Anybody using adjustable strut rods?

[BIGSHCLUNK]

Lots of great info here, thank you James from P-S-T for the enlightenment! I'll be in touch soon

 

[old tired rebel]

Great Thread. I learned a little something here.

 

[68 Sport Satellite]

Here is what I came up with. You have to loosen the bushing end but you don't have to loosen the control rod end. You can get an inch of adjustment either way but, by that point something is probably wrong. They are also 7/8" thick so they are less likely to bend. Haven't installed them yet, and it will probably be a while. Was going to go with the heim joint but I have heard stories of K members cracking.View attachment 99188

I too have heard about heim joint strut rods causing k member cracking and am curious what the PST rep has to say about this for re-assurance. Also, are the PST rods adjustable after install, unlike the Hotchkis rods? I did have Hotchkis strut rods and liked the firm ride, then a front end guy here in town scared me with cracked k member stories and made me a stock replacement set that I swapped in. I would love to go with the PST rods if they will be good long term on the street over bumpy roads...

 

[451Mopar]

Like P-S-T, Horchkiss, Mancini? How do you like them? Any do's or don't's?
Thanks
BIGS

I just got a set of the QA1 Dynamic struts from Mancinni racing along with the lower control arm stiffening plates, but don't have them installed yet.

http://www.qa1.net/qa1_motorsports/...amic-strut-bars/mopar-dynamic-strut-bars.html

I like the adjustable bars, less unsprung weight, no bushing deflection under braking, reduced friction as the suspension cycles, and adjustable length.

 

[PST]

I too have heard about heim joint strut rods causing k member cracking and am curious what the PST rep has to say about this for re-assurance. Also, are the PST rods adjustable after install, unlike the Hotchkis rods? I did have Hotchkis strut rods and liked the firm ride, then a front end guy here in town scared me with cracked k member stories and made me a stock replacement set that I swapped in. I would love to go with the PST rods if they will be good long term on the street over bumpy roads...

My personal background before I came to work for PST was in auto industries mainly in restoration ( body/lead work) and drag racing(pit crew) for the past 10 years. Originally at PST I did customer service and tech, while in the position I never had any issues with customers having issues with k-members fracturing at the mounting point. But being in the restoration business and working on many types of cars with struts rods I would run into cars that would have fracturing at the mounting points but it was normally due to thinning metal (rust) from moisture/dirt sitting between that bushings.

But fracturing could be caused by over adjusting of the adjustable strut rods too. They are only meant from slight caster adjustments as needed (meaning if you have a bent k-member this is not a fix). I am will be installing a set in my mopar pretty soon ( will post pics), and they should be able to adjusted in the car.

Thanks
James

 

[RustyRatRod]

Not that I doubt it, but I would like to see pictures of the k frame cracked in that area. Might give some insight as to how to reinforce that area.

 

[old tired rebel]

My personal background before I came to work for PST was in auto industries mainly in restoration ( body/lead work) and drag racing(pit crew) for the past 10 years. Originally at PST I did customer service and tech, while in the position I never had any issues with customers having issues with k-members fracturing at the mounting point. But being in the restoration business and working on many types of cars with struts rods I would run into cars that would have fracturing at the mounting points but it was normally due to thinning metal (rust) from moisture/dirt sitting between that bushings.

But fracturing could be caused by over adjusting of the adjustable strut rods too. They are only meant from slight caster adjustments as needed (meaning if you have a bent k-member this is not a fix). I am will be installing a set in my mopar pretty soon ( will post pics), and they should be able to adjusted in the car.

Thanks
James

A how too thread on this would be great.

 

[5.7 hemi]

R&R, or did ya want more, lol!!

 

[BIGSHCLUNK]

Pic's are always good! Teach this ol' dog a few new tricks

 

[68sportsatelliteragtop]

My personal background before I came to work for PST was in auto industries mainly in restoration ( body/lead work) and drag racing(pit crew) for the past 10 years. Originally at PST I did customer service and tech, while in the position I never had any issues with customers having issues with k-members fracturing at the mounting point. But being in the restoration business and working on many types of cars with struts rods I would run into cars that would have fracturing at the mounting points but it was normally due to thinning metal (rust) from moisture/dirt sitting between that bushings.

But fracturing could be caused by over adjusting of the adjustable strut rods too. They are only meant from slight caster adjustments as needed (meaning if you have a bent k-member this is not a fix). I am will be installing a set in my mopar pretty soon ( will post pics), and they should be able to adjusted in the car.

Thanks
James

I took a couple pics of the Hotchkis strut rods in my car. The rods don't have a flat spot in the bung by the heim joint, like the P-S-T product. Once you get the front mounted in the K member you really can't turn the joint. The adjustment would be made by loosening the jamb nut and retainer at the LCA and threading the rod in or out. Without a hex or flat spot on the rod, the only way to rotate the rod would be w/ a pipe wrench, scarring the rods. Looks like the P-S-T rods are the way to go, both remove the rubber bushing and have a solid front mount, but the P-S-T rods have provisions for adjusting the length once installed.


View attachment 100283

 

[Jeremiah]

The PST rods look exactly like my RMS units.

 

[q-ship]

All I can say is that it's a good thing that the vast majority of these old cars are used very rarely.

How that can be considered an upgrade is ludicrous, and will be doomed to failure, possibly catastrophic, if applied to a daily driver on common roads.

At best it will accelerate lower control arm bushing wear, ball joint wear, reduce braking performance (by eliminating smooth/progressive anti dive), and put higher than designed loads on all the other suspension and chassis components, and for what???

If it were designed for fine adjustment of production tolerances, it would be designed like a tie rod for adjustment (though MUCH beefier).

