PDA

View Full Version : Spherical Bearings for upper and lower A arm bushings..need



JinMTVT
11-28-2001, 04:57 PM
hi!
i need help.. i want to change my suspension arm bushings (the one that attaches the arms to the body by rubber bushings) to spherical bearings..beeing that i can't tune camber and toe settings if they keep on changing under side load different conditions..and i've calcuated almost 1deg of lost camber due to theese bushings when they move..

so as anyone in here done the convrsion ?
what does it involves ? and where to get good bearings and how to choose the righ size of bearings!

car is prelude 97
thanks

Bill Miller
11-28-2001, 05:30 PM
Have you looked into Delrin bushings?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI

JinMTVT
11-29-2001, 12:36 AM
nope..where should i start looking ?

is there a standard size to use for A arm bushing replacements?

il8apex
11-29-2001, 02:13 PM
I think Bill's on to something here... Delrin would absorb just a little shock without deforming as much as a poly bushing. It's probably a better idea, seeing as how we're not supposed to be reinforcing the suspension mounting points in IT (except where the cage mountings coincide, I know, I know!).

Production is the place you find a lot of this, maybe they'll be a better source for you in this regard.

-Tom

cbotha
11-29-2001, 04:53 PM
I don't think your calculations are correct. What type of movement were you allowing for that degree camber change. I have the Napa offset cam kit, I seem to have to adjust the cam a lot to get a 1/2 degree change and I don't think the rubber thickness is that great. I have not seen anyone make a kit yet with sperical bearings (although it is one of those projects I wouldn't mind getting to).

mock1
11-29-2001, 10:38 PM
Some of the guys in So Cal are running prototye bearings in ITA and say they work great. The Progress Group is hoping to have them available some time in the future.

Bill Miller
11-30-2001, 08:51 AM
Shine Racing has been selling spherical bearings for VW's for years now.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI

Jon Nelson
11-30-2001, 11:02 AM
Is this legal? Seems to be outside the intent of the rules...... Personally, I'd go with Prothane or Energy suspension. Wait a second, I DID!!!

mock1
11-30-2001, 11:22 AM
That great for vw's, but I thought we were talking about Honda's here.

JinMTVT
11-30-2001, 03:01 PM
Could i have more information about the
Delrin bushings...
or at least some links to specs of theese things..or where to buy them ?

i don't necessairly need/want spherical bearings if i can get a simpler solution that would limit alot the play form the stock bughins..
and i dont wanna use energy bushings..don't like them..

NoRaceCarYet
11-30-2001, 04:02 PM
Thanks for the SoCal info - Spherical bearings are illegal in Control arms...

Bill Miller
11-30-2001, 04:04 PM
Originally posted by NoRaceCarYet:
Thanks for the SoCal info - Spherical bearings are illegal in Control arms...

How so?

Chris Wire
11-30-2001, 04:44 PM
Originally posted by NoRaceCarYet:
Thanks for the SoCal info - Spherical bearings are illegal in Control arms...

So B. Stretch, and others that have replaced the rear suspension bushings on the 240SXs are all illegal?

The rule states that bushing material is free. I read that to mean that bushing type is free also (i.e. spherical bearing, steel bushings, delrin, urethane, plain old rubber, air bushings, roll bar padding http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif ). How is it that bearings are illegal?


------------------
Chris Wire
Team Wire Racing
ITS Mazda RX7

Jon Nelson
12-04-2001, 10:38 AM
Taking the conservative approach, of course, but a bushing is a bushing, and a bearing is a bearing.

That said, OPM sells spherical bearings for the front tension/compression mounts on a 88-91 Civic/CRX. This may indicate that they are legal. This seems to contradict the thought that spherical bearings are verboten.

So, basically, I dunno...

joeg
12-04-2001, 03:07 PM
That's what the GCR hints at too. In the Glossary, both are defined ("bushing/bush" vs. "Spherical bearing").

I would hesitate in swapping spherical bearings for bushings.

NoRaceCarYet
12-04-2001, 03:18 PM
When some used bearings in A/S they were protested for it, the Comp Board finally came back with a full metal bushing is a bearing, thus, not allowed

--- Chris you were in A/S for a long time - you must know this - I am asking Chris Herzog if he remembers the ruling.

