Battle Version suspension products, by Alex Pfeiffer,
came out with an answer to 350z rear camber / toe
adjustment needs. His products are widely used on
240sx, Supra, AE86 if any of you didn't know.

The 350z comes with a horribily designed suspension to
begin with, oem setup does not allow much of adjustment
in the rear, especially when the car is lowered, there's no
way the stock ecentric bolt will put you back to proper settings.




Battle Version Camber Link vs Stock


Battle Version Toe Link vs Stock
This toe link will only work with cars installed with true coilover setup in the rear, since it replaces the OE spring bucket.

These links allow easy adjustments, all you have to do is turn the rod one way or the other to get the desired setting, then tighten the nuts on both side.


set the rear to -1.0 camber. Toe is 1/16.


side shot of my car so you have an idea how low my car is


Corner weight and balanced. the car weights 3217lbs as you can see...


if you are interested in battle version products, please check the Vendor section, we'll do a special very soon.

 

How much for the Battle Version Camber Link?

 

It's $275 shipped either camber or toe link. PM me if you are interested in buying it.


Here's the link to the special in vendor section.

https://my350z.com/forum/showthread.php?t=144927

 

OK, which coilovers are those? Specs, price?

 

those are BuddyClub racing spec coilovers. PM me for price of the coilovers.

here is a review of the coilovers by me

https://my350z.com/forum/showthread....ight=buddyclub

 

...looks like everyone else's adjustable arms....there is no magic to making these pieces, but at least they ahvea good name attached to them

 

yea, but they arent priced like stillen or jic's. and they offer a true spherical bearling unlike the spc/kinetix camber arms which have rubber bushings still

 

Can the rear damper mounts support additional stress from the springs? I wonder if it's going to eventually stress out the mounting points and begin cracking. The damper mounts on our cars weren't designed to support the weight of the car. The stock spring mounts seem a lot beefier than the damper mounts.

 

OK, what he said.

 

The so-called "toe arm" by JIC / Stillen ARE NOT TRUE TOE ARMS, they replace the traction rod instead, and no matter how you adjust it, it won't change the toe at all. it will mess up the geometry of the suspension, those are mainly for adjustment of bumpsteer.

the only way to adjust rear toe is using the stock ecentric bolt, or using battleversion's method by replacing the lower spring bucket.

 

Anybody care to comment on the above?

Thanks,
Az

 

yea i know, i was promotibng battle version. i know that the toe arms are total bull**** from jic/stillen. i was just saying these are better constructed for a fraction of the price.

 

+1 on the comment aboved bout this as well... also since they are spherical bearings, are there any creaking or other noises associated with these?

 

I haven't looked at the rear-end geometry, but from my understanding, the nominal load on the damper mount would be the same whether the spring is attached to the the damper mount or to the spring mount.

 

I see my post was deleted...why, I have no idea.

Anyway, I have a different firms toe arms and camber arms on my car, and can confirm that yes you can in fact adjust toe with them....stating otherwise is not a fair representation of what else is on the market.

I am not owing loyalities to anyone on this mind you, as frankly I can count on one hand how many sets of other guys "arms" we have moved (aside from SPC). The ones I use are not even sold to the public, and may never be (they are very very slow with stuff sometimes). However, to state that it does not adjust toe when in fact it does (I've got several alignment settings we use on my car to prove it), is not a fair criticism of the products. Now, perhaps this is a better means of said adjustment..I honestly do not know the answer as I have not sat down to truly study the geometry of the car in depth, aside from the cursory look when we installed items and try them out

 

Hard to say.

But for the EOM mounts being beefier, remember that these mounts offer very little mechanical adventage (ie no leverage). The spring have to be very stiff to give an average spring rate at the wheel. (I read somewhere the spring is only 35% effective at that location).

So the load at the damper would not be that much more.

 

Well, looking at the stock rear lower arm, makes me think that this part has more stress on it than the upper spring mounting point. However, should we change it to a coilover, I would think that it would increase the stress on the upper mounting point. Don’t ask me for any explanation because I don’t have it … but that’s just the way I look at it until some can explain it. Other than that, I would think that the stock location would provide less stress on any single point... having said that, maybe you can use both a coilover and the stock location ??? I don't know


At any rate, can someone explain the benefit in real-life of using a coilover in the rear versus the stock setup.

Thanks,

Az

 

And this would also increase the stress on the upper mounting point of the shock

 

Other than the concern for load distribution. None. It's a design choice. Stock location is more compact on the sides, but intrude on cargo space. Not an issue on the Z, the rear diff is already screwing up the trunk space.


On a race car, you want all your suspension members to by as long as possible. Longer members will reduce loading. Allows for smaller spring rate and damping. In turn this will affect the natural frequency of the suspension.

 

Yes. It will increase for sure. But how much? Less than we might think at first.

Too much? I don't think so. The chassis is stiff enough.

Track your car seriously, and you will get rattles anyways.