Alloy arms onto a BG ?

[Hailz]

Hey everyone, I hear quite often about guys putting alloy front control arms of an sti onto the BG Legacy, what are the main reasons for doing this swap? Can anyone let me know what they've gained by it? I've found a set that have come out of a 2005 sti, will these bolt up to my BG wagon?

[Drunkenmonkey]

i think to go into a bg you need some sort of cone shaped spaces reuben has some ill ask him

[Shale]

You need the cones period.

The advantages are far more responsive steering, vs the nasty-arse stock stuff that comes in most of our cars. Only real disadvantage is if you thump anything, they get mangled pretty easily. So don't drive into anything

[Hailz]

Thanks guys, where exactly do these cones fit? And where the hell do I find them lol? Is it worth all the hastle?

[Guest]

i thought the reason for putting in alloy front lower control arms was to reduce unsprung weight.

how exactly do they help responsiveness ? all they do is move up and down ?

-smurff

[gotasuby]

they are the same weight, they are stiffer though, some guy did a test on rexnet australia a few years ago

[PhatRS]

The main reason is so you can rotate the rear mounting bracket to get more caster, google the "free castor mod"

Ive never heard of needing cone shaped spacers either, I though they were a direct replacement.

[funkytown]

 PhatRS']

The main reason is so you can rotate the rear mounting bracket to get more caster, google the "free castor mod"

+1

[quote name='gotasuby said:

they are the same weight, they are stiffer though

+1

ive done this conversion for a wrx. Should work just fine on a BG.

You will need new sway bar links as they are different alloy and steel. and you will need new mounting swivel for the ball joint into the hubs. Its a very easy swap, and a great time to do an ALK kit.

Pm me as i may have one going cheap.

[funkytown]

 PhatRS said:

Ive never heard of needing cone shaped spacers either, I though they were a direct replacement.

yer there is a lttle cone that is required to seat the balljoint in the lower arm on alloy ones. Il try dig out a photo

this is how the ball joints come out of the steel ones.. note no sleeve on the balljoint mount.

rats i havent got any of the mount hole in the alloy ones.

here is the free castor mod tho. c/-o rexnet in auz

[PhatRS]

You can also space the mount out for even further caster but you will also be incresing the track with slightly so may run into rubbing issues tyre wise. I think the rule of thumb was a further 3mm spacer for GC and 10mm for GD but someone may correct me on that. It will depend on rims and tyre choice too.

 funkytown']

The main reason is so you can rotate the rear mounting bracket to get more caster, google the "free castor mod"

+1

[quote name='gotasuby said:

they are the same weight, they are stiffer though/quote]

+1

ive done this conversion for a wrx. Should work just fine on a BG.

You will need new sway bar links as they are different alloy and steel. and you will need new mounting swivel for the ball joint into the hubs. Its a very easy swap, and a great time to do an ALK kit.

Pm me as i may have one going cheap.

So Funky are you saying the mount in the hub is different too? Did you end up using the ball jointed end links or replacement solid ones.

Need to search out some of these cheap cones too

[funkytown]

the balljoint, swivel and the thread (all one peice) are the same for either steel or alloy.

You can see from the top pic, how half the ball joint (left one) is shiny near the top. It has a upside down cone that sleeves over the shaft of that thread. This then seats the ball joint in the lower arm. the remaining thread then pokes through the arms and bolts up just like a steel one.

make sense?

Tbh i have used my old end links, the dog bone ones.. the bushes are a little out of whack but they do the job. I should change to the new ones, i just used high tensile bolts so that they dont shear off in the mean time. See my garage thread for how i mounted them

[PhatRS]

 funkytown said:

the balljoint, swivel and the thread (all one peice) are the same for either steel or alloy.

You can see from the top pic, how half the ball joint (left one) is shiny near the top. It has a upside down cone that sleeves over the shaft of that thread. This then seats the ball joint in the lower arm. the remaining thread then pokes through the arms and bolts up just like a steel one.

make sense?

Tbh i have used my old end links, the dog bone ones.. the bushes are a little out of whack but they do the job. I should change to the new ones, i just used high tensile bolts so that they dont shear off in the mean time. See my garage thread for how i mounted them

Sweet, makes sence to me

Ill use my std ball joints anyway just with my extenders so that should be fine. Ill have a look at your thread now, Im sure once I get into it Ill be fine anyway.

What a PITA that you need the little cone things, I would have thought they should seat on their own.

I have Cusco links which I was sure fit the STI too so Ill give them a try on the alloy arm too.

