CaptainSquirts

iTrader: (3)

Interesting... I guess I can't picture it in my head. Interesting note though, I emailed super pro about the ball joint and they said the following...



"Thank you for your interest in SuperPro and for your inquiry.

Long answer to a short question:

Some time ago we offered two options depending on the ride height of the car and requirements of the customer.
Whether by chance, our lack of marketing or Whiteline’s abundance of marketing we began to only sell the version we offer today (TRC0001 for the Evo VIII and Evo IX, TRC0004 for the Evo X).
Because demand shifted heaving to the ‘shorter’ kit we discontinued the kit you’ve referenced on Tein’s website.

We’ve recently gotten some fairly significant demand from both the Mitsubishi and Subaru communities through some of our more saavy dealers that there is a market for the roll center kits offering greater correction and with a more established dealer network and US facility we think we’re now in a better place to make customers aware of another option and make it a bit easier for them to select the correct kit.

The Subaru version is already in the works. We do not currently have left over stock of the Mitsubishi kits; but that should be a fairly straightforward part to ‘switch back on’.

I'll note your request to R&D as another vote to get that project moving and get them back to market.

If helpful I can e-mail you when these show some progress or you can simply follow our US or Australian/Global facebook pages or mailing lists to be alerted when these and other new additions become available.

Thanks again for the inquiry – sorry I don’t have an immediate answer – but I think we’ll have the solution you’re after in the coming months."

CaptainSquirts

iTrader: (3)

So lets say Super Pro put that balljoint back into production or made another item for greater correction, if that balljoint doesn't make a difference compared to oem/whitelines, then what would?

LetsGetThisDone

iTrader: (1)

As Dallas said, that superpro ballpoint in the tein article does nothing significant like it may apparat to. They moved the arm separately from the pivot. The angle of the arm doesn't matter, the angle of the imaginary line between the pivots is what matters.

CaptainSquirts

iTrader: (3)

Ok I am getting a better understanding on what you two mean.

Anywho I gave concerns to superpro about that current balljoint that was mentioned and they said...

"I think if/when we rerelease that kit – or a new development of that same concept we’ll package it with documentation of the roll center geometry change."

So if something comes out with the concept and proof thats better than our current options then cool, good for us. If not, then whatever, back to the mediocre whiteline balljoint life.

BigT

iTrader: (8)

Easy way to tell that those ball joints do nothing for geometry.... Once installed, ride height does Not change. What does that mean? It means geometry is exactly the same as it was before.

Its easy to get caught up by the advertising, especially when nearly every single person on this forum is saying to get the WL kit. My old Evo X had the kit on it. My current one does not.

kaj

iTrader: (60)

I thought the point was to correct geometry while leaving the cars lowered. You wouldn't want the ride height to change, otherwise, you end up right back where you started.

Dallas J

iTrader: (1)

Ride height wont change with a lower ball joint change or even my billet uprights with 2" of change. Its just a lower pivot but ride height is between the strut, upright, and wheel.

BigT

iTrader: (8)

Dallas J

iTrader: (1)

Ahh, yeah the 2g will definitely change ride height with a lower arm change for sure but multilink front with strut connecting to lower arm.

My uprights change the relative position of the lower mount relative to wheel center not the strut mount to wheel center. You actually couldnt to it the second way with the strut mount interfering with the axle.

EVO8LTW

iTrader: (41)

CaptainSquirts

iTrader: (3)

I am noticing more and more that if I brake first, then turn, I will get understeer(when there is some front load from braking). If I lets say let off or brake early, the car to be in not front heavy or rear heavy(more neutral i guess?) , the rear will slide out and I won't get understeer. At that point I will be able to control the rear with throttle.

Does that seems like the norm? It's something I an seeing more often in those scenarios so I'm now just playing with that and altering my driving to make use of it.

kaj

iTrader: (60)

Are you saying it understeers during trail braking? Full braking? Braking while turning? If so ,how much brake are you applying? These cars don't typically like braking and turning at the same time.

CaptainSquirts

iTrader: (3)

Braking and turning will cause understeer regardless probably for everyone lol. I'm talking about braking, letting off the brake, and then turning. All one after the other in a quick transission. If I give it more time between the letting off of the brake and turning itll rotate more in the rear.

kaj

iTrader: (60)

Gotcha. I wasn't sure the difference between your two scenarios If you are letting off the brake abruptly, then turning right away, it's possible you are trying to turn while weight is transferring back, off the front springs? Giving it more time allows the chassis to settle, which is probably why it's turning better. Let off the brake gently or continue to give the car time to settle. Either should balance the car out and let it turn in.

mantella

iTrader: (6)

well this is a x
1000lb front springs, 1200lb rear springs, jrz track adjustables, perrin offset front lower control arm bushings, vorshlag top plates, hotchkis sway bars set rear med front soft. mystery front and rear endlinks, whiteline rear adjustable control arms and megan rear toe arms, whiteline rollcenter kit running 315 a7s, carbotech xp12 front pads with xp10 rear.
front 3.2 camber, 7.6 caster, 0 toe
rear 2.3 camber 0 toe