 |
|
Mine loosened up slightly after only 50 miles. I figure that was just the bearings wearing in.
The top washer that GC supplies is much thicker than it has to be. Replacing it with a standard thickness washer is worth a bit over an eighth in thread. That’s enough to get full engagement of the locking ring on the strut nut.
i have at least 250 miles on mine now including two 2day autoxes and theyre still tight as shit.
I just run the strut nut barely finger tight so they don’t bind up. seems to be working fine as is, but i wonder if/how the bearing are rocking as the suspension moves…
Does Jay at Ground Control monitor this forum? I have been talking to him recently about this issue and he is of the mind that this is only a minor inconvience. I tend to disagree. Right now this issue is holding up work on my car.
I also spoke with the place that is selling the Vorslag se30 plates. Those special top nuts that fit down into the sleave are not avail yet.
I think I am going to let a machine shop touch up the bearing housing’s on the GC plates and be done with it.
To be honest when I picked GC, I did not expect to have these types of issues.
I may go back to Kmacs. They suck but at least they, fit, give you -3, and last a while.
We just removed a set that have been in the car since 1999 and should have been replaced four races ago. Pretty good mileage.
Thanks
Don
BMWCCA Boston #49
I have them, and i saw the same issue. I asked my mechanic, and she’s seen them before and never had any issues.
Can you use thread locker?
Mine were the same, but I just cranked them down hard and put them on the car. They’ve been working fine ever since.
JP
Don,
I am sorry I did not get back to you today. I was playing phone tag with Vorshlag. I assure you I will have an answer tomorrow.
Walter Ford
[quote]i have at least 250 miles on mine now including two 2day autoxes and theyre still tight as shit.
I just run the strut nut barely finger tight so they don’t bind up. seems to be working fine as is, but i wonder if/how the bearing are rocking as the suspension moves…[/quote]
It might be that your are still tight because you didn’t tighten the strut nut. That would allow the strut rod to rotate in the plate instead of the bearing rotating. If that’s happening the bearings won’t wear in.
I’m resurrecting this thread hoping there’s now some more info. I have been fighting with these plates for week or so now and am about fed up.
The only way I can keep the spring hats from binding (and completing screwing up the front end) is to leave the top strut nut loose. After driving for a few miles the nut loosens to the point where the strut is moving around which I’m thinking is not the safest thing. Once I tighten the nut the hats bind up again and screw up the spring position which also is not very safe! AS everyone mentions, I can’t get the nut down far enough to lock on to the threads. I’m assuming that would pretty much solve the problem.
Does anyone have a verdict or a solution to this problem? I installed the hats with the washer so everything is good there.
Ideas?
My first guess is that you are missing some washers or something under the plate, above the top spring pearch. Maybe you thighten the nut and the spring pearch binds aginst the top of the strut tower and does not let the bearing work. Take a look at the Bentley manual and see if you have everything in there.
Michael
#36
Matt - we have these plates on 3 e30s - Mike’s street car and the two '87 race cars. I agree, there is not much for the nut to hold on to, but we have no problems with them coming loose. Regarding the binding, have you checked to see if the spring hat is binding on the body in the shock tower? Try loosening the camber plate (less camber), tightening the shock nut, then push the assembly in to get as much camber as possible. For our cars, if you have the spring unloaded and push it it so it just touches the inner body panel, when the car is on the ground, there is enough room for the hat to turn. Also, did you grease the washer below the camber plate and bearing?
Ed
Thanks for the quick replies.
I’ve checked every possible place the thing could be binding and it’s definitely binding up in the camber plate bearing. I’ve spent a ton of time getting the plates lined up correctly so that the spring hat doesn’t bind against the strut tower.
If I loosen the nut on top of the strut (making it finger tight) everything works perfectly. As soon as I tighten with any amount of torque it binds the whole thing up.
I did NOT grease the washer… I may have to try that although it feels like it’s more than just a lube problem. Seeing as many other people have posted about this binding in the past I think it’s something common to these plates.
I’ve thread-locked the top nut and I have a track day tomorrow so I’ll see how that goes.
shifter - any updates on your problem? I’ll be installing these in the next few weeks…
I can say that they’re a bit of a pain to get right. I did thread-lock the top nut and it seem to be holding up fine. Just be real careful about how far you push the camber in. You have to find the sweet spot where you have max camber, but the hat doesn’t rub the strut tower. Use some blue thread-lock and it should work ok.
It’s worth saying that I’ve only been on the track once since I did this. They held up fine for that day, but I can’t speak to long-term use. I would definintely keep an eye on them.
I just removed a set of K-MAC Stage 1 plates (maximum possible camber was -1.7*) and am replacing them with Ground Control plates, with the intention of getting to -3.5* camber.
For those of you who are getting -3.0* to -3.5* of front camber with the Ground Control c/c plates, were they a simple bolt-on arrangement, or was some massaging of the strut tower needed in order to provide clearance between it and the spring so that the plates could move inboard far enough?
Mark
ON EDIT: I installed a Ground Control c/c plate on the LF only, and the camber is now at -3.0* (with the RF still being at -1.7*, with the K-MAC plate). Again, the whole purpose of this $350+ exercise is to get -3.5* of camber in the front, so I’m still missing -0.5*. The plate is pushed as far inboard as the spring diameter and strut tower will allow.
ummm, you don’t expect anybody to answer the massaging question here do you, given that that is not provided for in the rules …
bruce
the coffee can is about empty…
I have IE adjustable camber plates
[attachment=1401]IrelandEngineeringE30camberplates-.jpg[/attachment]
and can get crash strut mounts “cheap”
[attachment=1402]susp_e30_strutbearing_offset_camber_31331139484_lg.jpg[/attachment]
This will get me to 3.5 neg camber. Is this an ok set up short term until the budget permits the good ones?
[quote=“leggwork” post=55374]ummm, you don’t expect anybody to answer the massaging question here do you, given that that is not provided for in the rules …
bruce[/quote]
As such, I would expect that absolutely nobody here (or anywhere else) has massaged any shock towers in order to get to -3.5*, because it is not provided for in the rules. Even if they buy the high-buck plates and find that they still cannot get to -3.5* by simply bolting them on, I do not expect them to make any further modifications to the car in order to simply reach the rules-mandated maximum camber amount of -3.5*, which appears to be an unattainable goal in at least one instance of which I am aware. Right.
Mark
I know a guy… He accidentally wink bent his struts on very a awkward bump and he can now get 3.5 degrees of camber with a basic set of camber plates - no modifications or struggling required.
this is true, my RF strut is bent following a crash last year, i have to back the camber plate out almost all the way just to stay under -3.5