[funkytown]

haha no way they will seat on their own!! haha they'd flop everywhere.. would be funny to watch.

your links "will" mount up, it just wont be pretty. the sti ones are different, they are a "number 2" like shape or a "z".

as i said.. your ball points will work fine in the alloy arms.. you just need the cone sleeve to put over them when putting them in alloy arms.

[PhatRS]

Sweet, will have to hit Subaru up for the sleeves I guess, bet theres no STIs at pick a part .

Im not a big fan of floppy suspension!, it just makes me laugh that one car manufacturer can make 2 control arms and 1 ball joint and they need a sleeve to fit one and not the other, were you not thinking the day you designed the alloy one????

Ninja edit: I cant see how the Z shaped end links are likely to shear off bolts any less than the dogbone ones (whiteline actually quotes them both excluding sti alloy arms) they will still sit at the same ghastly angle with only one side of the bolt supported!!!! I think Ill get the ones with spherical bearings in at least they are designed to angle and adjust.

[funkytown]

 PhatRS said:

Sweet, will have to hit Subaru up for the sleeves I guess, bet theres no STIs at pick a part .

Im not a big fan of floppy suspension!, it just makes me laugh that one car manufacturer can make 2 control arms and 1 ball joint and they need a sleeve to fit one and not the other, were you not thinking the day you designed the alloy one????

they will be oooober $$ from subaru. I might be able to get you a set for cheeeep. I just gota find the guys number.

yer im using the dogbones.. come round and see how mine sits if you want.. I cant see it being to much of a problem they way ive done it. your logic is the same as mine)

[PhatRS]

Ooooo cheap is good.....you wiiiiilllll fiiiiiind the nummmmmber haha.

ill try mine out and see how I get on, the car isnt roadworthy just yet anyway, if they snap stuff parked then I know Ill need spherical jointed ones haha.

[funkytown]

 PhatRS said:

Ooooo cheap is good.....you wiiiiilllll fiiiiiind the nummmmmber haha.

ill try mine out and see how I get on, the car isnt roadworthy just yet anyway, if they snap stuff parked then I know Ill need spherical jointed ones haha.

mine havent snapped yet and i drive it daily...

edit: i hope you mean try out the links, not the ball joint without the cone.. the ball joint wud snap with out the cone .. haha

[PhatRS]

 funkytown']

[quote name='PhatRS said:

Ooooo cheap is good.....you wiiiiilllll fiiiiiind the nummmmmber haha.

ill try mine out and see how I get on, the car isnt roadworthy just yet anyway, if they snap stuff parked then I know Ill need spherical jointed ones haha.

/quote]

mine havent snapped yet and i drive it daily...

edit: i hope you mean try out the links, not the ball joint without the cone.. the ball joint wud snap with out the cone .. haha

Yes I do mean try out the links haha.

[PhatRS]

found a pic of these cone things: part number is 20216FA000 if anyone wants them from Subaru (Ill get a price if they are open Monday, just incase funky cant get these cheep ones)

[PhatRS]

ooook so you are right Funky they arent cheap from Subaru $91.80 on discount for the pair but Im an impatient bstard tho so I bought them anyway (at least I know they arent worn out) and they are a billion dollars cheaper than the coil pack I need lol.

[funkytown]

 PhatRS said:

ooook so you are right Funky they arent cheap from Subaru $91.80 on discount for the pair but Im an impatient bstard tho so I bought them anyway (at least I know they arent worn out) and they are a billion dollars cheaper than the coil pack I need lol.

;D lol.. told you

[Hailz]

"PhatRs" Could you let us know how you get on with the mod? Am interested to see if it actually makes a noticable difference by having the alloy arms in or not - cheers mate!

[PhatRS]

My car is probly not that good of a guinea pig for you just so you know, it bares very little resemblance to a legacy but Ill let you know anyway.

It will only make a difference if you do the castor mod or space the mount other wise the only difference will be the weight of your wallet.

[dubbedup]

 PhatRS']

My car is probly not that good of a guinea pig for you just so you know, it bares very little resemblance to a legacy but Ill let you know anyway.

It will only make a difference if you do the castor mod or space the mount other wise the only difference will be the weight of your wallet.

[quote name='Hailz said:

b]"PhatRs"[/b] Could you let us know how you get on with the mod? Am interested to see if it actually makes a noticable difference by having the alloy arms in or not - cheers mate!

TL:DR -

 

Reducing unsprung weight minimizes the load placed on controlling the motion of the wheels and tires. This means that suspension springs and shock absorbers will have a greater reserve capacity to control body motion -- just as they were intended to! The result is better handling