ALFAGTV6.COM

Maurizio · Post by **Maurizio** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:52 am

I would hate to it failing on me, that's why I've chosen to use the nascar parts. If they hold up on 180 mph Nascars, they'll hold up with me.

Sorry, but nascar use not good enough for me, I want to see numbers!

Jim K · Post by **Jim K** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:04 am

You are right Maurizio, while NASCAR is considered a heavy duty application, it can't compare with the duration and vibration of everyday road conditions! I wouldn't settle for anything less than positive location of the joint, i.e. if it fails, it'll continue to stay in place even while wobbling or whatever and NOT separate from the A-arm! Lowering the car's RC is fine but lowering my own RC below ground (permanently) somehow does not amuse me!

Jim K.

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:17 am

I see I have to complete the whole thing before posting ...

I realize that the std balljoint wont do the job..

Did you know that BMW make a suspension bj(there`s that abbreviation again.

)that works in tension?and the car it was used on weighs 1600kg?

Im not concerned as to the taper,machine it straight and tighten the nut big time..
Anyhow,no time for this at the mo....got lots to do first.

MD · Post by MD » Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:23 pm

Hey JK. I am finally convinced your eyes are too close together or you are wearing your sons underpants that are too tight.

Read my post again.

It addresses all the caution you got. Then it is trying to examine a clamping mechanism that absolutely prevents the ball from dislodgment but preferably use a joint specifically designed to be in tension. Finally, the thread is in the racing section. What else do you want ?

(Keep dreamin' about that bare ass and the pair of 38dd cups !!

)

Now that we have your cautions which we are all greatful for, unleash that birdbrain you got and get creative will ya ?!

Micke · Post by **Micke** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 11:39 pm

Everybody's right and wrong.

This IS the racing section. Do NOT make tuning like this for the street.

Using the OE part is STUPID. It is not ment for it. Trying to secure it doesn't make sense IMHO as there are other suitable parts around. A search would help but old Volvo or Opel should be hint enough.

Jim is just trying to maintain the popula here. Guys killing themselves doesn't help.

Barry, if you make the hole straight, wouldn't it be easiest just to use a suitable ball joint together with some fastening mechanism?

DaveH · Post by **DaveH** » Sat Jun 24, 2006 5:20 am

Micke wrote:Barry, if you make the hole straight, wouldn't it be easiest just to use a suitable ball joint together with some fastening mechanism?

I'm far from expert here, but let me add this: VW/Audi use straight pin balljoints retained with pins (cotterpins?). Have a look in the VWForum's vendor lisring: http://www.vwforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23021

MD · Post by MD » Sat Jun 24, 2006 3:37 pm

OK I have taken my Village Idiot hat off just long enough to say I respect everybody's opinion here.

Having said that, history tells me that it has all been done before. In fact it has been done by Alfa Romeo themselves. Check out the photo of the 101 series Giulia front suspension made in the late fifties/early sixties. You will see a ball joint in the exact configuaration we are talking about. It is screwed in from the bottom. Also remember that this is for a road car too so even more caution would have been required.

Now if it was good engough for Alfa, it is good enough for me. So yes, I does need a specific type of balljoint and the bottom arm would require modification as does the upright to properly seat the tapered bolt but hey, it's not rocket science. It is however a lot of pissing about and I can't see it getting too many takers.

Micke · Post by **Micke** » Sat Jun 24, 2006 9:08 pm

Of course it has been done before. Just use the search function!

Micke · Post by **Micke** » Tue Jul 11, 2006 12:42 pm

Today I can post something constructive for a change.

As we're about to start fabricating the tubular A-arms tomorrow I sourced some new upside down ball joints. The same as I successfully used the last 10 years.

Lada 2105 (or any rwd Lada).
Price €7,- each.

MD · Post by MD » Tue Jul 11, 2006 2:34 pm

Ah Micke, you are worth you weight in camel dung !! ( if you don't beleive me try getting camel dung in Finland).

TS_turbo · Post by **TS_turbo** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:35 am

Micke wrote:Today I can post something constructive for a change.

As we're about to start fabricating the tubular A-arms tomorrow I sourced some new upside down ball joints. The same as I successfully used the last 10 years.

Lada 2105 (or any rwd Lada).
Price €7,- each.

as my county is ex comunistic we have shitloads of ladas here

from friends that tuned lada for rally i know not to use old stock items USSR made ..they often are build with very poor quality ... i too have 2 of those but trying to fit in stock alfa lower wishbone is no worth the effort ... better with lighter cromolly or SS fabricated ones
Micke what brand are those?

Micke · Post by **Micke** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 8:19 am

Beats me! Western writing anyway.
For 7,- a piece swapping them now and then doesn't destroy my account very badly.

O! Found some writing on the bag:
Redaelli ricambi
Made in ITALY

Micke · Post by **Micke** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 8:21 am

BTW, just took some matherial to the machine shop. The first 4 setsof lower control arms are on the way.
Only for coil overs and they will be LIGHT
Besides they are longer than OE and length adjustable.

Dennis · Post by **Dennis** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 8:33 am

any plans of selling some?

Micke · Post by **Micke** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 8:57 am

So far we didn't think about it but if they work like planned it shouldn't be impossible.
At first we make 2 versions. One for my upside down ball joint and one for the original part.
Length will be +30..+50 mm of original.
We also try with some anti dive. If we find it too much we might make it adjustable.