Camburg Uni-ball UCA's cant get more than +3 caster?

[wfo9]

The heim joints would be awesome and absolutely no issue with strength. Many of the LT setups use these. There "may" be issues with joint wear over time... I don't know

I would love such a UCA. Adds so much flexibility to to clear larger tires.. and set alignment to whatever you want.

The LR UCAs are an adjustable ball joint that has questionable strength but a similar level of adjustability.

I did not realize ICON made standard travel UCAs in this configuration. Might need to go shopping ;-)

 

[TotalAutomotiveLV]

The heim joints would be awesome and absolutely no issue with strength. Many of the LT setups use these. There "may" be issues with joint wear over time... I don't know

I would love such a UCA. Adds so much flexibility to to clear larger tires.. and set alignment to whatever you want.

The LR UCAs are an adjustable ball joint that has questionable strength but a similar level of adjustability.

I did not realize ICON made standard travel UCAs in this configuration. Might need to go shopping ;-)

SPC Control arm with adjustable balljoint provides a little less caster than the aftermarket uniball UCAs.


We can get you setup with the billet ICONS for a great price - the Dirt King arms would be right under 700 delivered :frog:

 

[wfo9]

SPC Control arm with adjustable balljoint provides a little less caster than the aftermarket uniball UCAs.


We can get you setup with the billet ICONS for a great price - the Dirt King arms would be right under 700 delivered :frog:

Never heard of Dirt King before, but look like worth taking a look. I would assume the downside of the joints might be some noise...?

For the SPC... It seems like you can throw the caster to max with the LCA adjustment cams (rear cam out, front cam in). Then simply use the adjustable ball to get the camber in spec. This may not yield as much actual caster as some other setups, but I would assume it would be quite a bit.

The heim should allow for a similar type of camber adjustment. Is that the general idea, keep the adjustments on the UCA heim joints even? Also might be an expensive alignment to adjust those while on the rack. Looks like you would need to pull the bolt and spin them?

 

[wfo9]

I read the instructions for the icon billets...

ICON SHIPS THE BILLET UPPER CONTROL ARM AT THE MOST COMMON ALIGNMENT SETTING. ONE OF THE MAJOR PERFORMANCE ADVANTAGES OF AN ICON BILLET
ADJUSTABLE UPPER CONTROL ARM IS THE ABILITY TO IMPROVE WHEEL POSITION. IMPROVING WHEEL POSITION IMPROVES FIREWALL CLEARANCE ALLOWING FOR
LARGER TIRES AS THE SUSPENSION CYCLES. IN ORDER TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS FEATURE, DISCUSS WITH YOUR PROFESSIONAL ALIGNMENT SHOP THAT YOU
WOULD LIKE TO CAM THE LOWER CONTROL ARM TO MAXIMIZE WHEEL POSITION FORWARD AND THEN ADJUST CAMBER AND CASTER WITH THE UPPER THREADED
ADJUSTERS.
A MAJOR PERFORMANCE ADVANTAGE OF ALL ICON UPPER CONTROL ARMS IS INCREASED CASTER OVER STOCK. DISCUSS WITH A PROFESSIONAL ALIGNMENT SHOP
THAT YOU WANT THE VEHICLE ALIGNED

They still don't tell how the adjusters work. If you have to pull the UCA bolt, it would be very expensive and time consuming.

Also, it looks like TC makes a tubular unit now with the adjustable heim joints.

 

[Ducmonsta]

SPC Control arm with adjustable balljoint provides a little less caster than the aftermarket uniball UCAs.


We can get you setup with the billet ICONS for a great price - the Dirt King arms would be right under 700 delivered :frog:

This is not true. You can get over 6* of caster with LR UCAs.

You can not get more from the ICONs. Here is why,
The upper control arm length (distance from heim joint to ball joint) is very close to the stock length. They essentially need to be bottomed out in order to get a decent alignment. If you were to adjust those upper heims it would make the camber extremely positive. There isn't enough adjustment in the factory lower control arms to compensate for it. You would max both lower control arm eccentrics outward to compensate for the upper ball joint moving so far out. Then you're left with very minimal adjustment in the upper.

The LR control arms adjust at the ball joint. The arms are fixed and you're relocating the ball joint to gain a lot more adjustability in caster AND camber.

I believe the Icon arms are more designed and intended for a wider track or longer travel. If they only made the control arm 'shorter' it would allow more adjustability. This experience was several years ago and things may have changed since then.

