school boy

thanks jazzer. i'll look into the torque box braces, think there called battle boxes.

SteedaGus

A arm with spherical bushings as has been recommended will have the best durability, but if it is a daily driver will also introduce NVH into the vehicle, especially if its a spherical on both ends.

The lakewood arms bushing diameter is very hard, so it will introduce quite a bit of bind.

With our 3-piece bushing design we use very soft outers with a hard center bushing. This allows for less bind than any other aftermarket arm but still performs like arms with much harder bushings, and no NVH.

If it is not purely a street car or it is and you dont think you'll hear rear end and road noise over your exhaust, then something with a spherical bearing on one end and urethane on the other will be much more durable and have less NVH than pure sphericals on both ends.

Jazzer The Cat

This is exactly what I was thinkin'

Ageed with SteedaGus on the following as well. Even if only occasionally driven on the street, it will REALLY free up some bind and actually be an improvement over a bushing as it has NO give on lauch whatever, but will roll freely lenghtwise on a turn. I think those LW LCA's as being VERY hard on the torque-boxes with ANY body roll at all.

Jazzer

WannaBeGearHead

Teej, what benefits do you see in having spherical ends on both sides compared to just one end? Wouldn't one spherical end allow for plenty enough movement that a control arm would ever need?

Are the MM XD LCAs better than every LCA that doesn't have spherical ends on both sides or is that a personally preference?

SteedaGus

Forgot to mention the benefit that the having a spherical on one end will reduce bind as well, thanks for catching that.

BTW, our urethane bushing arms are very easy on torque boxes too because of the soft outer bushings I mentioned previously.

About the other question, still keeping 1 urethane bushing in the system leaves a bushing that can fail. Although it will last much longer than having 2 urethane bushings, there is still a point of eventual failure there. 2 sphericals is the most durable setup, just too noisy for street use.

teej281

Well the spherical bearings relieve a lot of stress from the torque boxes and the design that MM has come up with with the spherical/spherical with a urethane bumper surrounding the spherical bearing seems to be a great idea for a street car wanting to get the most out of their suspension. Most say that with the s/s bushing styles there is a lot of NVH but with the introduction of that urethane bumper, there isnt a whole lot of addition to NVH over a poly/spherical design due to the bumper but you still get the benefits of the spherical/spherical arm with the no deflection and full suspension articulation. This is from my understanding through talking with the guys at MM through emails.

WannaBeGearHead

I'm not sure if I missed it but you never really answered my question about how the MM are better than a poly/spherical LCA. An LCA with one spherical end will allow more than enough rotation than is required during the LCAs operation. It also takes 100% of the energy applied to it and directs it to the body. So what is the benefit of having 2 spherical ends other than the added NVH they say comes with the S/S ends.

This is from my understanding through talking with a member on the board here.

Mustang_NTriangle

i have these ones and they work great UPR Pro Series Lower Control Arms.

teej281

Less stress on the torque boxes through launching and cornering is the real benefit of the spherical/spherical from my understanding. And also for those with loud exhaust, it really isnt bad for NVH just because you cant hear it over the exhaust usually anyways from what ive heard. Im sure though that there is less binding with a spherical/spherical lower control arm than any poly/spherical lca though...

WannaBeGearHead

Looks like that is something you should research. From my understanding, specifically with the Griggs LCAs, LCAs with one spherical end are 100% bind free.