Front Camber Lock

What you describe is a 'camber-lock' and similar devices are sold by all the Pantera vendors. Some have better installation info than others. I'm not sure who made yours from the description. Basically, the camber adjustment in our cars is via slotted holes through the upper ball joint holder & is held in place by simple bolt compression- a VERY bad design. The camber-locks jam the adjustment so hitting a curb or pothole doesn't instantly change your wheel alignment.

Jack, Now I find this is a Hall Pantera kit and is still in the present catalog. I assume it works fine, the bolt head bears on the ball joint casting stopping it from sliding in the slotted holes. I removed the bolt array and welded the plates to the upper control arm to add strength.
It looks to me that the A-arm structure needs the ball joint casting as a member otherwise there isn't much to maintain the shape of the a-arm compared to the lower A-arm. The lower A-arm is a superior design in many ways.

I have two Q's. Why do you think the Front lower control arm is a "supirior design" and Jack why do you think the friction clamping load is not a good idea for the front camber locks. I have designed SUV's with friction clamp loads that far exceed those of a front suspension in a pantera. Have you seen the joint move, with proper torque on the bolts?

My comment �superior design� is with respect to strength only. I am not a suspension designer, but I can recognize the additional stamping welded within the lower A-arm. The top A-arm has one plate welded to the bottom of the rails and the ball joint casting maintains the rails parallel. I would have expected a plate on the top of the rails to form a box. I added a plate to bridge the to rails and doubles as a reference for the ball joint casting.

Please comment or recommend if I have over-looked something.

IMHO relying only on the friction of a bolthead or nut in a slotted hole for a critical mechanism is a recipe for disaster. Racing engineer Carroll Smith agrees in his excellent book 'Design to Win'. The sheer existernce of an economic market for a camber lock argues against using such an arrangement unless an OEM locking mechanism is included. Another example of the same sort of thinking is the design of the stress-bar above our bellhousing. One CANNOT tighten the bolts enough to keep the bar from moving under load. In this case, the fix is to use a bar thats long enough to jam into the pockets at each end, thus transferring loads thru the welded pockets, not the bolts. Adjustment is now via a central left/righ-threded clevis and the bolts in their slotted holes then become the 'reastraining devices' that keeps the bar from popping out.

Jack, You are "Right-On" Sir!! I have the steel bar you discribe, It mounts solid and does it's job well. And I agree that the aluminum bar with the short ends is what we, in the know, call a "Pretty Bar", because ALL it does is sit there and look pretty, and does near nothing to add rigidity to the rear shock mounts. NOW, while we are on the subject of poor design!, I have noticed quit a few designs of cross bracing(aftermarket and homemade), both in the engine compartment and the front trunk. These braces are intended to add rigidity and reduce chassis flex which improves steering imput, cornering, braking, all of the above. But when it comes to the actual attaching points, "Heim Joints"(spherical rod ends)were used to allow for "Flexability" and would provide support only in a push/pull direction. This is a complete contradiction to the original Intent for the design. In other words, if you want chassis stiffening, then the Heim Joints are OUT! Marlin.

quote:

---

1
It mounts solid and does it's job well.
2
NOW, while we are on the subject of poor design!, I have noticed quit a few designs of cross bracing(aftermarket and homemade), both in the engine compartment and the front trunk. These braces are intended to add rigidity and reduce chassis flex which improves steering imput, cornering, braking, all of the above. But when it comes to the actual attaching points, "Heim Joints"(spherical rod ends)were used to allow for "Flexability" and would provide support only in a push/pull direction. This is a complete contradiction to the original Intent for the design. In other words, if you want chassis stiffening, then the Heim Joints are OUT! Marlin. [/B]

---

1
As for the rear "camber bar" A square tube exact lenght fitting is good. The bolt should just hold it in place.
2
The upper A-arms don�t carry as much load as does the lower arm. We can�t compare the mounting of the rear bar to the camber lock oval holes of the front top spindle mount. The principal are the same but not the load.

Front stiffening is not necessary. It will only add front-end weight, and costs money.

Right, heim joints do only provide strength in a straight-line direction. Depending on the construction of the stiffening part that is to be mounted, heim-joints may be less good. However, a single tube between two mounting points should only have straight loads for the best strength. A tube should NEWER receive bending forces. But bending forces is exactly what we see in a lot of these applications. And as soon as the forces are not directed to the exact centre of the ball in the heim-joint, the whole construction will be weaker.

Many times heim-joints is used for �adjustability� and as such the force vector change by the same amount as the adjustment made. HJ are also used to be able to sell a �bolt on� item. It probably also look �racy� to the crowd.

Goran Malmberg

I am certainly flattered to have PI-BB's best tech guys responding to my feeble question about camber lock, so while I have your attention please explain why there are sheet metal stamping upper and lower front A-arms and round tube for the rear upper and oval tube for the bottom rear? Thanks.

The OEM's go round and round with the design of suspension components. One day they want Aluminum control arms and the next they want stampings. The basic designs are stampings, forgeings, castings and some tubular designs, the later being few. Stampings are cheep but difficult to design for durability due to the shell design and the use of welding. Forgeings are heavy and normally used on heavy dutiy applications or whrere realestate is at a premium. Aluminum castings are light but expensive, although usually have greater stiffness than stampings. Aluminum forgeings are the best of all, these have the added stiffness, and reduced material and higher mechanical properties. I have not delt with tubular designs although they do have the benifit of optium use of section modulas. The Pantera suspension uses mild steel so the benifits of using tubular designs is minimized. There is one thing to note between the different designs is how the entire vehicle handles. Each component of the vehicle acts like a spring, ballancing each component to minimize total flex and harmonics is key.