Saturn ION RedLine Forums banner

21 - 40 of 49 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,403 Posts
Eagle_f90 said:
So they do not give you better handeling, less wheel hop, or anything like that?
They give you better handling, but you have to adjust the alignment to do so, and that type of alignment isn't recommended for street use. They help reduce bumpsteer on lowered cars because of their affect on the alignment. Wheel hop is supposed to be addressed with a different geometry engine and transmission mount set, but I haven't heard what's up with it yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,885 Posts
Pierre said:
Are you sure Eco?

-1 1/2 Degrees is a very noticable amount of negative camber. Given the low camber gain of a Mcpherson strut I'd be very surprised if a 1" drop alone would give you that. You would also burn up the inside edge of the tire in very short order on the street.

Pierre
I agree about the camber, and specialized in suspension and chassis as a tech. I run -1.15 in the front and -1.0(or as close as possible) in the rear. The main concren is the effect of the control arm to strut angle being greater than 90 degees(ideal), thus changing the travel vs angle dynamics while turning. The decreased angle with the longer lower control arms would lessen the travel of the arm, decreasing the availble change in negative camber during turning. It may not sound like much, but if you have driven 2 cars, one with a 90 degree condition and a 100 degree condition, the corner handling is noticably more difficult in the latter of the two.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,885 Posts
Shabodah said:
They give you better handling, but you have to adjust the alignment to do so, and that type of alignment isn't recommended for street use. They help reduce bumpsteer on lowered cars because of their affect on the alignment. Wheel hop is supposed to be addressed with a different geometry engine and transmission mount set, but I haven't heard what's up with it yet.
It's not wheel hop that is being addressed with the mounts, its bump steer again. I want to campaign BWoody to make us a solid mount set that rotates the motor forward as suggested in the GM build book, as well as small spacers for raising the steering rack. Doing that reduces bump steer by changing the angle of effect on the rack, making road input less direct on the tie rods.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,403 Posts
I thought the new design mounts were part of this:

Subject: Transmission fluid Leak Slipping Clutch Or Broken Axle Shaft - keywords crack housing shift slip #PIP3932 - (09/29/2006)



Models: 2005-2007 Chevrolet Cobalt SS

2004-2007 Saturn Ion Redline

Equipped with a 5-Speed Manual Transmission (RPO MU3)




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following diagnosis might be helpful if the vehicle exhibits the symptom(s) described in this PI.

Condition/Concern:
Some customers have commented about transmission oil in the clutch housing, slipping clutches or broken axle shafts on this model. An analysis of several of these failures has revealed that the problem is due to excessive front wheel hop during WOT acceleration events.

Excessive wheel hop transmits a torsional shock load into the transmission case. This causes the case to crack and transmission fluid to leak into the clutch housing. See photos below.

Recommendation/Instructions:
Stiffer axle shafts and hardware will change the system harmonics and help prevent wheel hop. These planned changes will not be available until the 2008 model year.

Note:: Be advised that failures of this nature are abuse. They are NOT defects in materials or workmanship for which General Motors would be responsible and should not be covered under the terms of the new vehicle warranty. Vehicles with this complaint should be inspected by the dealer and Area Vehicle Manager. A product report should be submitted on each.

Please follow this diagnostic or repair process thoroughly and complete each step. If the condition exhibited is resolved without completing every step, the remaining steps do not need to be performed.



GM bulletins are intended for use by professional technicians, NOT a "do-it-yourselfer". They are written to inform these technicians of conditions that may occur on some vehicles, or to provide information that could assist in the proper service of a vehicle. Properly trained technicians have the equipment, tools, safety instructions, and know-how to do a job properly and safely. If a condition is described, DO NOT assume that the bulletin applies to your vehicle, or that your vehicle will have that condition. See your GM dealer for information on whether your vehicle may benefit from the information.
WE SUPPORT VOLUNTARY TECHNICIAN CERTIFICATION


© Copyright General Motors Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,885 Posts
Yes, the new motor mounts that will be introduced for production in '08 on the CSS. They will be offered as an upgrade from what I understand in the future, but not as of yet. The steering knuckles have nothing to do with the wheel hop, and the function of the mounts in the performance builds are 1) to increase throttle response and reduce wheel hop, as the BWoody ones do, and 2) they also changed the mount design to rotate the motor slightly forward to allow clearance for the raising of the steering rack to further reduce bump steer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,885 Posts
Just took a look at the GMPP knuckles and compared them to stock, they are much beefier, and the strut to knuckle mount is moved slightly further away from the wheel. I'll try and put up some pics tonight after work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,924 Posts
seen this thread awhile back and i was just wondering whos got em anyone
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,924 Posts
Eco-Mod said:
It's not wheel hop that is being addressed with the mounts, its bump steer again. I want to campaign BWoody to make us a solid mount set that rotates the motor forward as suggested in the GM build book, as well as small spacers for raising the steering rack. Doing that reduces bump steer by changing the angle of effect on the rack, making road input less direct on the tie rods.
the spacers for the steering rack would be a easy piece to make not to mention they would be as MGM 1979 always says "money"

BWOODY make em please!!!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
804 Posts
Eco-Mod said:
I agree about the camber, and specialized in suspension and chassis as a tech. I run -1.15 in the front and -1.0(or as close as possible) in the rear. The main concren is the effect of the control arm to strut angle being less than 90 degees(ideal), thus changing the travel vs angle dynamics while turning. The decreased angle with the longer lower control arms would lessen the travel of the arm, decreasing the availble change in camber during turning. It may not sound like much, but if you ave driven 2 cars, one with a 90 degree condition and a 70 degree condition, the corner handling is noticably more difficult in the latter of the two.
I'm not considering the Cobalt arms in this discussion.

