I know it’s been a while, but do you remember when we installed lowering springs on Marlon’s car and couldn’t get more than -0.2 degrees of front camber because his tire and wheel size were too aggressive, causing the inner part of the tire to rub on the strut?
Well, if you don’t, please click the link below to read all about us lowering his car.
Now that you’re all caught up, Let me update you on our “quest for more negative front camber”.
First off, In this post, I want to explore whether it’s worth pursuing increased negative front camber without resorting to coilovers. To test this theory, we’ll be installing Cusco front lower control arms. This upgrade might help us achieve more negative front camber while avoiding strut-tire contact and preserving some of the car’s comfort without needing to install coilovers.
Let’s dive right in, shall we? Though by “dive,” I mean cautiously tiptoe through a series of, ahem, delightful surprises during installation (details to come, for the truly masochistic). For that reason, this post lacks the step-by-step details that I usually go through. In all honesty, for those of you still clinging to the fantasy of lowering your car on a budget, while maintaining some sort of comfort with springs, let me offer a gentle word of advice: just buy coilovers. Trust me, your wallet, and possibly your sanity, will thank you. Because let’s just say the financial black hole we’ve created attempting to make lowering springs work could have easily funded a trip to Flavortown, all-inclusive, with Guy Fieri himself as our personal tour guide.
Below is what his car currently looked like that evening before rolling into the garage to install the Cusco FLCAs. Currently, it is only sitting on Swift Spec R lowering springs, with no camber bolts, minimal 0.2* of negative camber in the front (basically zero), and a healthy -2.2* of rear camber. Of course, this is not an ideal setup for a car that we are trying to increase the handling characteristics on. Remember that due to the rear suspension’s multi-link design, it will inherently gain negative camber as the car gets lower… the lower you go the more negative camber you’ll gain. This is why most will opt to get an aftermarket rear lower control arm so they can adjust the camber back to a more neutral state in an effort to preserve tire life. Because from the factory, there is no way to adjust the rear camber.
Ideally, since we have no option for adjusting the rear camber, by installing these front lower control arms, we were hoping to get closer to -2.5ish degrees in the front to better complement the rear’s natural -2.2 degrees that was gained just from installing the lowering springs. That’s why, as discussed in the previous post about lowering his car (that you hopefully read), we were trying to install front camber bolts and use the secret “switcheroo” of the bolts that secure the strut to the knuckle to maximize the amount of negative front camber. Unfortunately, because of aggressive wheel and tire sizing causing contact between the tire and strut, we ended up not doing any camber adjusting up front.
Remember… A MacPherson-style suspension will not inherently gain negative camber when lowered as a double wishbone style does. This is why we were trying to use camber bolts to help increase the amount of negative camber.
Even if there was a way for us to adjust the rear and make it less negative and be more similar to the front camber…
- The tire/wheel sizing in the rear already slightly rubs on large dips or bumps in the road. So even if we had a way to make the rear less negative, we would encounter even more interference with the fender.
- Having a car with minimal negative camber should be reserved for those only concerned with aesthetics and cars and coffee socials. But for performance driving, negative camber is crucial, especially when combined with lowering springs, wider wheels, and grippier tires. Focusing solely on aesthetics over performance might be appealing to some… we refer to them as “posers”, but for those who prioritize handling… Healthy amounts of negative camber are necessary.
So obviously, if you haven’t gathered this by now, our main focus is on trying to get the most amount of front negative camber as possible to more closely match the rear without installing a coilover.
In a stroke of genius (or perhaps not wanting to admit we just needed coilovers), I theorized we might achieve more negative front camber by installing aftermarket front lower control arms. These control arms would extend the lower ball joint further outboard, effectively moving the lower portion of the tire/wheel outward. This approach differs from using camber bolts, which pull the upper part of the wheel and tire inboard to create negative camber. By pushing the lower part out, I figured we might be able to achieve more negative camber before the tire contacts the strut.