I read the instructions for the icon billets...


They still don't tell how the adjusters work. If you have to pull the UCA bolt, it would be very expensive and time consuming.

Also, it looks like TC makes a tubular unit now with the adjustable heim joints.

The black Dirt Kings that have the helm joint appear to be the ones that you can't adjust while installed. The billet arms labeled Dirt King but are Icon's have the adjustability.
You can see the collar that is threaded into the control arm itself. Then you can see the two locking bolts that prevent that collar from spinning. The heim joint is threaded into the collar. So it goes something like this:

Control arm>adjustable collar>heim joint.

I can't remember which one is left hand thread (the collar or the joint) which will allow adjustability while installed on the vehicle by spinning the collar and effectively changing the length of that part of the arm. I can't be positive, but the black Dirt King's do not appear to have this collar or if it did, then there are no provisions to lock down that collar to prevent it from loosening up. I guess they could use a set screw but that would be junk.

 

[fubar]

I don't doubt that they can't get any more caster out of it. I have the Camburg UCAs with the BJs. Along with my Icons set at 2.75", I think 2.5 or 3° was all I could get out of them. My 4runner drives perfect though.

You may need to find another shop though because alignments on these Toyotas are pretty easy really. There is no way it should've taken them that long.

2.9 w/ Camburg w/Moog BJs. Also drives great.

 

[wfo9]

This is not true. You can get over 6* of caster with LR UCAs.

You can not get more from the ICONs. Here is why,
The upper control arm length (distance from heim joint to ball joint) is very close to the stock length. They essentially need to be bottomed out in order to get a decent alignment. If you were to adjust those upper heims it would make the camber extremely positive. There isn't enough adjustment in the factory lower control arms to compensate for it. You would max both lower control arm eccentrics outward to compensate for the upper ball joint moving so far out. Then you're left with very minimal adjustment in the upper.

Not saying your wrong... but that would defeat the purpose for standard travel if they could not be adjusted "shorter" to pull the ball in. One reason for this might be clearance of the coil at full drop.

Their instructions seem to indicate that they would allow for negative camber adjustment...

I've thought about the LR UCAs, but seems like so many issues with the ball joints...on those.

 

[Ducmonsta]

Not saying your wrong... but that would defeat the purpose for standard travel if they could not be adjusted "shorter" to pull the ball in. One reason for this might be clearance of the coil at full drop.

Their instructions seem to indicate that they would allow for negative camber adjustment...

I've thought about the LR UCAs, but seems like so many issues with the ball joints...on those.

This was mine and [MENTION=99235]Scott@Hightech[/MENTION]'s experience when we were working together back in 2012. In fact, it was [MENTION=78705]jangoforhire[/MENTION]'s Limited that had us experimenting with the Icon UCAs. Here's a good part of his thread that shows how the upper control arms are adjustable. This is the adjustable collar that threads into the control arm. The heims are not pictured but would be inserted into the collar. The holes in the collar allow for the use of a spanner wrench similar to the ones used for the adjustable coil overs.


This is how the lower cam eccentrics should look when you want to maximize caster (move lower ball joints as far forward of the truck as possible). Pics are facing the front of the truck.
Passenger

Driver


With the cams set at their starting point, the Icon upper control arms need to be bottomed out so that camber wasn't positive. It would have been nicer if the upper control arms were shorter so that we could move the upper ball joint forward and aft with the adjustment of the heim joints. But all of the fine tuning had to be done with the factory lower control arm eccentrics.

There's a possibility that these were an early production and things have changed since then. Scott would have to chime in and say if there has been any changes to the Icon UCAs since I've left.

 

[Scott@Hightech]

SPC Control arm with adjustable balljoint provides a little less caster than the aftermarket uniball UCAs.


We can get you setup with the billet ICONS for a great price - the Dirt King arms would be right under 700 delivered :frog:

The LR arms are actually the MOST adjustable, Despite being the least desirable performance wise.

