S10 spindle swap without the negative camber

[70styleVega]

I've been thinking about this swap for a while, and this is what I'm planning: step by step. This process corrects the negative camber during the swap, not afterwards.

1) I'm going to get a frame chart and check for frame spread and twist....correct if necessary.
2) I'll establish some baseline measurements....final tire radius, distance from floor to frame, etc... prior to the car being disassembled.
3) "Jack stand" the front of the car and disassemble front end.
4) Next, both upper and lower control arms will receive new poly bushings
5) Both upper control arms will be modified to accept S10 upper balljoints....S10 balljoints will be installed.
6) Next the upper and lower control arms will be mounted on car (no springs or shocks), with all of the control arms in middle of their adjustment range.
7) Next the lower S10 ball joints will be mounted in the spindles, then the spindles will be mounted on the upper ball joints, hanging on the car.
I plan to use a fixture based on previous measurements to HOLD the spindle at the correct wheel height and at zero camber.
9) Then swing the lower control arm up, to meet the lower ball joint (mounted on the spindle).
Next, mark the location of the lower ball joint on the mating lower control arm.
10) Then remove the lower control arm and install a S10 lower ball joint sleeve centered on the previously marked location. Install lower S10 ball joint.
11) Reassemble both sides with springs and shocks.... the end result should not have excessive negative camber or require special adjusters, and it should work with each unique car.

At this point, this is all untried theory, but it is worth a try since there is negative camber built into this swap, even if the car being updated is perfectly straight and square.

All comments and corrections are welcome. I have no one else to ask.

[2lucke4u]

the only question is,,,,
When will you start on this????
this is the holy grail of h-body fixes,,,keep a very good picture record of the mods and post us all to keep us updated,,,,you will go down in h-body history if this works,,,,you will be a bust in the hall of fame,,,,,
sorry ,,,getting a little excited here,,
Charles

[NixVegaGT]

This is a good plan, Tom. I wish I'd known about the camber problem before I started on my control arms. I would have done something similar. Thanks for documenting the process. I think it will really help our community...

[70styleVega]

The H-body community gave me the idea....

After reading about Bob Gumm's adapters, I later learned that there was negative camber built in, according to some posts and FAQs.
I started a thread on another forum some time ago to discuss how to get rid of the negative camber. That's when Art Gravatt and Greg72 commented on chassis twist and frame spread and how it made each car different.
I looked at Dirtmod's groundbreaking S10 spindle swap photos again, and realized that the lower ball joint sleeves could be welded with the spindle at zero camber, if I could find the correct location.

I will post some photos when I'm done.

This forum has been a huge help.... there are quite a few ideas I'm going to incorporate in my car, including NixVegaGT SFCs. Tom

[92turbogtz]

just how bad is the negative camber with the swap?

[70styleVega]

I'm sure it varies with each car and how much abuse each has seen

I took some measurements, then drew the control arm pivot points of one side of my 75 Vega in AutoCAD. I also drew a 2nd version with a 1/16" shorter spindle (like an S10).
This change alone added 1 degree of negative camber on paper. On a 20' tall tire 1 degree will cause it to lean in .350 (between 5/16 and 3/8 inch) at the top.

This is what Greg72 had to say about his car:
"the problem is not solely related to the s-10 spindles. My 72 has stock front end pieces , and even with the lower control arms pulled all the way in and the uppers all the way out ----the top of my tires STILL lean in ....a lot!
The problem is frame spread , with the removable stamped steel k-frames being the main problem.
The fix is to pull the frame rails back in an secure the k-frame adequately so it does not "walk". A popular item a few years ago was to use the later years k-frames. The one on my 77 Monza is much beefier than the one on my 72 vega."

Also, Art Gravatt's comments about making sure the car free is of twist was great advice, all things considered.

[v8astregt]

I didn't have any problems with my swap. Actually right now, my camber is perfect.

When I first did the swap, obviously I had camber issues. After that, I did the V8 springs, lower balljoints, and lower bushings. When I reinstalled them, I adjusted the camber all the way in. That helped a lot. It was pretty decent.

Then I had to do the upper balljoints. Instead of the H-body units, I made S10 pieces work. While I did that, I had to enlarge the holes for the larger balljoint. Instead of enlarging it from the center out, I just made the hole bigger toward the back, and outer edge which helped further with my issue.

Then when I brought it in for alignment, they installed the upper bushings. With all this said and done, I now have correctly aligned wheels!

