negative wedge plates angle?

Why bother.
Its really not worth the effort.
Drop em 1" and save the time.
Seriously...

2bav8 said:

Why bother.
Its really not worth the effort.
Drop em 1" and save the time.
Seriously...

Click to expand...

I totally agree.

Mine are down 1.25" and no problem what-so-ever, even under track conditions at speed at major NASCAR ovals.

HistoricMustang

flynchicknfarmR said:

has anyone done a negative wedge kit? do you know what angle it is? I want to lower the control arms like the shelbys which move down 1 inch without ball joint bind but a kit sold by (ultimate mustangs) shows that you can drop by 1.75 but its $240 for a couple ball joints , a couple plates and handful of bolts. i work with metal cutting lasers and have access to a full machine shop so i could just make the plates and have a machinist grind them to whatever angle i need.

Click to expand...

You have the upper control arm and ball joint and you know how far you're going to move the mounting location. Just use trig to figure the angle. Yeah it isn't a perfect 90 degree angle between the UCA and the car, but it gets you an approximate angle for the wedge. That's what I did and I've driven it several summers without problems.

I can't tell you whether it's worth it or not, but I sure did notice a handling difference in my '70 when I dropped it 2". Took me a couple evenings to make the wedges on a Bridgeport at work.

A buddy of mine has some from (I think) Pro Motorsports and they were 15 degrees, and his car has the UCA dropped 1 3/4". Personally, I think he did something wrong. The car eats front tires on the inside and it doesn't handle nearly as well as my '68 does with only a 1" drop and no wedge.

I have some drawings someone sent me. PM me your email and I'll send them to you.
I made a set, but didn't like them. I also made a set of angled washers so the bolts that hold the ball joint wouldn't bend when I tightened them.
You'll need a special ball joint so the grease fitting is accessible (NAPA's best did the trick)
When all was set and done, I just didn't care for them so I went ahead and did the Opentracker mod to my UCA's. Muuuuuch better

zookeeper said:

A buddy of mine has some from (I think) Pro Motorsports and they were 15 degrees, and his car has the UCA dropped 1 3/4". Personally, I think he did something wrong. The car eats front tires on the inside and it doesn't handle nearly as well as my '68 does with only a 1" drop and no wedge.

Click to expand...

The theory on negative camber is simple. Do not use on a street car or you get the effect you mentioned with tire wear. However, it does look cool.

On race cars the wear does take place on the inside of the tires while going in a straight line but this is offset by the wear that take place on the outside under hard turning.

Hope this helps.

HistoricMustang

zookeeper said:

A buddy of mine has some from (I think) Pro Motorsports and they were 15 degrees, and his car has the UCA dropped 1 3/4". Personally, I think he did something wrong. The car eats front tires on the inside and it doesn't handle nearly as well as my '68 does with only a 1" drop and no wedge.

Click to expand...

What alignment specs is he using?

Hack said:

What alignment specs is he using?

Click to expand...

Here are specs for a budget performance set up. You can back off these for the street.

HistoricMustang

Summary of the front end set up on mine:

Shelby Drop
1 1/8" Front Sway Bar
Front Coils cut to height for 2 1/2" front end drop
Poly bushing everywhere
Monte Carlo Bar
Ford original Export Brace
KYB shocks
Toe In - 1/8" total
Camber - 1 degree negative
Caster - 2 1/2 to 3 degrees positive
Quick Steering Box with Shelby pitman arm
Granada spindle and brakes
Brake Master Cylinder from 1970 Ford Mustang
Ford Upper and Lower Control Arms
7" x 15" Torque Thrust Wheels
245 x 45 Hoosier Street TD's (bias ply)
Fender lips are rolled

zookeeper said:

A buddy of mine has some from (I think) Pro Motorsports and they were 15 degrees, and his car has the UCA dropped 1 3/4". Personally, I think he did something wrong. The car eats front tires on the inside and it doesn't handle nearly as well as my '68 does with only a 1" drop and no wedge.

Click to expand...