Don't you want less than 90 degrees at static ride hight? you should hit 90 deg somewhere in the middle of your wheel travel or towords the latter part. That way you minimize the track displacement through wheel travel and will have the most camber gain when the car rolls to the extent that you can with a mcperson strut. If you start at 90 you can only go down in the angle from there.


PS how did you camber the rears?

Pierre
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
804 Posts
Eco-Mod said:
Just took a look at the GMPP knuckles and compared them to stock, they are much beefier, and the strut to knuckle mount is moved slightly further away from the wheel. I'll try and put up some pics tonight after work.
Is there any drop by relocating the spindle in relation to the ball joint mount with the new knuckles?

Pierre
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,771 Posts
pierre said:
I'm not considering the Cobalt arms in this discussion.

Don't you want less than 90 degrees at static ride hight? you should hit 90 deg somewhere in the middle of your wheel travel or towords the latter part. That way you minimize the track displacement through wheel travel and will have the most camber gain when the car rolls to the extent that you can with a mcperson strut. If you start at 90 you can only go down in the angle from there.

Pierre
^the cobalt a arms bolt right in to our suspension, thank djt for that.

As far as 90° suspension angles and such, the strut works best at 90°. So you want to keep the strut at 90° whenever possible. When you go changing geometry to 70° your strut will bind more often and result in a harder spring rate...making it hard to turn.

These knuckles are for serious racing, mainly because GMPP found on their Grand Am vehicles, that the stock knuckles would buckle under hard cornering. Thats why they replaced the knuckles on the Cup car to Grand Am knuckles.

(according to the Solo2 guy i bought the rims from) if you want to keep even tire wear when adding camber, you add more caster and a little tow out. (According to SCCA rules) We can actually drill out our strut mount all the way to the crease on the tower, which allows us to add -2° of camber to our car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
804 Posts
socalsilverRL said:
^the cobalt a arms bolt right in to our suspension, thank djt for that.

As far as 90° suspension angles and such, the strut works best at 90°. So you want to keep the strut at 90° whenever possible. When you go changing geometry to 70° your strut will bind more often and result in a harder spring rate...making it hard to turn.
What I am saying is keep your strut near 90 degrees over it's compression operating range. If you set it for 90 at ride height it will only decrease as the suspension compresses.

In fact as the angle becomes less than 90 degrees the spring in the strut will have a lesser effect because of the angle. Your wheel rate will decrease.

Pierre
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,771 Posts
^ok...so i had it backwards...i thought you meant 70° the other way...lol

..yea keep the average angle at or around 90° so a little more than 90° at ride height.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,885 Posts
Yeah I'll admit I didn't slow down to double check my wording/thought process. I fixed my earlier post about the angles. I SHOULD have said that having a GREATER than 90 degree strut to control arm relation will cause negative effects by not allowing a greater increase in negative camber during turning, just didn't go from my head to the fingers right. So < 90 degrees = good >90 degrees = bad.

And for the rear, you can shim it. The BWoody rear bar allows a small amount of change in camber, but it more importantly effects rear toe which should be your first/main concern back there.

The new knuckles really don't change alot, which you will be able to see in the pics I'll have. It's really just a stronger knuckle that uses all the other stock pieces.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
194 Posts
Factory graphic of the strut grinding process

Does anyone have a copy of the graphic from a 2006 Saturn ION Redline maintenance manual that depicts how to grind-out the strut mounting hole? I had one from a 2005 manual but I can't find it. As was mentioned earlier, you can get an SCCA-legal 2 degrees of negative camber 'if' you happen to have a copy of the page showing the modification when you're tech'd.

I'm going to be running at an SCCA National Tour Event in the near future and need the graphic to show to tech...

Thanks in advance,
Scott
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,885 Posts
Um, there isn't one that I know of... I can check, but I'd just use the lobed camber bolts. Do you REALLY think they can see though metal? Plus I doubt you really need to grind them out that much, if at all, I've only had to do it on one Ion out of all the ones
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,143 Posts
so, Eco, Did you put these on yet? Just curious if there are any suprises. I will be ordering mine in March.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,550 Posts
+1 requesting if anyone has that page. I HAD IT PHOTOCOPIED AND LAMINATED DAMNIT and now I can't find it. The local Saturn dealers have only online manuals that don't have the same detailed info, i.e., specifying the additional 2 degrees - and yes, it spec'd 2 ADDITIONAL degrees, you can get over 3.5 degrees of negative camber by grinding that mount LEGALLY in Solo 2...

I'm currently running -2.5 passenger side, -2.7 drivers side. In the begining of the thread, people are talking about -1.5 degrees ruining tires, lol... I have pretty even wear - but I corner hard enough to wear the outside 'evenly' with the faster wearing inside, LOL.
 
21 - 40 of 49 Posts
Top