This was mine and [MENTION=99235]Scott@Hightech[/MENTION]'s experience when we were working together back in 2012. In fact, it was [MENTION=78705]jangoforhire[/MENTION]'s Limited that had us experimenting with the Icon UCAs. Here's a good part of his thread that shows how the upper control arms are adjustable. This is the adjustable collar that threads into the control arm. The heims are not pictured but would be inserted into the collar. The holes in the collar allow for the use of a spanner wrench similar to the ones used for the adjustable coil overs.
View attachment 156852

This is how the lower cam eccentrics should look when you want to maximize caster (move lower ball joints as far forward of the truck as possible). Pics are facing the front of the truck.
Passenger
View attachment 156853
Driver
View attachment 156854

With the cams set at their starting point, the Icon upper control arms need to be bottomed out so that camber wasn't positive. It would have been nicer if the upper control arms were shorter so that we could move the upper ball joint forward and aft with the adjustment of the heim joints. But all of the fine tuning had to be done with the factory lower control arm eccentrics.

There's a possibility that these were an early production and things have changed since then. Scott would have to chime in and say if there has been any changes to the Icon UCAs since I've left.

the collar you have a picture of is acutall a rear Control arm. The fronts have holes all around the collar vs a hex, it makes it very easy to adjust, I use a the bottom of a drill bil that's the exact size of the hole to adjust them.

The past few sets of Icon Billets ive installed have acutally aligned very well, and I was able to achieve the correct specs. I think they have changed it in the past year or 2 but have no way of acutally confirming.

Icon and TC arms have the +2 deg of caster built in and can easily achieve 4deg of caster with plenty of camber adjustment left(if your a skilled alignment tech)

I have seen more than one set of camburg arms that I couldn't get more than +3 deg out of. However I was under the impression that they had changed the geometry to also be +2 caster built in now as well.

 

[DesertCanyons]

Heim Joint on UCA

Thanks for all of the replies regarding my question abut Heims on the UCA. This helps a lot. I'll be picking the right system soon.
Total Automotive in Lost Wages, Nevada is only 5 hours away from me. I may need to make trip out there.

 

[wfo9]

Icon and TC arms have the +2 deg of caster built in and can easily achieve 4deg of caster with plenty of camber adjustment left(if your a skilled alignment tech)

I've never done it, so I can't say... Is there really that much skill involved? Seems like set the rear cam to + 9 and then go as far negative as you can up front and still keep camber in spec. Is there really any more to it than that? I know you have to come back and do toe... but I can't figure out why so many techs have issues with it.

I figure there has to be more to it.

Different shops always seem to get different results... Is it the racks measuring different....? Seems like a lot of mystery around alignment...

 

[Ducmonsta]

I figure there has to be more to it.

Different shops always seem to get different results... Is it the racks measuring different....? Seems like a lot of mystery around alignment...

There isn't much more. The mystery of alignments is finding a technician that isn't lazy or is competent.

 

[wfo9]

The main reason I'm asking... is that my alignment is sort of screwed up at the moment. It drives fine, but the caster is only about 1.5+... This makes clearing my dedicated offroad tires hard.

The guy I took it to (who seems to know what he is doing) told me I most likely had a bent spindle on the passenger side (he claimed it measured out different than the driver side, not sure how he measured it). He said the drivers side would easily go to 4.0 with good camber, but that the passenger side would not cooperate at all. He ended up having to just make the drivers side match what the passenger would do.

At first I thought I would try another alignment shop before digging further... but when I looked at how he adjusted it... it made sense. The drivers side is almost neutral on both cams, while the passenger is +8 on the rear and a little + on the front. That matches up with what he told me and what the sheet shows.

I'm just not sure where to go from here. I could try another alignment shop, but that is most likely throwing money away. I need to figure out a way to measure the spindle.

That is why the adjustable UCAs seemed like a nice option. At least I would not be throwing away money on parts or rack time...

I'm going to add spindle gussets after I get this figured out.

 

[Ducmonsta]

The main reason I'm asking... is that my alignment is sort of screwed up at the moment. It drives fine, but the caster is only about 1.5+... This makes clearing my dedicated offroad tires hard.

The guy I took it to (who seems to know what he is doing) told me I most likely had a bent spindle on the passenger side (he claimed it measured out different than the driver side, not sure how he measured it). He said the drivers side would easily go to 4.0 with good camber, but that the passenger side would not cooperate at all. He ended up having to just make the drivers side match what the passenger would do.

At first I thought I would try another alignment shop before digging further... but when I looked at how he adjusted it... it made sense. The drivers side is almost neutral on both cams, while the passenger is +8 on the rear and a little + on the front. That matches up with what he told me and what the sheet shows.