The problem is the guy who aligned it. He probablly makes $12 a hour and is expected to do 2 or 3 alignments an hour. He doesn't have the time to make it right.

I bet the camber and caster are ok (if your buddy has stock spindles), but the toe is way off.

I used to help out on a South West Tour car. The guy who owned it had a Chevrolet dealership. We tried setting the car up on his $20K Hunter rack. When we got done pushing it back to the race car shop we figured out we had it way wrong. Mustang front ends are the same. There is a bunch of "sticksion" in the front end of these cars stock, even if you have the plates on your alignment rack.

You need to roll the car back a carlength and forward a carlength to get the front end to 'settle' and you can measure it.

Hmm, I suppose I could believe that if "the guy" who aligned it was one guy. He's had the car to a couple shops, all of them verify the car is within the alignment specs (he uses the same specs I do-1/2deg neg camber, 3 deg caster, 1/8 toe in), yet the car continues it's quest to rid the world of his size of front tires. My theory is that during suspension travel, it gains too much negative camber. If it were my car, I'd remove the springs and run the suspension through it's travel and see what's up with the setup. But, it's not my car, and my car handles very nicely and doesn't thrash front tires. I've also worked on circle track cars, and while I'm no chassis wizard, I do know that excess tire wear on the front indicates that only part of the tire is in constant contact with the road. If only 2 1/2 inches of the tire is in "hard" contact with the surface, then the other 5 inches of tire is a waste of rolling weight. If the toe is ok, then camber has to be the culprit, right? If he's got the same static camber I have, yet my car handles better and has better tire wear, then somethings, wierd. Maybe the car isn't square anymore, maybe the towers are sagging, pulling the upper control arm in too far, maybe something's worn out, who knows? I've looked it over, and it all appears ok, and the only real difference I see is more of a drop on his upper control arm. I know lots of guys run the same setup with good results, but after driving my car for a while, I really don't see enough of a benefit to worry about it.

I went through three front end shops before I got a guy to do it right.

The last one told me up front that cars like mine were a bunch of work, and he could do it, but it would be a straight time deal. I agreed. He billed me for four hours at $60 an hour, and got it right. He also was able to roll the car off the plates and back on them without uncalibrating the pickups. Nobody else did it that way. If you're near Fresno or Bakersfield, I recomend Hanford Alignment Service @ 559-582-3652.

Now, I have a homemade toe gauge and a hub mounted camber gauge and I do it myself. They same way we used to do the late model. And for the same reason - our cars have a bunch of wheel scrub if you get the front tires off the ground (something they have to do to calabrate the pickups on the alignment machine). The front end "jams" itself into position, and you can't bounce it out as hard as you try.

I only figured this out after the last time I watched the production guy do my alignment. I went to a bunch of trouble to get the car to have the right stance, and get the LCA flat with the ground. I walked out of the office and there was a 3" gap in the front fender, and the LCA was 3" too high measured from the chassis mount bolt to the ground. The machine, however, said my car was perfect. I explained to the technician that he had to make sure the front of the car was settled because of all the aftermarket parts, and he replied "That's what the plates are for". Whatever.

Incidentally, they do a great job on my straight axle Jeep and my car with a Macphearson front strut.

I have the GW arms and 1 3/4 drop. No tire issues here. Stock my car would destroy tires. I suspect the problem was the alignment all along because I had the same issues pre and post GW with eating tires.

flynchicknfarmR said:

has anyone done a negative wedge kit? do you know what angle it is? I want to lower the control arms like the shelbys which move down 1 inch without ball joint bind but a kit sold by (ultimate mustangs) shows that you can drop by 1.75 but its $240 for a couple ball joints , a couple plates and handful of bolts. i work with metal cutting lasers and have access to a full machine shop so i could just make the plates and have a machinist grind them to whatever angle i need.

Click to expand...

Ironically, I asked the EXACT same question back in December:
http://forums.stangnet.com/showthread.php?t=678040&highlight=negative+wedge

Unfortunately I no longer work at a place with the (real) machine shop equipment needed to make them.