As you can see, the Cusco arms provide camber adjustments of 0mm, 5mm, 10mm, and 15mm. However, with the stock tie rods, you can’t fully utilize the 15mm setting. This is because there won’t be enough thread on the tie rod to safely handle a track width that’s 15mm wider on each side. Therefore, when using the stock tie rods, you’re limited to the 0mm, 5mm, and 10mm settings.
Another advantage (or a way to convince Marlon) is that these arms come with much stiffer rubber bushings. These stiffer bushings can help reduce alignment changes during demanding conditions, such as heavy braking on a track or spirited driving. They also improve overall steering response. All of these factors contribute to a more predictable, stable, and easier-to-drive car, especially when pushing it to its limits.
Let me start by saying that I have done my fair share of front lower control arm/ball joint removals over my 25 years of working on cars. And in no way was I prepared for the amount of cursing this one was going to provoke. As with everything we’ve modified so far on this car… nothing has been easy or taken us less than 4 hours to execute. Tasks that typically take me an hour or two on other chassis have pushed my patience to the absolute breaking point. For instance, the 2022+ BRZ uses an aluminum knuckle instead of the steel one found on previous models, which is just another stupid reason why this car is a nightmare to work on.
As you can see in the picture above, the aluminum knuckle has significantly more material around it, making access to the ball joint nut for removal challenging enough. And forget about fitting a ball joint removal tool in there; it’s nearly impossible.
I assumed that since the car only had about 2,000 miles on it, the ball joint would easily separate from the knuckle. Unfortunately, I was wrong. As you’ll see below, it was easier for me to completely remove the knuckle and lower control arm from the car as one piece rather than trying to separate them while they were still on the vehicle.
With the car lifted and the front wheels removed, you can now clearly see how much the aluminum knuckle obstructs access to the lower ball joint.
Here you can barely see the tip of the ball joint threads/cotter pin.
Now you can sort of see the top of the ball joint nut, the cotter pin, and the threads of the ball joint.
And just in case you didn’t know where you should be looking… my blurry finger is pointing to it.
Here, I’m able to sneak the 17mm socket on the nut after of course removing the cotter pin.
Despite the wide-angle lens making it appear as though there was plenty of room to swing the ratchet, there really wasn’t. I also had to use a cheater bar on the ratchet for additional leverage.
After employing every trick I knew of to separate the lower control arm ball joint from the knuckle without damaging any part of Marlon’s brand-new car, I decided my best option was to remove the entire assembly. This would give me much better access to the ball joint.
If the ball joint had separated from the knuckle easily, installing these FLCAs would have been a straightforward process. However, because I had to remove the entire front suspension assembly to gain better access to separate the ball joint from the knuckle, it turned into a much more complex and time-consuming task.
In hindsight, I should have known about a specific tool available through Subaru or other tool suppliers that would have been ideal for this job. Unfortunately, as this was the only Subaru I’d ever worked on, I didn’t have the tool, and with the project well underway and nearing sunset, there was no way I could run out and buy one.
This is what the tool looks like. I do have one similar, but it is for my FK8 (Civic Type R). Of course, I did try to make that one work, but without success due to it not being the correct size.
Now that I decided to remove the entire front suspension assembly, my frustration grew. Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to take pictures of each step, so you’ll have to make do with just words explaining the process rather than pictures.
To successfully remove the complete suspension assembly you must:
- Disconnect the outer tie rod from the knuckle.
- Remove the brake caliper from the knuckle. But you can leave the brake line attached, just simply hang the caliper somewhere out of the way. (you can see I hung it from the coil spring)
- Unbolt the sway bar end link.
- Unbolt the ABS/wheel speed sensor from the knuckle.
- Unbolt the lower control arm from the two mounting points where it attaches to the chassis.
Here’s the last official picture before frustration completely sets in. This is the outer tie rod, where it needs to be disconnected from the knuckle.
Below, you can see the failed attempts I made to separate the knuckle and lower control arm at the lower ball joint. I used a dead blow hammer to try to shock the ball joint free, but this usually works better with a non-dead blow hammer. I was only using a dead blow to avoid damaging or marring the area where I was hitting the lower arm and knuckle. I also used a pickle fork, but the handle broke during the attempt. Finally, I even tried the ball joint separator tool I have for my FK8, but none of these methods were successful.
