I know one of the CC “CC” (Clued-in and Clever) will explain the madly positive camber on this Chevy, which today’s CC reminded me that I had shot a couple of years ago. Doesn’t its front suspension consist of two un-equal length control arms, with the upper arm being shorter than the lower arm? Which should result in some slight increase of negative camber as the suspension either compresses or rebounds? Maybe I’m missing something (obviously). Swing axles are back?
Since the right front wheel doesn’t appear to be cambered the same way, I’d say he lost his left upper ball joint and the only thing holding the wheel at that angle is the lower ball joint being at its maximum angle and the tie rod. And maybe the brake hose (ha)!
I should have shot it head-on. The other wheel is cambered too; maybe not quite so badly, but it was very noticeable.
Hmm, well how do the lowrider guys get all that extra ride height for their 50″ wheels they use? Longer control arms? Maybe he’s got his longer uppers installed but not his lowers yet?
I have no idea…but I would have had to shove my head in that wheel well to see what the deal was.
To make a high rider/donk they just use longer upper control arms with their spring spacers.
were did you see this car? i live in eugene oregon would like to go see if they will sell it ??????? thankyou
It’s just a “juiced” car with the front fully extended. The 155/13 just hides that fact, and yes there are likely some iffy ball joints on there
Does that involve changing the fundamental geometry of the suspension? I’m curious, because I’ve seen juiced cars that had negative camber. Fully extending a conventional suspension results in negative camber, right? No big deal; just looks might odd sitting there; well, at least for Eugene! Not big on juicing here.
There are a fair number of juiced cars around here though mainly A/G and that is how the sit when extended.
Car & Driver or someone ought to do a full set of instrumented tests on whatever is considered the finest donk in the world and see how it does.
It needs a caption: “GM’s skunk works unfortunately found that swing axles didn’t work any better on front-wheel drive than they had on the Corvair.”
Some variation on the VIP car?
http://www.gtspirit.com/2010/04/23/overkill-tuned-vip-car-off-camber/
I guess there doesn’t have to be a reason.
Motor removed.
If you get a chance to inspect the build quality of one of these you’ll flip.
Dodgy doesn’t quite cover it. Yes, there are exceptions but not many around here.
could be engine-less too?
Judging by the mismatched tires, this one is on the road to hooptieville, if not already hooptied out.
That front tire simply looks ridiculous, too small and perhaps too wide (a look that was once popular before the really tall rims and donut tires became all the rage) and it’s these really small, wide wheels that we often see on low riders though.
Either that or the motor, as mention has been pulled. I simply though perhaps the left front tire is sitting in a whole, but that doesn’t explain why the whole car isn’t lower at that corner.
Also, if you look carefully, the front DOES look a bit higher than the rear which looks normal.
I’m with Sobchak and Carmine here. The height in front and the attitude of the front wheels suggest that the car is engineless. However it is true that most guys don’t put the hood back on and shove the thing out into the street that way.