K

NoRaceCarYet
12-04-2001, 04:13 PM
Oh! and lets not forget the attempt for 1st Gen Rx7's to put spherical "bushings" in the control arms for the rear suspension, that lastest about 2 races... They really worked well too!

Knestis
12-04-2001, 04:44 PM
Out of curiosity, in the cases cited, were these bushings (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) installed without ANY modifications to either the suspension component or chassis pick-up point?

Kirk

Chris Wire
12-04-2001, 06:23 PM
Originally posted by NoRaceCarYet:
When some used bearings in A/S they were protested for it, the Comp Board finally came back with a full metal bushing is a bearing, thus, not allowed

--- Chris you were in A/S for a long time - you must know this - I am asking Chris Herzog if he remembers the ruling.

K

My tenure in AS lasted all of 5 years. During that time, the only issue that I remember is when Ross Murray showed up with monoball ball joints in the lower control arms which allowed him to seriously lower his (and his customer's) cars, while still maintaining a decent roll center location. The cars made it through Tech, much to the chagrine of all, but the following Jan. brought a clarification in Fastrack which made them illegal. Ross' justification was that bushings in AS were free, but Fastrack declared that ball joints are not considered bushings. I recall nothing relative to control arm bushings.

The term "free" in the rule book is, in my opinion, an non-limiting term. You may consider the spherical bearing to be a bushing since, in the case of a lower front A-arm, the bearing only works in a rotational manner around the axis of the control arm bolts. In this case, it does not move in any other direction, therefore, it serves the same exact function as the stock bushing would, albeit with no bind. If the term "free" were to read "alternate bushings of the same type as original", then I would consider spherical bearings illegal. FWIW, I will likely be using Delrin.


------------------
Chris Wire
Team Wire Racing
ITS Mazda RX7

NoRaceCarYet
12-04-2001, 08:43 PM
I think the ball joint issue was a seperate issue from the "a metal bushing is a bearing" issue, though, yes I remember that episode through Chris H, or the Asedan list.

It's the same ruling that rules out the GW solid bearings in the LCA's on the Mustang's rear suspension, hence the "Del-a-lum" bushings.

Bill Miller
12-05-2001, 12:27 PM
I heard the ball joint issue on the A/S cars was related to using longer post ball joints w/ spacers (to aide front roll center on a lowered car). I've also heard that the spherical bearings that Shine sells for VW's must be welded into the LCA. To me, this violates the 'unmodified' rule that governs IT suspensions. However, it would be legal in a limited-prep production car as they are allowed 'alternate' or 'reinforced' control arms. Personally, I use Delrin bushings w/ a metal sleeve inside for the pivot bolt.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI

NoRaceCarYet
12-05-2001, 01:50 PM
The culprits that were found to bending the rues were Ross M and Eric Curran, this issue had been a burning issue in AS for years before this too. They were using the altered ball joints, not the Steeda extended-shank ball joints, but they became illegal due to this ruling too.

As Chris Herzog says:
"The clarification was something along the lines of that a ball joint was *not* a "bushing" and therefore had to be kept stock. This meant the monoballs had to go. This also means the Steeda ball joint with the extended shank is not "legal" but not as obvious..."

On the issue of the "a solid metal bushing is actually a bearing and therefore is illegal" it looks like I am mistaken. Sorry if seemed to be rude or arrogant.

But the issue I guess I have is that we used the spherical bearings in the trailing control arms in the 1st Gen Rx7's, and for some reason they were disallowed the year I bought my set, I ran them once and were superior, but I had to go back to my old ones. Why was this? I understand that to retain most of the Spherical Bearings they have to be welded into place, is this somehow construed as alteration to the control arm?

Confused,

K

[This message has been edited by NoRaceCarYet (edited December 05, 2001).]

Knestis
12-05-2001, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by NoRaceCarYet:
[B]I understand that to retain most of the Spherical Bearings they have to be welded into place, is this somehow construed as alteration to the control arm?B]

Boy, I would sure think so...

