Camber

[anasasisxenophontis]

Ok cool that clears things up. I did manage to come up with something that gains 4-5° negative camber at full bump and gains 2° at full droop, and it was like you said. I kind of squeezed the arm mounts an inch closer at the frame, and that did the trick.

[plkracer]

BDK, where should the castor curve lay? Castor usually doesn't change if your mounts for the a arms are parallel.

[bdkw1]

Originally Posted by plkracer

BDK, where should the castor curve lay? Castor usually doesn't change if your mounts for the a arms are parallel.

The mounts on stock cars are not parallel. The top arm is angled to the bottom arm (viewed from the side) to give more castor in compression=anti-dive. This has serious limitations when you get into higher travel numbers. When fully drooped, you can wind up with positive castor and twitchy steering. Also under hard braking with a lot of chassis pitch you will have reduced castor.
F
If you take the upper arm mounts and make them look like this / \ (Viewed from the top) you can get gain in bump and droop. Usually a mixture of the 2 styles will get the desired results. Cars with the front arms raked will need more than cars with the arms parallel to the ground.

[plkracer]

Ok, I see what you are saying. Is a change is caster needed? With my older j arm design, I gained 2 degrees in both bump and droop from ride height.

[bdkw1]

Originally Posted by plkracer

Is a change is caster needed?

I like it, some people are totally against it.