[cosvega76]

I had a problem with negative camber after my S-10 spindle install. A friend of mine made up some tubular control arms. Not only could they be adjusted to correct the camber, he moved the upper ball joint back to add some positive caster as well.

He's come up with a second design now, that uses turnbuckles to adjust the alignment without messing with the eccentric cams on the lower arms. I'll post pix when I get them.

Chuck

[SunbirdMan]

I took some measurements, then drew the control arm pivot points of one side of my 75 Vega in AutoCAD. I also drew a 2nd version with a 1/16" shorter spindle (like an S10).
This change alone added 1 degree of negative camber on paper. On a 20' tall tire 1 degree will cause it to lean in .350 (between 5/16 and 3/8 inch) at the top.

Some things to consider.
First, using Bob Gumms installation guide as my source I read that there was a 1/16" difference in the height of the spindles. I couldn't measure a difference in the spindles I had for comparison. I attribute this to sloppy tolerances by GM. Also from Bob's guide, he shows where you may or may not need to grind away a protrusion of his adapters as they may set too deep into the taper(I didn't need to trim mine). Again I would say that this would indicate variations in manufacture.

Second,(just for consideration) the actual point of pivot would be the center of the "ball" joint. If using an s10 ball joint, the center of that joint may be higher or lower. I'm not sure. A larger "ball" would have to be installed "closer" in order to maintain the same geometry.

Third (correct me if I'm wrong) If the ride height was changed by using a shorter or softer spring, positive camber would be added.

Fourth(again correct me if I'm wrong) If you relocate the ball joint on the lower control arm to zero out the camber on the s10 spindle, this would kick the turning axis of the spindle inward at the bottom. This would cause positve camber on both wheels when turning. At least more than the h-body spindle. Edit: correction: i confused myself on the fourth one. Had to draw a model to check myself. It would go negative as the wheels turned and rise up in the wheel well. This is based on the assumption that the stock h-body spindle's turning axis is perpendicular at zero camber.

I realise that these considerations may be splitting hairs, but we are talking about a few degrees here or there.

[NixVegaGT]

That's a good point about lowering the suspension. There probably is some neg. correction designed in for body roll... I might be in the clear then since I've lowered the springs in the front... I hope.

Wait. I would think that would make it worse. OK I'm going to have to set up my suspension with out springs to check it out. I won't be doing that for a few months yet. If no one beats me to it I'll post my findings...

[SunbirdMan]

I scanned this out of an old textbook. I'm pretty sure h-bodies use the post 1969 instant center outside the wheel. As the wheel moves up, in relation to the body, it angles outward at the top.
I think I got that figured out right, I could be wrong.

[NixVegaGT]

Perfect! Thanks man!

[spencerforhire]

I've been following this negative camber thread for a while, and I have some questions/observations- are the problems with alignment mostly on early(71-73) cars without the "deep pocket" LCA's and/or cars that have been smashed/abused/rusted? Will using 2" drop S-10 spindles instead of cut springs help the geometry? If I put my front suspension all together with the Bob Gumm ball joint spacers on the drop spindles and there is a problem, I guess I could switch to S-10 uppers, and move the mounting location inward when I enlarge the hole in the UCA's. Another idea I've had is to loosen all the K-member bolts and spread the frame rails apart before re-tightening. The vehicle under construstion is a solid, western Canadian 77 Vega wagon which fortunatly(for me) had it's 2.3 chuck a rod through the side of the block before it could be exposed to the horrors of our east coast winter road salt.

[NixVegaGT]

Spencer,

The problem goes the other direction. It gives too much negative camber. The top is too far in for a rear driver. I actually moved my uppers in a little (like 100 thou or something) thinking I could use the extra neg. camber but discovered well after I cut and installed the upper S10 that the S10 spindle BJ locations are slightly different that the stock H. If I remember right the LBJ mount on the S10 spindle is about 1/4" inboard. Or farther from the spindle shaft. Most guys talk about modifying the UCA because it's easier to modify. I modified my LCA for the S10 LBJ. I would have mounted the LBJ 1/4" on my LCA.

This problem is exacerbated on some SBC cars because the increase weight of the engine spreads the frame rails causing the LCAs to move outward.

[wagonman]

has any body used off set bushings in the upper control arm's i got some from rare parts this is what the guy at the front end shop said to use cain't find the part # right now