Too much positive camber with BMR A-Arms

[booyah11]

Recently installed the full BMR suspension kit, including new upper and lower A-Arms.

Took it for an alignment and had three issues:

• Too much positive Camber
• Inner Tie Rod Sleeve stuck
• Upper Ball Joint installed on wrong side of A-Arm

The toe is all jacked up because the sleeve between the tire rods was fouled up and not adjustable. Got new inners and sleeves, so that will be an easy fix.

I also noticed that I put the ball joint plate on the bottom of the upper a-arm, but the directions and the OEM ones have the plate on the top of the a-arm. Not sure how much of an impact this will have because the a-arm metal is pretty thin, it isn't likely off by much.

Here is the printout:

So came in with a silly amount of positive camber, some progress but not enough. The a-arms are slightly shorter than stock, so if anything I should have showed up with some negative camber.

The tech added a bunch of shims and I'm still way off. Also, the upper is now pushed so far back that at full droop it hits the shock tower. So while I could get clever with solid shims and longer hardware, I'll just cause more clearance issues with the a-arm and tower...poop.

I don't have a previous alignment printout, but I've had the same tires for 3 years and over 20k miles. They are wearing very even with everything between 5/32 and 6/32.

Shot a quick video walking through the measurements and issue, any help is appreciated. Thanks.

p.s.
Upper A-Arm Install Instructions
Lower A-Arm Install Instructions

 

[Chuck Leeper]

So, what did the guys at BMR tell you?

 

[No disintegrations]

You might try taking careful measurements of the length of the new components and check for any visual clue as to a defect. The right side had a larger difference than the left. Or was the car ever hit? Just wondering why the disparity.

 

[No disintegrations]

I see in the video you made some measurements but I'm thinking measure each tube length to each weld or a similar idea since 1 degree will come from a very minute disparity.

 

[booyah11]

@Chuck Leeper , they are equally confused. Because the new arms are shorter I should have got some free negative camber.

@No disintegrations , good call. I tried weaseling a tape around the components so my measurements aren’t perfect. I’ll try using some string to get a more accurate view of what is going on.

Also going to fix the ball joint mounting today, it’s something to fix but not holding my breath.

 

[Phoneguy]

I have the same problems with TRZ tubular arms. After 6+ hours on the rack the best we could get was +2* camber, and it had 13/16" of shims and needed another 7/8" . Ridiculous...

Bryan

 

[No disintegrations]

I have the same problems with TRZ tubular arms. After 6+ hours on the rack the best we could get was +2* camber, and it had 13/16" of shims and needed another 7/8" . Ridiculous...

Bryan

Whoa! So over an inch and a half of shims! Sumpin ain't right. Its like they swapped a number around in the blueprint or used the wrong year make or model.

 

[Bullnerd]

Wait, two different aftermarket MFG and the same problem on two different cars?

 

[Chuck Leeper]

Dum ?
Are they on backwards?

 

[booyah11]

Okay, so this was a PITA but took the Right Side apart and got a bunch of measurements. Looks like this was destined for failure because the uppers are physically a bit shorter...but functionally a bit longer. Doesn't make sense, but what matters is the distance from where the arm mounts to where the ball joint is.

And it doesn't stop there, the lowers are a bit shorter...poop. So having the extra positive camber totally makes sense, it sucks but there you go.

Took a bunch of time to get everything level and square with the work table so I could get apples to apple comparisons. But, as the measurements are mostly relative to the part itself I'm pretty confident with the results.

Sent this to the BMR guys as well. Their last question was, "Do you have an alignment sheet with the stock suspension". Hopefully with this data they'll see the arms are wrong and not make be install all the old crap and get that aligned to prove the car isn't just a bitch. Which it is but that's none of their business.

 

[Turbo6inKY]

That's bizzare.

Send those back. Call UMI.

 

[captrob]

I can't tell from the pic of the uppers...Is the shaft offset differently if you rotate it 180 degrees? If not, then offset shafts on the uppers would help, but maybe not that much.

 

[booyah11]

@captrob , no joy on the offset because crossbar is symmetrical.

Also, looks like there is something screwy with the ball joint angle for the uppers.

https://flic.kr/p/2gD4ZhL

Not sure if defective or for the wrong car. :sigh:

 

[Bullnerd]

That sucks! Thats a lot of work!

 

[Jerryl]

That sucks! Thats a lot of work!

Agree.

 

[1KWIKSIX]

I've got UMI Uppers & lowers and luckily no such issues. I'd do as suggested and send em back for another brand

 

[Pronto]

Most likely they are from a different car...
You bought these new?

 

[MaxVO2]

*****Those might be for a different application. Mebbe for a Regal, but one with different spindle length (lowered cars, or for guys that want 22" rims, etc..)

That was a lot of work. Usually, the arms are stamped with a model number. Cross check the number with their online system if they have it, and see if they sent you the wrong arms. The fact it has so much positive camber with that many shims is reason enough to send them back. I've seen guys with that style arm and they fit perfectly and really loosen the up/down movement for better weight transfer on launch. They look really cool too, but not so much if you can see the belts on your tires from wear after 500 miles from that much Positive camber..

Good luck

 

[booyah11]

@MaxVO2 , agree that they seem like they must be for a different car. The quality of the parts themselves seems very high, the welds, webbing and power coating all look great. Also, they came with the Energy Suspension bushings all pre-installed and stamped Made in Murica. I definitely had high hopes for them.

Got all the 35 y/o OE stuff back on and getting an alignment today.

I did check a couple more things during the swap:

• ~2" lower ride height with the BMR Arms. This looks mostly due to the spring cup for the lower arms, but as the camber curve is positive with compression maybe this is the cause of the issue?? Nothing in the product description mentioned that the kit would lower the car.
• At full droop the OE suspension has ~3* more negative camber
• Measured all the Rear Suspension bits that I got from BMR and those are identical to Stock

Sent all this info to BMR, though it was over the weekend so didn't expect a response. Will update with Alignment Results and any info from BMR when available. Thanks.

 

[dank GN]

Is it possible they are trying to fix a problem with the stock suspension like bump steer or something similar?