I'm just not sure where to go from here. I could try another alignment shop, but that is most likely throwing money away. I need to figure out a way to measure the spindle.

That is why the adjustable UCAs seemed like a nice option. At least I would not be throwing away money on parts or rack time...

I'm going to add spindle gussets after I get this figured out.

Could you help me understand what you're referring to when you say +8. For example, could you use the pics I posted about jangoforhire and translate what you're talking about regarding the +8, etc?

If I'm understanding correctly, the pass side pic has the rear cam at 9 and the front at 3. The drivers side rear cam is at 3 while the front cam is at 9. Make sense?

 

[wfo9]

Could you help me understand what you're referring to when you say +8. For example, could you use the pics I posted about jangoforhire and translate what you're talking about regarding the +8, etc?

If I'm understanding correctly, the pass side pic has the rear cam at 9 and the front at 3. The drivers side rear cam is at 3 while the front cam is at 9. Make sense?

I'm referring to the chart... that is in the manual that I posted earlier in this thread. They scale the adjustments 0 - 9. So + 9 in the rear pushes the rear of the LCA out as far as the cam will allow. And -9 in front will pull it in as far as possible. This results in max caster with the lower ball as far forward as posible ( but also creates positive camber). This is how I would describe the pics you posted.

I'm just stating it seems like the guy that tried to align mine did the right thing... unless his machine was reporting caster wrong...

 

[Ducmonsta]

I'm referring to the chart... that is in the manual that I posted earlier in this thread. They scale the adjustments 0 - 9. So + 9 in the rear pushes the rear of the LCA out as far as the cam will allow. And -9 in front will pull it in as far as possible. This results in max caster with the lower ball as far forward as posible ( but also creates positive camber). This is how I would describe the pics you posted.

I'm just stating it seems like the guy that tried to align mine did the right thing... unless his machine was reporting caster wrong...

Ok, I understand. You also see in trying to get max caster from the lower control arms causes positive camber. Essentially, you need the upper control arm to move the upper ball joint inward to offset the positive camber from the lower control arms. This is where my experience with the Icons comes into play. With the adjustments already bottomed out, you can't pull the upper ball joint inward to compensate for the positive camber. That's why I believe they should be just slightly "shorter" so that you CAN make those adjustments. But as Scott said earlier, Icon may have addressed this in later production models.

 

[wfo9]

Ok, I understand. You also see in trying to get max caster from the lower control arms causes positive camber. Essentially, you need the upper control arm to move the upper ball joint inward to offset the positive camber from the lower control arms. This is where my experience with the Icons comes into play. With the adjustments already bottomed out, you can't pull the upper ball joint inward to compensate for the positive camber. That's why I believe they should be just slightly "shorter" so that you CAN make those adjustments. But as Scott said earlier, Icon may have addressed this in later production models.

Yep... I'm guessing my spindle is bent, but it is really difficult to verify without pulling it and comparing to a new part.. and they are not cheap at all (darn Toyota parts are outrageous). I might be able to find a used one...

I still don't know exactly how I bent it. I can only think of one situation where I put some extreme load on that side. It was at night and I had to use a lot of momentum to get up a nasty loose extremely steep climb... Still thinking they are pretty weak if that caused it. And I think they would always bend towards positive camber ;-(

 

[Scott@Hightech]

Yep... I'm guessing my spindle is bent, but it is really difficult to verify without pulling it and comparing to a new part.. and they are not cheap at all (darn Toyota parts are outrageous). I might be able to find a used one...

I still don't know exactly how I bent it. I can only think of one situation where I put some extreme load on that side. It was at night and I had to use a lot of momentum to get up a nasty loose extremely steep climb... Still thinking they are pretty weak if that caused it. And I think they would always bend towards positive camber ;-(

Your LCA or lower ball joint is more likely to be bent than the spindle.

 

[Mtbkr]

2.9 w/ Camburg w/Moog BJs. Also drives great.

I just installed Camburg UCA's w/ the Moog ball joints on my Gen 5 w/ 3" lift and had a reputable 4wd shop perform an alignment and got the same result as you - 2.9 degree caster.

 

[DannyLlama]

I just installed Camburg UCA's w/ the Moog ball joints on my Gen 5 w/ 3" lift and had a reputable 4wd shop perform an alignment and got the same result as you - 2.9 degree castor.

Is that good or bad? excuse my lack of understanding.