Here we are now with the whole suspension assembly removed. You can easily see how everything just disconnects from the knuckle, allowing it to all be removed.
I don’t have a picture of what the lower control arm and knuckle looked like after removal but before separating them at the lower ball joint. However, below you can see what the knuckle looked like with the lower arm removed.
Again, it’s not really too complicated to remove but rather just time-consuming. Below you can see how simple it is. Two large holes on the left are for the brake caliper. At the top, vertically, is where the knuckle secures to the strut via the two bolts. On the right, is where the tie rod connects. At the bottom, you can see the single hole for the lower ball joint. And lastly, there is a provision (not visible in the picture) for the ABS/wheel speed sensor. Those are the only things holding the knuckle onto the car.
Below is a helpful comparison between the OEM lower control arm and the Cusco one. You can also see the three mounting points of the lower control arm: two points where it bolts to the chassis (one vertically and one horizontally) and the ball joint where it connects to the knuckle.
To avoid working late into the night, as we often do with this car, we decided to quickly wrap up this project. Instead of trying the 10mm setting to get closer to our goal of -2.5 degrees of front camber, we opted to set the ball joint to the 5mm setting on the lower control arm. I knew that the 5mm setting wouldn’t give us the desired amount of negative camber, but I didn’t want to have to disassemble everything again if we ended up making contact with the tire and strut using the 10mm setting. You might be thinking that adjusting the lower control arm further outward would only push the lower part of the wheel outboard. That’s true, but I also knew that there would be some slight inward movement on the upper part of the wheel, which could cause interference with the strut. And at that late hour, I wasn’t interested in trying it out.
If we hadn’t already spent extra time taking apart the entire front suspension on both sides of the car, I might have tried setting the ball joint to the 10mm mark. However, adjusting the ball joint requires separating the lower control arm from the knuckle again to access all the screws. This was something I really wanted to avoid doing, especially if there was still contact between the tire and strut. While my heart yearned for the benefits of the 10mm setting, logic dictated the 5mm option due to the limited clearance and potential rework.
Here you can see everything all reassembled.
Cell phone pic of everything reassembled.
While we had everything disassembled, to gain a few more millimeters of clearance between the strut and the inside of the tire (potentially allowing us to increase the amount of negative camber), we decided to grind down a section of the strut where the spring sits, also known as the spring perch. As mentioned in our previous post, we were using Marlon’s debit card to measure clearance. According to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), a debit card is 0.76 millimeters thick. Grinding away 0.25 inches from the perch would provide at least 6.35 millimeters of additional clearance or just slightly more than the thickness of 8 debit cards.
I applied some blue painter’s tape to ensure there was no damage to the Swift Spring paint.
Armed with my trusty flappy wheel, I delicately shaved off just over a quarter inch of spring perch material, ensuring it didn’t accidentally turn into a modern art sculpture. This little modification gave us some extra wiggle room and, more importantly, let me sleep soundly knowing Marlon’s tire isn’t just a measly 0.76mm away from the strut—because who needs that kind of stress?
Below, you can see how I only shaved down the front side of the spring perch, as this is the only area that might ever contact the tire. Remember, on a MacPherson strut suspension, the strut rotates with the wheel as you steer in either direction.
And again one last zoomed in one for clarity of what was actually shaved down.
Below are the results from Marlon’s first alignment after we installed the Swift Springs. As you can see, he left the shop with only -0.2 front camber and a healthy -2.2 rear camber. This is why we are installing the Cusco front lower control arms.
The alignment sheet below shows the results after installing the Cusco Front Lower Control Arms. By setting them to 5mm, we gained approximately 0.7 degrees of negative camber compared to the previous setup with only Swift springs. The FLCA’s now allow for a total of -0.9 degrees of front camber.
While this is an improvement, it is nowhere near where we need to be especially if the rear is at -2.3ish degrees.
Below are some pictures of what the car currently looks like.
- Lowered on swift springs.
- No camber bolts.
- Cusco Front Lower Control Arms set to 5mm setting.