Kirk

Chris Wire
12-06-2001, 01:52 AM
Not to start an arguement, but I would think that if the bushing is "free", then the method of attachment of said bushing would be free. I don't see how a simple weld to keep a bushing located in a control arm would "modify" the arm. The weld is simply the method of attachment. It does not alter, relocate, strengthen, weaken, or modify the arm in any way. Why the fuss?

The spherical bearing setups I have seen do not weld, however. The bearings are centered in the arm, then sleeves are used to take up the remaining space in the bushing shell, then the sleeves are staked or pinned on the outside edge. That keeps the bearings from moving laterally. Again, I don't see anything wrong with that either.

However, opinions do vary. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

------------------
Chris Wire
Team Wire Racing
ITS Mazda RX7

Harry
12-06-2001, 02:05 AM
Guys,

The ITCS says: Bushing material is unrestricted. Including that used to mount a suspension subframe to the chassis.
Unrestricted means: Un= NOT or REVERSE OF Restricted = LIMITED
Not limited to me means free, any, whatever I want to use.
I mount my subframe to the tub with solid aluminum bushings. A spherical "bearing" is a "load bearing" to allow angular motion. Mine came with machined tapered steel sleeves that simple tap (machined interference fit)in both sides so when they are both sleeves are in they are flush with the ends of the control arm. They're not welded in. When in place the sleeves are retained by the subframe control arm mounting brackets they fit in.
I'm just going by what's in the ITCS and my ol dictionary.
Harry

Bill Miller
12-06-2001, 09:53 AM
Originally posted by Chris Wire:
Not to start an arguement, but I would think that if the bushing is "free", then the method of attachment of said bushing would be free. I don't see how a simple weld to keep a bushing located in a control arm would "modify" the arm. The weld is simply the method of attachment. It does not alter, relocate, strengthen, weaken, or modify the arm in any way. Why the fuss?

The spherical bearing setups I have seen do not weld, however. The bearings are centered in the arm, then sleeves are used to take up the remaining space in the bushing shell, then the sleeves are staked or pinned on the outside edge. That keeps the bearings from moving laterally. Again, I don't see anything wrong with that either.

However, opinions do vary. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif



Chris, it's these exact kinds of interpretations that lead to rules creep. Just because it says that the bushing material is free DOES NOT mean that the method of attachment is free. And if an OEM LCA did not come w/ the bushing/bearing welded in, welding in a replacement bushing/bearing, regardless of how small the weld is, is altering the LCA. And, it can be argued that since you welded additional metal to the LCA, you have indeed reinforced it, which is expressley prohibited.

This gets back to the "Even though it violates the rules, there's no competitive advantage to be gained, so protesting it is chickenshit." attitude. Point is, if you have to weld a spherical bering into the LCA, that weld has in fact given you a competitive advantage, because it's allowed you to use the spherical bearing.

I looked into trying to engineer some spherical bearings for the LCA's in my VW ala what Harry is talking about as I felt that it was w/in the rules (and that welding the Shine kit in was not).

I look for loopholes in the wording of the rules as much as the next guy, but your interpretation is too much of a stretch. I really don't see how you can argue that welding something to an LCA is not altering the LCA.

But, opinions do differ...

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI

tderonne
12-06-2001, 10:39 AM
I gotta go with Bill here.
I think he could have said it a bit simpler though. The rules tell us exactly what we need to know. Unrestricted is not the key word there, "material" is. The material is unrestricted. The design, mounting, number, etc. can't be changed.

Knestis
12-06-2001, 02:03 PM
Yup.

K

NoRaceCarYet
12-06-2001, 03:30 PM
Good stuff - good stuff..

OK, So if I bring a Gen.1 Rx7 to your next race, with full metal bushings, aka spherical bearings in my Control arms, front and rear, and a tri-link setup for the rear axel and run 1 3/4 seconds faster than I did before, then I would be legal?

Method of attachment for said bearing's accomplished via your approved method of course. (boy.. sacrcasm doesn't make it in the written word does it).

K

tderonne
12-06-2001, 03:45 PM
axel?
Grabbing dictionary....nope don't see it, not in the GCR either.
Illegal!

