DIY adjustable camber ball joints mod

[sambb]

Yeah I'd be into that. There's so uch available for mk 2/3 etc golfs and just zilch for us which sucks. Doesn't bulletfast do CAD and cnc machining. I just wonder how much further the track can be pushed out before driveshaft issues creep in though.

[sambb]

Really with a mac strut your just looking at 3 points of contact - the front and rear LCA bushes and the strut tower. Looking at it another way I wonder if anyone has looked into a complete strut/hub swap that could go onto our arm. If it was a VAG group part (judging by the fact that the audi joints fitted) I bet you could get our steering rack/tie rods to work in another hub that had better camber gain characteristics. I think I read somewhere that Mk3 driveshafts go into our hub - so are there any trick mk3 golf hubs/struts that could go in. I bet it would be do able.

[sambb]

These ball joints: Roll Center Ball Joint Kit Roll Center Ball Joint Kit [SUSPMK4RCX] - - It's Free! : USRT, Usually Sideways Rally Team

These mk 4 control arm with the rear mount modified: you could probably cut our rear LCA spigot off and adapt it somehow

Tubular Front Control Arms (MK4/R32/TT/ALL) MK4 VW/Audi Tubular Front Control Arms [SUSPMK4TARM] - $525.00 : USRT, Usually Sideways Rally Team

...and hopefully not run out of driveshaft length as the track increases.

[Martin]

These ball joints: Roll Center Ball Joint Kit Roll Center Ball Joint Kit [SUSPMK4RCX] - - It's Free! : USRT, Usually Sideways Rally Team

They would mainly be good if you wanted to lower the car
But see how little they can adjust the camber, +/- 0.5 deg
The further away you are from the hub the harder it is to adjust camber

These mk 4 control arm with the rear mount modified: you could probably cut our rear LCA spigot off and adapt it somehow

Tubular Front Control Arms (MK4/R32/TT/ALL) MK4 VW/Audi Tubular Front Control Arms [SUSPMK4TARM] - $525.00 : USRT, Usually Sideways Rally Team

They look totally awesome

I have replaced the arms in my Nissan 350Z to gain adjustability and eliminate compliance

[seangti]

This is the second time the ball joint on the whiteline adjustable drop links has backed off like that. anyone else had that?

Yeah it's happened once or twice with mine, but not recently. It sounds like the front end is wanting to abandon ship, really resonates along the chassis.

[sambb]

First dry night in a while so started getting the car ready for the weekends hillclimb. I fit my 20mm spacers to the front and its a no go. The wheels sit way proud of the guard lip now that the audi joints have increased the track - it just looks wrong really and would definitely get knocked back at scrutineering on the grounds that its not street legal. That left me only able to run my 12mm spacers. With them fit up, the front track is a touch wider than it had been pre-ball joint mod with the 20mm spacers fitted. But because of the camber it has now it doesn't look too out of place because the tyres are tipped in at the top.
I can confirm that the audi ball joints have changed the front geometry noticeably. When the front end was standard, the 12mm spacers felt weird I think because they were running at close to zero scrub eg strange squirming on down hill sweepers and really light pedestrian speed steering. The 20mm spacers had the steering feeling like standard again, nice and weighty, but obviously with positive scrub and a much wider track. Now, because the audi joints pivot much lower relative to the hub than the OE ball joints, the scrub radius will have moved more towards zero and so it takes less spacing out now to achieve the same result as before. This time the 12mm spacers felt wicked with nice meaty steering weight again and lots of feedback.
Theoretically now with a higher roll centre the car should be less inclined to roll, and by achieving the same wide track but with narrower spacers my wheel rate won't have dropped as much as when I had the 20mm spacers on, so overall the car will have more front roll stiffness than before (which you can definitely feel) so I should be able to get away with the front ARB on soft for the weekend I think and hopefully get some good drive coming out of the hairpins.

[Martin]

Theoretically now with a higher roll centre the car should be less inclined to roll

Probably not - the roll center was already in a good place
The reason the car leans/rolls is because it's up high and and is setup soft for comfort

It's when you lower the car that the roll center moves down away from the center of mass - which induces more lean/roll
Devices like the TT ball joints put the roll center back where it's meant to be - fixing the problem and making low work correctly

Never the less, one would assume all the work you've done should return better handling, good luck and keep us posted on how she performs in the hillclimb

[sambb]

I do see what you mean that at standard front ride height there is no roll centre height issue to correct yet.
With the original ball joints and at stock ride height the control arm pivots were basically dead level. This was measured at the front LCA pivot. The rear LCA pivot is much higher even with the anti dive reducing rear offset bush in place. To be honest in that situation I'm not sure if you are meant to take an average of the two inner pivots or use trig to work out a virtual inner pivot point that lines up in top view with where the ball joint sits. So basically the instantaneous centre with the OEM joint is governed almost entirely by the SAI.
But with the ball joint pivots now a full 10mm lower than the OEM's the roll centre would have to have risen because the SAI has increased by a degree and a bit and so has the control arm angle by more. But like you say it will have risen towards a COG that is unchanged because the ride height is unchanged so what effect it will have in that situation, I don't know.
For sure I agree that the real performance benefit of this won't be felt until I throw my lowered weitecs back in which should restore the factory geometry but with a lower COG. I don't have the stomach for any more work at the moment though - the garage floor is too cold atm. I would have thought the raised RC would have to be having some effect though but I guess there's every possibility that it feels less inclined to roll only due to the fact that the unspaced and spaced front track is wider than before.
At the moment its tricky because so many things have had to change due to the ball joints. eg I physically couldn't run the 20mm spacers because the track is so much wider and the 12mm spacers that didn't work well before now feel like the 20's used to in terms of steering feel. And where I needed to run the front bar on hard before to get a good balance, the car seems to prefer the bar on soft. On hard it is sharper and pointier than before with the new camber but is more inclined to spin up the inside front. I hate having to change more than one thing at a time. Even the rear will have changed from last time out because the 12mm spacers that I used there are now on the front, so the rear track will be back to stock and I'll have a wider front track by a smidgen. I don't think the bigger F:R track ratio will hurt me on the tight track i'll be on though and should even help. I'm hillclimbing at the same track as 3 weeks ago on sunday so if its dry I guess we'll see if changing about 4 things at once due to the ball joint change helps my time!!

[sambb]

hey martin I just measured my tracks and have a question. My front track with the BJ's and with the 10mm spacers on is 1450mm. My rear track std/no spacers is 1380. I could put my 20mm spacers on the rear to give F:R 1450:1420 and square things up. What do you reckon for a tight hairpin riddled track where you don't really get out of second.

[Martin]

My gut feeling would be to leave the rear in stock/narrow format
This may help the car being taily and eager to rotate
If you go wider the car may be less inclined to rotate and may increase understeer tendencies

Put the spacers in the boot and take them with you - an easy thing to try at the event if in need