As it is, it violates two fundamental rules of engineering. #1 - is that something has to be designed to fail as gracefully as possible in the event of failure (stock fulfills that very well), and #2 - If something can't flex, it will break eventually (all the flex is transfered to the lower controll arm bushing, and as load to the heim joint).

It appears to be the answer to a question that no body ever asked, or (to put it another way), a solution to a non problem, (but a non-solution that can fail dramatical and catastrophically)!

All I can say is that it never ceases to amaze me how many ways people can come up with to degrade the performance, and true enjoyment, of these old cars!

 

[PST]

[/QUOTE]How that can be considered an upgrade is ludicrous, and will be doomed to failure, possibly catastrophic, if applied to a daily driver on common roads.[/QUOTE]

To say these upgrades are ludicrous I say is ludicrous. Many of these upgrade are derived from today's Daily Drivers ( AKA Modern Cars suspension design) So to say that it is a recipe for catastrophy is false. If that was the case I guess we have would have cars flying off the road around us on our daily commute.


[/QUOTE]At best it will accelerate lower control arm bushing wear, ball joint wear, reduce braking performance (by eliminating smooth/progressive anti dive), and put higher than designed loads on all the other suspension and chassis components, and for what???[/QUOTE]

I do not completely understand your statement. If any thing it increases smooth/progressive anti-dive as the heim joint allows for a more fluid movement from the control arm to the k member? I would agree that it can cause pre-mature wear of the lower control arm bushings if its not used for fine tuning of caster (meaning used to compensate for a bent suspension parts). But as for causing for pre- mature wear on ball joints I do not see the connection.

[/QUOTE]If it were designed for fine adjustment of production tolerances, it would be designed like a tie rod for adjustment (though MUCH beefier).[/QUOTE]

Our adjustable strut rods are designed for fine tune adjustments and work off a very similar principle of a tie rod sleeve and to say that the design is not more robust I beg to differ.

[/QUOTE]As it is, it violates two fundamental rules of engineering. #1 - is that something has to be designed to fail as gracefully as possible in the event of failure (stock fulfills that very well), and #2 - If something can't flex, it will break eventually (all the flex is transfered to the lower controll arm bushing, and as load to the heim joint).[/QUOTE]

A heim joint can and will fail as gracefully as a strut rod bushing. In essence a heim is based on the same principle as a ball joint (ball and socket). As it wears it will loosen and make a clunking noise. I would assume that most on this site are in tune with car and do periodic checks of there suspension and brake systems.

[/QUOTE]All I can say is that it never ceases to amaze me how many ways people can come up with to degrade the performance, and true enjoyment, of these old cars![/QUOTE]

All I can say to this is everyone is entitled to their opinion, but is it a right to bash the individuals and their ideas to help improve the handling and performance of these muscle cars and make it available to the public. ( This is me talking NOT PST, I am talking for every manufacturers big and small yes we are here to making a living but we also share a common bond and that is the love of Mopars)


Thanks
James

 

[RICHIES ARMOR]

James

Are these available for the 73-73 B-Body style strut rod? Mine bolts to the top of the lower control arm.

Thanks

Richie

 

[PST]

Hey Richie,

Sorry we don't at this point but it is something that I am looking into.

Thanks
James

 

[Jeremiah]

All I can say is that it's a good thing that the vast majority of these old cars are used very rarely.

How that can be considered an upgrade is ludicrous, and will be doomed to failure, possibly catastrophic, if applied to a daily driver on common roads.

At best it will accelerate lower control arm bushing wear, ball joint wear, reduce braking performance (by eliminating smooth/progressive anti dive), and put higher than designed loads on all the other suspension and chassis components, and for what???

If it were designed for fine adjustment of production tolerances, it would be designed like a tie rod for adjustment (though MUCH beefier).

As it is, it violates two fundamental rules of engineering. #1 - is that something has to be designed to fail as gracefully as possible in the event of failure (stock fulfills that very well), and #2 - If something can't flex, it will break eventually (all the flex is transfered to the lower controll arm bushing, and as load to the heim joint).

It appears to be the answer to a question that no body ever asked, or (to put it another way), a solution to a non problem, (but a non-solution that can fail dramatical and catastrophically)!

All I can say is that it never ceases to amaze me how many ways people can come up with to degrade the performance, and true enjoyment, of these old cars!

Do you have any direct experience with adjustable strut rods?

 

[Brads70]

I made my own. I wanted them mounted in urethane to dampen road shock/noise? I agree they should not be used to get more caster but to adjust for the "sweet spot" where the LCA bushing doesn't bind.

 

[RICHIES ARMOR]

James

Thanks for the prompt reply. No worries . Itll take while to upgrade the other items. I just picked up a set of your Billet TIE rod sleeves and Im upgrading to the 11/16" tie rods now.

Richie

 

[68 Sport Satellite]

Now those look sweet! I like that it gives the suspension travel/direction what it wants, yet has some urethane to soften the street ride a bit. What car did you install these on and have you driven it yet? I wouldn't mind you making a set for me!

Looks like you're running the Hotchkis UCA's on there as well, which I have on my '68 Satellite. Sometimes when I turn all the way to lock out in one direction at slow speed it feels like something is binding a bit. Would that be my LCA's? I boxed my LCA's since I installed a Hotchkis front sway bar, but my strut rods are new original rubber style made as a one-off for me by a local frame shop.

I made my own. I wanted them mounted in urethane to dampen road shock/noise? I agree they should not be used to get more caster but to adjust for the "sweet spot" where the LCA bushing doesn't bind.

 

[RustyRatRod]

Damn Brad, that looks nice.

James, thanks for continuing to respond in this thread. I think you've shed light on several different concerns.