Where does that spelling come from? I see it all over, in print too. British? Bad Japanese translation?

NoRaceCarYet
12-06-2001, 05:40 PM
You need a better dikshonery

AXEL
A jump in figure skating that is initiated from the outer forward edge of one skate, followed by one and one-half midair turns and a return to the outer backward edge of the other skate. [After Axel Paulsen (1856-1938), Norwegian figure skater.]

NER

yeah still, wrong...

Knestis
12-06-2001, 06:39 PM
Still looking for understanding here (and understanding that I believe that ANY modification to suspension components or pick-ups is illegal - welding, cutting snap ring grooves, drilling, pinning, staking or whatever)...

Is there a difference between a bearing and a bushing, if they both provide rotation only about the axis defined for movement of the original part?

If I put metal-on-metal roller bearings in a suspension pivot, WITHOUT changing the suspension component or chassis pick up point in ANY way, would that be legal?

Would things be any different if I used a spherical bearing that provided movement in all directions? What if that bearing were made of plastic or a steel ball element that rode on a composite suface?

Has anyone seen a car found illegal for JUST the composition/design of the bushing/bearing (in a case where the suspension component and pick up were completely unmodified)?

Kirk (the other "K")

Harry
12-07-2001, 04:34 AM
OK,
So you feel it's the material. Well the material is steel and teflon. I haven't changed the mounting or the number of bushings. Any bushing you replace the original with will be of a different design unless it's absolutely the same in everyway except the material. Ever dimension would have to be the same for it not to change in design. Possible but highly unlikely.

The spherical bearing serves the same function as the original. It's metal / teflon / metal the original was metal / rubber / metal. Just the material changed. They are both press fit.
How many people use camber plates that have spherical bearings?
Harry

eh_tony!!!
12-07-2001, 05:03 PM
Interesting thread. I don't have my GCR in front of me (lent to a friend), but doens't the ITCS say somehting like the following.

1) Fasteners are free provided they perform the same fastening function?? This would allow substitution of one weld for another.

2)If I recall, somewhere in there it says that you can repairs can be facilitated as long as they use " standard methods" (or somthing like that.. This clause would also seem to permit welded location if you climed that the old bushing was "worn out".

3) I see no problem with shoerical bearings. Heim joints have been used for years on 510 rear subframes. (heck, I even think that is says that you can specifically use them on suspension). To me a sperical bearing is no different (in principle) than a heim joint.

Scott Matre
124 Spider 2.0 - ITB

tderonne
12-07-2001, 05:43 PM
No, fasteners aren't "free"
It's a topic that's been discussed here before.
"Hardware items (nuts, bolts, etc.) may be replaced..." in a few areas:
Engine
Transmission
Suspension mounting points
Cooling system (clamps, hoses, different wording)
Wheel studs/bolts (again unique wording there)

While suspension mounting points would cover alternate hardware in a spherical bearing setup, a weld isn't a "hardware item", so, no.

As for seam welding the body. According to the ITCS as it's written, body hardware items must be stock. (That can of worms has been opened already, as I mentioned.)


Originally posted by eh_tony!!!:
Interesting thread. I don't have my GCR in front of me (lent to a friend), but doens't the ITCS say somehting like the following.

1) Fasteners are free provided they perform the same fastening function?? This would allow substitution of one weld for another.

2)If I recall, somewhere in there it says that you can repairs can be facilitated as long as they use " standard methods" (or somthing like that.. This clause would also seem to permit welded location if you climed that the old bushing was "worn out".

3) I see no problem with shoerical bearings. Heim joints have been used for years on 510 rear subframes. (heck, I even think that is says that you can specifically use them on suspension). To me a sperical bearing is no different (in principle) than a heim joint.

Scott Matre
124 Spider 2.0 - ITB



[This message has been edited by tderonne (edited December 07, 2001).]

eh_tony!!!
12-07-2001, 10:46 PM
wait a sec, how can a weld (in the sense of retaining a bushing) be considered different from a bolt?? I don't see the separation. (maybe I need to re-read the ITCS?) I say the still repair clause includes this mod, even if the fastener clause does not.. Also, maybe we should include the interpretation of the rule. If heim joints are allowed, make a sperical bushing from brass. then it is a bushing, same as a heim.
Maybe we need to send a formal clarification request to Denver?? (Topeka?)

