Anybody used Global West +3 a-arms

[70BOSS302]

Looking at a set for my 65, don't know much about them. It's either these or the original negative roll arm. Any thought or opinions?

[GT289]

Where did you get the +3 terminology? Is this the coil-over stuff?


ex-Global West GM
1991-1995

[70BOSS302]

I was hoping you would chime in here. The "plus 3 a arm" is GW's terminology. Per GW it is their new a-arm with additional caster built in. However, I am not really interested in running the adjustable strut rods. I called and spoke to a gentleman at GW and he recommended these new arms over the traditional negative roll arm. I am not sold on them yet. I am looking for a good handling street car and planned on doing the arning drop and if I am going to start drilling on a K code car thought I would go ahead and put a good a arm under it while I am at it

[Huskinhano]

I've just about finished installed these parts from Street or Track on my 66. Very nice quality and the A arms use rod ends that you can fine tune caster.



The business end of the UCA

[jmn444]

I plan on trying a set of the +3 arms. The street or track ones are pretty slick, but the process of fine tuning would probably take more hours than I'd want to spend. Maybe they come with a cheat sheet that equates # of theads different = so many degrees or something, that'd be useful...

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by jmn444

I plan on trying a set of the +3 arms. The street or track ones are pretty slick, but the process of fine tuning would probably take more hours than I'd want to spend. Maybe they come with a cheat sheet that equates # of theads different = so many degrees or something, that'd be useful...

The thread is 3/4-16 so 16 threads per inch. I set the front bearing 3-4 turns further out than the rear bearing, then do the final tweaking with the strut rod and camber kit.

There is no such thing as a cheat sheet, these cars are no where near precise enough that the same rules would apply to every customer.

There is no difference between the GW +3 arms and setting ours with the front bearing further out than the rear. Both move the ball joint rearward to induce some positive caster. No matter how you dice it or what parts you use, a good alignment will take time. The only company to of found a way to 'save time' is TCP that use barrel adjusters. This makes you and your alignment guy happier because the alignment takes less time but I guarantee you the arms won't be the same length on each side of the car. This will result in different geometry on each side of the car and it'll feel different going around left/right corners.

[jmn444]

I did not mean a cheat sheet in the sense of getting exact measurements for my car, but rather a sheet that would explain 3 to 4 thread is equal to 2° extra caster. I understand that the total caster depends on the lower strut rod and the car in general.

[jmn444]

Can you tell me approx how much shorter than stock these are when adusted for approx 3 degrees more caster than a stock arm?

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by jmn444

I did not mean a cheat sheet in the sense of getting exact measurements for my car, but rather a sheet that would explain 3 to 4 thread is equal to 2° extra caster. I understand that the total caster depends on the lower strut rod and the car in general.

Its not possible to state that fact. Each chassis is wildly different, strut rods are different lengths and on 67-70 cars the position of the stock LCA eccentric is going to have an affect.

If these cars were like a few super accurate production cars, I'd be able to build the arms with no adjustment needed, take them out the box and bolt them on. That is simply not the case with those old cars so I've built in plenty of adjustment for mild to wild alignment options.

[jmn444]

I think you misunderstand what I'm asking, and I could probably just do the math after buying them, but a given number of threads extended further on the front of each arm would result in a given distance that the ball joint is moved rearward. That change compared to stock should be enough info to compute how many degrees the spindle is tilted back. I assume GW simply figured out the distance required to get 3 degrees and made the arm to place the bj in that spot. I understand each car can be different. But the spindles are all the same height, so I think that moving the upper bj back 1/2" or whatever would have to result in the same change in caster with all else being equal.

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by jmn444

I think you misunderstand what I'm asking, and I could probably just do the math after buying them, but a given number of threads extended further on the front of each arm would result in a given distance that the ball joint is moved rearward. That change compared to stock should be enough info to compute how many degrees the spindle is tilted back. I assume GW simply figured out the distance required to get 3 degrees and made the arm to place the bj in that spot. I understand each car can be different. But the spindles are all the same height, so I think that moving the upper bj back 1/2" or whatever would have to result in the same change in caster with all else being equal.

I can figure that out for you but its going to be irrelevant when you get it on a car based on how long/short you make the strut rod.

[jmn444]

Don't worry about it for me, we will talk more when I'm ready, I have to fix my engine before throwing more cash at suspension anyway.

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by jmn444

Don't worry about it for me, we will talk more when I'm ready, I have to fix my engine before throwing more cash at suspension anyway.

Uh-oh. You broke your motor?

[jmn444]

Yep. #1 and #4 holes were full of coolant, locked up at WOT.... Assuming bent rods at a minimum... Just pulled it yesterday, gonna pull it apart later this week and see what went wrong.

[GT289]

Okey dokey. Those took a little rooting around on their site to find.
Didn't even know they had them.
Mustang Front End Individual Components 1964, 1965, 1966
The "take-away" is that they have the added positive caster (+3 degrees) already
built into the arm. The other major benefit is the Chrysler-style twist in ball joint.
Those are incredibly robust BJ's. And the normal uppers (K8036) don't really have
a strength issue but good quality 8036's have become a rarity- and Made in USA
units may very well be non-existant now.....
+3 arm doesn't need to be re-located down but looks to have the bigger 9/16"
mounting bolts (Next size up in diameter but down in bolt grade for increased yield
strength and greater snap resistance). Bushings are grease zirked del-a-lum and
billet steel pivot shafts.
Looks like a nice piece but no Negative Roll attributes. You get that from a shorter
arm and a lower mounting point.
So the bottom line question is "do you want/need the revised Negative Roll
geometry?" That's pretty much where the rubber meets the road.

ex-Global West GM
1991-1995