Notices
Modified JK Tech Tech related bulletin board forum regarding subjects such as suspension, tires & wheels, steering, bumpers, skid plates, drive train, cages, on-board air and other useful modifications that will help improve the performance and protection of your Jeep JK Wrangler (Rubicon, Sahara, Unlimited and X) on the trail.

PLEASE DO NOT START SHOW & TELL TYPE THREADS IN THIS FORUM

Aligment question

Thread Tools
 
Old 12-06-2014 | 06:27 AM
  #11  
Invest2m4's Avatar
JK Junkie
 
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 3,697
Likes: 2
From: Grosse Pointe, MI
Default

Originally Posted by kjeeper10
Why would caster be that low at 2" ? He's right AEV list a min coil measurement to run their brackets. I would do arms in this situation. Either uppers or fixed length lowers... Both will be cheaper.
It was likely low from the factory. They do their best to pair coils with the weight of the Jeep, but he is probably on the light end of the coil so caster was low. Plus, having a little more caster than stock is fine (up to 5*).
Old 12-06-2014 | 01:15 PM
  #12  
ade's Avatar
ade
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 479
Likes: 0
From: Alameda, CA
Default

Originally Posted by Invest2m4

You like AEV, but not MetalCloak? Is this the twilight zone?! Haha. Just messing with you
First, let's not take another thread off line.

Never said I didn't like Metalcloak, just don't like their CA's or 6paxs.

F'in hate Priuses, but happily wheel with Tacomas, go figure.. Just messing back...
Old 12-06-2014 | 02:05 PM
  #13  
Ncb's Avatar
Ncb
JK Super Freak
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,087
Likes: 2
From: Parker, Colorado
Default

I'd go with lower adjustable control arms. The brackets are cheap, but on a lower amount of lift why decrease the ground clearance of the attach point? I had the brackets and switched to Synergy lower arms and didn't notice any difference in handling. I thought the brackets looked stupid. Chances are you don't have the required height for the brackets.
Old 12-07-2014 | 08:17 AM
  #14  
htm7765's Avatar
Thread Starter
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
From: Bluffton SC
Default

Looks like it will be arms any advantage of upper adjustable over lower other than the cost ?
Old 12-07-2014 | 02:30 PM
  #15  
htm7765's Avatar
Thread Starter
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
From: Bluffton SC
Default

Ugh. I just came across my alignment specs they left a copy in the Jeep while I am waiting on the cams ( this was a suggestion prior to posting) I was off it is at 1.0 degrees I find it crazy that a small 2 inch lift could cause this, I have to assume it was low before I did the lift and purchased the Jeep, it never really gave me an issue little flighty on the road but I thought it was just a Jeep thing and never really gave it a thought, the front end is tight from what I have been told anyway, is there something I am missing or should be concerned about ??? Should I invest in upper adjustable with my lowers ? There are good sales floating a round the forum right now
Old 12-07-2014 | 03:32 PM
  #16  
Mr.T's Avatar
JK Junkie
FJOTM Winner
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,171
Likes: 211
From: Over the hill
Default

For comparison, mine has a 2" lift and handles fine without any caster correction. Never had the caster angle measured. My thinking is that if the steering feels about the same after lifting, it isn't enough difference in caster angle to matter. There's going be variation off the assembly line, so other results may vary...

If I'm understanding correctly, your Jeep is handling OK, not flighty steering, but the caster reading is very low (1 degree). That caster reading sounds fishy to me, maybe try another shop?


Last edited by Mr.T; 12-07-2014 at 03:36 PM.
Old 12-07-2014 | 03:38 PM
  #17  
nthinuf's Avatar
JK Jedi Master
FJOTM Winner
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 11,463
Likes: 162
From: Austin <--> Colorado Springs
Default

Originally Posted by htm7765
while I am waiting on the cams ( this was a suggestion prior to posting)
Cams have not been installed, correct? You have decided to ditch them in favor of adj arms?

As far as upper vs lower goes - one set of arms will adjust the caster/pinion, the second set allows for fine tuning and for moving the entire axle forward/backward in the wheel well. If that alignment sheet is correct, and you really are somehow down at 1 degree caster with only 2" spacers, (somewhat difficult to believe...) then I would opt for front lowers instead of uppers. Uppers have to be shortened to raise the caster, and you may not be able to get them short enough to set the caster where you want it. Lowers will be adjusted longer, and you should not run into a problem getting 3+ degrees of caster out of them. If you have money to throw at it, won't hurt anything to grab the uppers as well. But shouldn't be needed.

But before pulling out the credit card, I think I would get some verification on the alignment. Some shops will throw it on the rack and print the specs for free just to get people in the door. Wouldn't be a bad idea to make a few calls. Or run out and buy a $10 angle finder and use the steps in the DIY Alignment writeup to get a 'ballpark' of where you are to see if it backs up the printout you have.
Old 12-07-2014 | 03:47 PM
  #18  
htm7765's Avatar
Thread Starter
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
From: Bluffton SC
Default

I am pretty confident on the alignment a friend is doing it unless the machine is whacked out I would assume it is correct but I really thought at that level this thing would be all over the road. Yes after posting I am ditching the cams I font thunk they would have gotten me close anyway sounds like lowers are the way to go from what I see the rock crawlers are liked and they seem to be the least expensive out their... Agree ???
Old 12-07-2014 | 09:55 PM
  #19  
Mr.T's Avatar
JK Junkie
FJOTM Winner
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,171
Likes: 211
From: Over the hill
Default

With 1 degree caster I thought it would be all over the road too, that's what makes me skeptical of the measurement.

Using this table for fixed arms, I'm deducing that for a 2" lift there is about 1* change in caster (negative). Given this is correct, if it was 4.2* stock it would change to about 3.2* at 2" lift. 3.7* to 4.7* is the stock setting, but it's not something I get OCD about if it handles well -- especially since adding caster (more positive) makes the pinion angle worse.

Old 12-08-2014 | 03:43 AM
  #20  
kjeeper10's Avatar
JK Junkie
Vet Army
 
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
From: CT
Default

Uppers (adjustable) or fixed lowers. Like I said .. Either will be cheaper then adjustable lowers.


Quick Reply: Aligment question



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:25 AM.