I did that when I rebuilt these arms originally... Well on the uppers. They are double adjustable. Blaine told me why they don't have flats and how to work around it, but I still find them useful.
Modifying Currie control arms to double adjustable
- Thread starter Mike_H
- Start date
Sorry, I said one to two is different than zero to one. Probably wasn't clear and it don't matter. Thanks for at least responding.
But it's really not... Threading a hole is about as basic as it comes. You want to get fancy and start doing variable helix, or multi axis thread whirling, sure, but running a straight walled 2B thread should be pretty easy for anyone who's considering doing it on a production basis.
Trying to do it in your garage with a Chinese bench top lathe? Ok, maybe.
Next fucking time you respond to me without a quote lands you on the ignore list. Now you know how to get what you want.
In what way? Just holding the body stationary while you tighten the jam nuts? That's the only thing I can come up with that flats would help with, since I only adjust them by hand. And if I do the jam nuts right, I usually don't even have to hold it still.
Get the threads muddy and let the clay suck the oil out of the anti seize so it turns into a sticky mess. Having a wrench flat is really nice, because mine don't always turn by hand easily.
OK, I can see that. Still haven't wheeled outside Colorado where the mud is mostly just brown water.
I'm not sure what I'd do in that case though...other than relearn how to use DA arms. Being able to turn by hand is my go to method of making sure there's no binding.
Yes it would. Guess I wasn't clear enough, spin it a few turns by hand with the tailstock center in to get it started straight, then finish it off by hand. If you wanted to power tap there would be no need for a center.
Multiple ways to solve each of those actually. Deflection isn't much of a concern for this problem, as it will deflect the same amount at the beginning of the threads as it does the end, possibly even more considering the stickout is greater at the start, but not a lot of tool pressure for threading ops.
Plenty of ways to deal with chatter, sfm, number of passes, infeed angles and techniques, anti-vibe bars, steady rest, high pressure coolants, holding a piece of wood through the door against the workpiece, etc.
I wheel in a mix of trails and soil, with a significant amount of clay. In spite of the fact that I disassemble each double adjustable control arm and apply liberal amounts of anti-seize, when I go back to do maintenance, there is surprisingly little left. Until this conversation about clay came up, I was wondering why that was the case. Mystery solved!
I move the bolts. If they spin freely, the arm isn't binding.
I was thinking more along the lines of tightening the jam nuts. I'm sure it can be done simply with a pipe wrench or something once they have been dragged over a few rocks and the finish is gone, but it's difficult to hold them and not burr them all up when they are shiny.
That actually is pretty easy to do. They both spin the same way, so you bias the joints that way, then snug one side down, work the other side, and go back and forth. It doesn't take much to keep that tube from spinning.
fair enough. I guess I'm just used to my adjustments being about 8:1 after-the-fact pinion angle adjustments with bolts already torqued vs initial setup.
Ultimately that's what I ended up doing. I did have a few that wanted to rotate as I tightened them.
I thought I laid that out in the first post...I figure I could sell em for 7-800 dollars. New ones are about 1300 but the time they are shipped, so that's a 5-600 dollar cost differential. I can buy the housings and jam nuts for less than 200, taxes and shipping included. A tap, if needed, is about 65 bucks. I won't bugger one up. It's not difficult to do what I'm proposing
Similar threads
