Flipping upper a-arms

[72BLAZERDUDE]

Will this work on my 72. I know they have to be flipped over and switched sides. What are the advantages and disadvantages. Will I have to do any grinding. (I am having my arms powder coated and want to make sure all mods are done first). Does this limit travel of the arm. I would assume the ball joint will have to be mounted on spindle side of the arm afterwards.

[TurnNBurn]

HI

There is a post a few pages back that has pics of it done, but I could not get the ball joints to go in the control arm upside down in my 82 with out grinding the balljoint and the arm. I really didnt like the idea of mounting them
in the spindle side. So I am in the same boat I dont know how to get them to work. If you find out it would be greatly appreciated if you told me how you did it. Pics would help too. The person that posted the pics says that they
fit in there, they do BUT the balljoint will not sit level in there. that was my problem.

All that I know about it is that it limits how high the front can go.

[Izzy]

Do you have to drill out the spindle to do this? I know you do on other model trucks when you flip the balljoints since the spindles hole is normally tapered.

[69 longhorn]

Originally Posted by fiveeightchevy

Do you have to drill out the spindle to do this? I know you do on other model trucks when you flip the balljoints since the spindles hole is normally tapered.

I havent tryed this yet, but am thinking that way.... it looks like the upper a arms are flipped upside down, & swapped side for side to help with the balljoint angles on a severely lowered truck. I think the question is remounting the balljoints in the a arm after the swap. they will still go in the spindle the same way......but do you mount the balljoint under or over the a arm? with the a arm upside down, it doesnt look to me that the balljoint will bolt onto the topside & sit flat like the stocker did. what about mounting the balljoint with the a arm over top instead? 69L

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by 69 longhorn

.... it looks like the upper a arms are flipped upside down, & swapped side for side to help with the balljoint angles on a severely lowered truck.... 69L

Flip them upside down & swap them side to side.

I had mine on like this (sitting in the garage only) & don't recall any issues w/the ball joints not bolting right in. I'll have to look into it & see if I did something special that I'm not remembering.

[72BLAZERDUDE]

Shouldn't be any issues with it not bolting in because your basically just flipping it over in the arm and mounting it from the same side of the arm. When you flip the arm over the ball joint will now be mounted on the underside of the arm instead of the top side of the arm. Mounts to the spindle exactly the same. So I don't see any problems with that. I was more concerned with travel issues do to the shape of the upper arms. SCOTI did you have yours mounted on the truck. If so do the arms hit the top of crossmember any sooner than normal on there downward travel. I would think the corrected angle of the ball joint shouldn't be to different at ride height than with the arms mounted normally. Does anybody have the link to the previous pictures

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by 72BLAZERDUDE

Shouldn't be any issues with it not bolting in because your basically just flipping it over in the arm and mounting it from the same side of the arm. When you flip the arm over the ball joint will now be mounted on the underside of the arm instead of the top side of the arm. Mounts to the spindle exactly the same. So I don't see any problems with that. I was more concerned with travel issues do to the shape of the upper arms. SCOTI did you have yours mounted on the truck. If so do the arms hit the top of crossmember any sooner than normal on there downward travel. I would think the corrected angle of the ball joint shouldn't be to different at ride height than with the arms mounted normally. Does anybody have the link to the previous pictures

Yes, when flipped they will hit the crossmember sooner if the suspension were to be unloaded. But the BJ angle was much better compared to right-side up & extremely dropped.

[gringoloco]

Bringing back the dead...

Any pics of this? Problems with mounting the BJs under the arm? Pros/Cons?

SCOTI- Ever drive on it like this?

[abadsvt]

What is the purpose of this? Does it move the upper arm forward a little so when you are dumped the wheel is centered in the wheel well?

[Inthuwind]

PICS!!! I am interested.

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by abadsvt

What is the purpose of this? Does it move the upper arm forward a little so when you are dumped the wheel is centered in the wheel well?

Not so much that (see here for that mod). But what it does do:

Originally Posted by SHANE

...the BJ angle was much better compared to right-side up & extremely dropped.

[abadsvt]

Thanks alvin for that link! I am making my own frame and all the mounting locations can easily be altered. You wrote that you moved it 1 1/2" forward. I plan on having my truck sit about 1-1 1/2" off the ground. If you were to do it all over again how much would you move it forward? I just got to that stage of the front end and would like to fix it now before i have to go back and correct it. Thanks again!

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by abadsvt

You wrote that...

That is most definitely not my handy work. His board name is Slammed67. Sorry I forgot to give him credit for that . Hopefully he can chime in, or you could try sending him a PM.

[gringoloco]

Few pics of the arms. Notice how by flipping the arm and swapping sides, you keep all the angles the same except the balljoint mount. When the arm is at an extreme upward angle, this will keep the balljoint from binding.

Do I have to be the guinea pig here? Anyone see any problems with this?

And yes, I know they look like crap, they're torn down for the powder coater...

[crazy longhorn]

Originally Posted by gringoloco

Few pics of the arms. Notice how by flipping the arm and swapping sides, you keep all the angles the same except the balljoint mount. When the arm is at an extreme upward angle, this will keep the balljoint from binding.

Do I have to be the guinea pig here? Anyone see any problems with this?

And yes, I know they look like crap, they're torn down for the powder coater...

It looks like that may also change the caster angle.....I wonder if its to the good? L

[gringoloco]

Originally Posted by crazy longhorn

It looks like that may also change the caster angle.....I wonder if its to the good? L

It looks like the CL of the balljoint will be the same, so the caster should be unaffected- as far as I can tell...

[crazy longhorn]

Originally Posted by gringoloco

It looks like the CL of the balljoint will be the same, so the caster should be unaffected- as far as I can tell...

I would be curious to see if it makes the alignment shop "dude" a little crazy Really, it looks like it should work, but probably best on severly slammed trucks. My longhorn is a 3 " drop on a spring, & I have thought about this mod......but would like to hear more L

[el curioso]

Any one got the link to the previos thread?

[chevy_mike]

Originally Posted by gringoloco

It looks like the CL of the balljoint will be the same, so the caster should be unaffected- as far as I can tell...

From what I am seeing, I don't think the caster will be affected I do think the built in Anti-dive may. Most cars/trucks have some anti-dive built in so when you are braking, it helps to keep the front from nose diving to much. You still get the dive from the weight transfer but not as much. At least that is what I have gathered from some of the race car suspension books I have read. YMMV.

[gringoloco]

Originally Posted by el curioso

Any one got the link to the previos thread?

I think this is the one he was referring to. Linky No pics of it done though...

[AesC10s]

Any one have any more info on this i might do this to mine but i would like more info.

[crakarjax]

Rise from the grave! Ten years on, has anyone done this with success/failure/benefits?

[lolife99]

I see zero benefit.
You are better off trying to achieve more caster with your a-arms.
(moving the lower balljoint forward)

[crakarjax]

Originally Posted by lolife99

I see zero benefit.
You are better off trying to achieve more caster with your a-arms.
(moving the lower balljoint forward)

I think the point of this was to alleviate ball joint angle/binding, not affecting caster. If someone needs more joint play, improving caster will do little good!