- Front camber is -0.9 degrees.
- Rear camber is -2.3(ish) degrees.
Oh, absolutely, that front fitment with -0.9 degrees camber is a real showstopper for the stance Bois only trying to chase social media clout. But don’t fool yourself into thinking it’s going to deliver any performance enabling you to chase down supercars at the track. True enthusiasts will see right through it and know you’re all about the show, not the go.
Just a reminder: Wheel/Tire specs…
- 18×9 +42 square.
- 245/40 Azenis RT615K all around.
- No spacers (obviously).
The picture above does a great job of highlighting how much more negative camber there is in the rear compared to the front.
Another one from the rear perspective shows again just how much more negative camber there is in the rear compared to the front.
Below is a perfect example of how social media can pull the wool over your eyes. Thanks to the magic of a wide-angle lens, it might look like the car has a decent amount of negative camber up front, giving the illusion of a meticulously dialed-in track setup. You’d probably see this online and think, “Wow, this car must absolutely rip on the track! The fitment is chef’s kiss.” But, let’s be real—if you think this is anything more than a showpiece built for likes and comments, you couldn’t be more wrong. This is just social media smoke and mirrors, not a well-sorted track monster.
Back to the frontal view with a 70mm lens, and just like that, the illusion disappears, exposing the minimal front camber for what it really is. A sheep in wolf’s clothing.
You might be wondering why I’m being so harsh about his car’s current state because it arguably looks sick. But it’s not about insulting his car; it’s about exposing some of the smoke-and-mirror tactics behind the online heroes you idolize. From the moment we installed his springs and realized we couldn’t achieve a significant amount of negative front camber, we’ve been on a mission to correct that. I’m not about to let my good friend drive around in a “track-inspired” car, and he wouldn’t want that either.
Since we weren’t able to achieve the camber numbers we were looking for after installing the Cusco FLCA’s. I’ll show you a sneak peek of our next blog post…
Yep, we are still trying to make this whole “non coilover” thing work on his car. The write-up and install process on these bad boys will be coming up sometime in the next few weeks. So until then, you’ll have to settle with the sneak peek and no further info.
However, I must share one piece of advice: I would skip buying and installing the Cusco FLCAs we just covered and go straight for the Verus camber plates. These plates can provide up to -3.0 degrees of front camber per side and are compatible with OEM springs or lowering springs on stock struts and shocks, effectively giving you a “budget” coilover setup. I’ll be going into much more detail on these in the next post.
Our journey in modifying Marlon’s BRZ has been a rollercoaster of trial and error, but every challenge has brought us closer to perfecting and truly understanding this chassis. Through blood, sweat, and a few tears, we’ve come to master the intricacies of the BRZ/86 platform, and we’re eager to share our hard-earned insights with the enthusiast community.
As a die-hard Honda fan, diving headfirst into a BRZ project was a bold and humbling move. It’s been a steep learning curve, but the challenges have made the triumphs even sweeter. I owe a huge debt of gratitude to Marlon for trusting me with his car – even if his wallet might disagree.
In all seriousness, Marlon’s been an incredible sport throughout this entire process. His patience and understanding are unmatched. Plus, it’s comforting to know that every modification we’ve made has a clear purpose and enhances the car’s overall performance. Even if they weren’t really necessary at the time.
And there you have it, folks! Another chapter in the ongoing saga of Marlon’s car modifications. While this particular project may not have gone as smoothly as we had hoped, it’s all part of the learning process. We’ve certainly gained valuable insights and experiences along the way. Stay tuned for more updates on Marlon’s car, including the upcoming installation of Verus camber plates. Until then, happy wrenching!
As always, I thank you all for taking time out of your busy lives to read a bitter, aging man’s tales of car modifications. I genuinely hope that no matter what your skill level, you are able to absorb some sort of knowledge that you might have been lacking before. If you have any questions, concerns, hate, love, or just want to say hi, please feel free to reach out to me via Instagram (@Functiontheory), email at (Billy@functiontheory.com), or simply comment on the post below, and I will get back to you. I always enjoy interacting with the readers.