should eliminate the shear on the bolt as it spreads the load to the bush. |
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2024, 05:13 PM | #345 | |
Colonel
707
Rep 2,449
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2024, 05:45 PM | #346 | |
Major
1395
Rep 1,300
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-22-2024, 03:32 AM | #347 |
Brigadier General
3916
Rep 4,180
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-22-2024, 07:52 AM | #348 |
Colonel
1548
Rep 2,072
Posts |
can someone tell me the full height of the stack w/ washer on the spherical conversion? i'm still wondering if it's (at least partially) a lever arm issue, with the spherical just being too big.
__________________
Current '21 DG X5MC, '22 X5M50i, '11 E90 M3
Recent Past '12 E92 M3 ZCP, '08 E93 M3, '18 F80 ZCP, '04 E46 M3 I think I have an M3 problem. |
Appreciate
0
|
01-22-2024, 10:38 AM | #349 | |
Captain
503
Rep 649
Posts |
Quote:
I would also say, I would not hesitate to run spherical on the toe link, the one on the very back side of the knuckle. I think that will see the most benefit from the spherical, has not had any issues, and doesn't even have the factory taper. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-22-2024, 12:10 PM | #350 | ||
Enlisted Member
32
Rep 38
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
01-22-2024, 12:46 PM | #351 |
Captain
503
Rep 649
Posts |
I can't keep track of what we call them. This position:
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-22-2024, 01:10 PM | #352 |
Enlisted Member
32
Rep 38
Posts |
Yes, they are solid.
However, for the non-M models, the arms are shorter and not interchangable with M parts. These non-M arms are also sheet metal, with rubber bushing with similar dimensions as the spherical bearings this thread is all about. |
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|