Bill Miller
12-07-2001, 10:56 PM
Originally posted by eh_tony!!!:
wait a sec, how can a weld (in the sense of retaining a bushing) be considered different from a bolt?? I don't see the separation.


Tony, nothing personal, but if you don't see the seperation between a weld and a bolt, regardless of the context, then you need to do more than re-read the ITCS. Talk about strained and tortured! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/rolleyes.gif


------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI

eh_tony!!!
12-07-2001, 11:02 PM
Bill, I disagree in context. The IT rules say "fastener"; this could be a bolt,screw, clevis, Dzus, C-clip, cotter-pin, lock-nut, racers tape, hood pin, or a "weld". My opinion goes only though as long as the weld is used to fasten a replacement part. A weld to fasten a re-enforcing saddle would not qualify.

Bill Miller
12-09-2001, 01:27 AM
I guess we'll agree to disagree.

By the way, where do you buy your 'welds' from?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI

NoRaceCarYet
12-10-2001, 02:09 PM
You missed "rivet"

HiRcc#21
01-08-2002, 05:33 PM
Interesting debate her about the spherical bearings.
I am the Ohio distributor for The Progress Group, Inc. in Anaheim, Ca.
I have requested from them; if they have made the spherical bearings yet for the LCA on 88-91 Crx's yet? The answer is yes.
They were tested in a 89 Civic Si that ran in E Prod. this year during the Runoffs and the tech people at that event cleared them for use.
However, this car used a heim joint for attatchment, the I.T. pieces that are soon to be produced,(in the next 2 weeks I will have them here in Ohio)are legal and have passed tech in California so far. Regions are different, I agree, but I have been told that are SCCA legal, and I am going to run them in the first spring race. Lets see what happens!
Also, Progress has the OPM style front stay rod/ radius rod bearings available as well. Now if T.Fowler can run them, and win two I.T.A. titles and pass tech both times, that is good enough for me to run them here in CenDiv.
Progress is also making a spherical bearing that goes in the front LCA (inner to the body, similar to the rear outers)and I find that from speaking with them, it is legal.
Besides, why would they waste all that research and developement and money to make a part that is not legal for I.T. competition?
I will have all these parts in stock in the next 2-3 weeks if anyone has any questions, email me.
btw- I have ripped out both a set of urethane and delrin bushings on the rear, LCA's, so I am game to try something new.
email:[email protected]

HiRcc#21
01-08-2002, 05:53 PM
Hi everyone!
This post is not meant to stir up any arguments. I have read the above thread and I have heard from some guys that run ITA crx's on the West Coast have the bearings in the LCA already and they have not had a problem in tech out there.
I have spoken with The Progress Group, Inc.
and they tell me that are about 2-3 weeks away from selling these new bearings.
They have made: the inner to the body on the front LCA, the outer on the rear LCA and also have a front radius rod bearing set that will be available soon as well.
As their distributor here in Ohio, I have talked with Progress about wether these are legal or not. One of the guys there, ran them on his E Prod. Civic Si at the 2001 Runoffs, and talked with the tech people there about the I.T. version he was going to produce. My understanding is that they are legal, and I trust that to be true.
I am going to stock some of them, if anyone is interested, email me.
I don't see this as a rule creap, it is just something new, therefore everyone has to discuss it first. If Fowler can pass tech, after two I.T.A. wins at the A.R.R.C., and also advertise he is selling his radius rod bushings, then he isn't trying to hide anything, and SCCA knows and has approved of it. So I see this new spherical bearing topic as one that is just a bearing that is being used in a different location, not some big advantage of rule infrigement per the GCR. Like I said, I don't want to kick up dust here, but I am tired of ripping out bushings on the LCA's so my motivation is to try these bearings.
Also there is a strut rod bearing in the works as well.
I look forward to reading all your feedback. I guess I will know more after the first race in Cendiv this spring!