Chevy Impala SS Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Vendor
Joined
·
148 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
C3 FAB wants to show everyone that we give impalassforum.com members the best prices !!! this is the absolute best rear suspension kit for your 91-96 b-body impala/impala ss!!
LOOK AT THE PHOTOS!!!!
VERY HEAVY DUTY!!!

$509.00 FOR THIS EXACT SET UP
C3 FAB!!!
CONTACT US : 310-901-3084







 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
148 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Missalignment issue answer

This extended kit WILL FIX REAR WHEEL CENTERING!!
as far as the missalignment issue , when you pull that rear end back 5/8" it will change your rear differential housing perch angle, in other words , they will spread them out further and will create binding if your housing mount is not offset . Look at our uppers ..... We found a solution to correct that problem in your angle change when you extend to 5/8" !!!
If you decide to stay stock 22", not extended, there is no need for offsetting , and there is no missalignment issue! I hope this helps you!! Thanks , and merry Xmas from C3 FAB!!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,343 Posts
what misalignment issues? does this fix the wheels not being centered in the wheel well or is it something else?
The potential for a misalignment problem with the re-positioned rear axle mod has always been there. The fix C3 has implemented is what I've always wanted someone making these parts to do. Still, it may not be the entire answer.

The issue is that with the axle moved back, unless the upper axle-side bushing or bearing is repositioned (ie. the angle of the sleeve or bolt is changed as viewed from above), the clevis (the part of the upper arm that comes down on each side of the housing bushing) will not align correctly with the hole in the bushing--and that's the problem with a standard "centered" clevis setup on an extended control arm setup.

It explains why many installations have rapid UCA bushing failure, especially urethane bushings with their "cold flow" behavior (ie. under constant compressive load from the center bolt & sleeve "pinching", the material will deform and take a permanent set, and no longer act the same as far as the durometer material it was intended to replace), and why the bolts to secure the clevis often have to be FORCED into a misaligned condition when the uppers are being assembled.

One possible way to counter this is to make the clevis holes offset to align with the hole in the axle-end bushing, regardless of whether the attachment of the clevis to the adjuster has been offset as C3 has done--and it MAY be that their version does take account of all of this and the axle-side bolts line up with no issues.

Ideally, the force imparted on the housing bushing (by way of connection to the frame at the rear crossmember) should be perpendicular (at right angles to) the axis of the bushing sleeve/bolt, and offsetting the holes in the clevis would probably not completely address this, either.

A UCA spherical setup at one end (typically frame-end) helps, although it doesn't guarantee that binding will not occur. A spherical at both ends makes the problem go away....the final geometry may be "off" slightly from original (the ideal is a 90-degree angle between the 2 UCA's as viewed from the top). Above all, as long as the uppers do their job of controlling side-to-side motion properly and keep the driveline alignment (ie. pinion and rear U-joint angle in limits, that's what counts.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
148 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Issue?

If you read the thread carefully and notice the photos of our uppers up above on this thread ..... You will see that we have corrected the problem ! I do not know if any other company that does this, besides us!! Thanks! C3 FAB
 
Joined
·
7,191 Posts
If you read the thread carefully and notice the photos of our uppers up above on this thread ..... You will see that we have corrected the problem ! I do not know if any other company that does this, besides us!! Thanks! C3 FAB

great ! now what about the axle side will that be enough for that also?
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top