Not being satisfied with any of the after markets alternatives to the poor geometry of the "A" body I set out to fix it. Now while it may seem simple to start from scratch and design a new suspension, I had several criteria that had to be met first. For starters it had to use OE control arm pivot points, no cutting and welding makes this much easier to duplicate later on other chassis's. I also wanted to be able to use as many off the shelf type parts as possible to make future repairs less painful (anyone who tracks their car knows repairs are going to be eminent). By increasing the length of the spindle I could correct the camber gain and place the ball joints in a position for favorable RC migration numbers. I dropped the spindle pin almost 2" over stock to bring the chassis down without altering the control arm working angles. While I had wanted to have my own built if for no other reason than the claim that were "mine", it wasn't monetarily responsible to waste resources when a viable alternative is available with very close measurements to my own. Moving the spindle pin allows a lower CG and brings the control arm pivots down to help with poor geometry without hurting ride and still allowing for spring drop to fine tune the pivot heights. It is a common mistake that lowering with springs is better for handling, not true. As you lower the chassis height at the spring it moves the control pivot point in relation to the ball joint. This relationship is crucial to roll center migration and roll center height. When the chassis points are lowered enough the lower ball joint is higher than the pivot...not good. I guess the misconception comes the fact that due to increased roll stiffness from removing coils the car "feels" better, sort of like using polyurethane bushings in the rear (that's another story for later). I also determined that the control arms are simply not long enough to provide roll center height numbers, effective scrub radius, and smooth RC migration at the same time. The fix was obviously to increase their lengths, 2" should do it. Building custom control arms is fairly time consuming so that part of the project is on the "WAY back burner".

I was able to get FRCH at 2 1/2" while still maintaining enough ground clearance to maintain drivability.

This is a screen shot from WinGeo3 analyzing software. As you can see the RC migration is just over 1/4" at maximum lateral roll. Compared to the foot or so it has in stock configuration I would say that is not too bad. I don't have the bump steer numbers yet, but I'll add them when I do. Rather than guess at where the tie rods will end up I'll just wait until they are on and take measurements.