adjustable vs un adjustable

**dav-02ws6-m6** · 01-24-2014, 01:45 PM

I'm looking at upgrading the lca and the panhard bar. Here is the thing I want to keep the stock height on the car. And I do not plan on lowering the car either. With that in mind which should I get the adjustable or the unadjusted one. Thanks in advance

***SMWS6TA*** · 01-24-2014, 01:54 PM

if you have no plans to lower then non-adj are fine.

**35th-ANV-SS** · 01-24-2014, 02:42 PM

I agree with Scott, but having adjustable is always better because while you say you are never going to lower the car now, that may change at some point. Also, even without the car lowered, you still have the option of adjusting the front to back location of the wheels if they are not centered in the wheel well for whatever reason with adjustable LCA's.

As far as the pan hard bar goes - get adjustable. The rear end of our cars is not centered to begin with. It favors the driver's side just a bit. The on-car adjustable is the best option. Makes adjustments on the fly a breeze compared to removing it each time.

**dav-02ws6-m6** · 01-24-2014, 02:57 PM

Thanks for the replies. I forgot to mention that I do plan to replace the 10 bolt for either a 12 bolt or a 9 in

**35th-ANV-SS** · 01-24-2014, 03:05 PM

Food for thought, I am lowered on Strano's springs with Koni 4/4 shocks. I have non-adjustable LCA's. My wheels are perfectly centered, at least just by looking at them. I never physically measured it. I also have a 9".

I am running the UMI on-car adjustable PHB though. Nice piece.

**dav-02ws6-m6** · 01-24-2014, 05:32 PM

Ok awesome I think I'll go with that same setup.

***SMWS6TA*** · 01-24-2014, 09:33 PM

I have full adjustable. Mine is lowered also but like Jon pointed out if you plan on getting a new rear then adjustable would be best.

**dav-02ws6-m6** · 01-25-2014, 07:14 AM

Was checking the lca units and I think they have three different one's. The non adjustable, one side adjustable and the full adjustable. So should I look maybe at the one side adjustable?

***SMWS6TA*** · 01-26-2014, 07:22 AM

I have the single. Best guys to talk to would be UMI. They are very helpful and con point you in the right direction while not forcing a product on you like some places do.

**UMI Sales** · 01-30-2014, 09:59 AM

Originally Posted by dav-02ws6-m6

Thanks for the replies. I forgot to mention that I do plan to replace the 10 bolt for either a 12 bolt or a 9 in

Hey David.

If you need anything let me know.

And guys above, thanks for the shout out!

ramey

**SuperSSguy** · 01-30-2014, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by 35th-ANV-SS

I agree with Scott, but having adjustable is always better because while you say you are never going to lower the car now, that may change at some point. Also, even without the car lowered, you still have the option of adjusting the front to back location of the wheels if they are not centered in the wheel well for whatever reason with adjustable LCA's.

As far as the pan hard bar goes - get adjustable. The rear end of our cars is not centered to begin with. It favors the driver's side just a bit. The on-car adjustable is the best option. Makes adjustments on the fly a breeze compared to removing it each time.

Agree.......When replacing my LCA, shocks,PHB and adding a trans mount bushing something went whacky with the rear end alignment and one tire wore out real fast ( GY F-1`s arent cheap!!) good thing i bought the adjustable PHB and it was able to be re-aligned so i wasnt crabbin down the road!!

**Naaman** · 02-27-2014, 11:28 PM

Speaking of LCAs and PHBs, if you have the extra couple bucks, I agree with others: get adjustable. Install them at stock spec if you want, but if you ever need to adjust, you don't have to buy new parts.

Also, especially for the PHB, they are not that expensive to begin with, so it's not a major financial burden to save up another week or month or whatever for the difference.

I'm waiting for UMI to email me back about the benefits of the roto-joint vs the rod-end joint LCAs. I bought my car with adjustable LCAs (rod-ends) but they are noisy and I don't like it. I'm hoping the roto-joints will be quieter. If clunks and thumps annoy you as you're rolling down the road, definitely consider the regular (polyurethane) LCAs. I'm thinking I will eventually spring for the roto-joints if they are what I think they are, though: the benefits of a rotating joint without the noise/wear&tear issues (?)

**pajeff02** · 02-28-2014, 01:57 AM

Only adjustable piece on our rear suspension is the UMI tunnel mount torque arm. Like Dave, our car will never be lowered so I wasn't concerned about going with the non-adjustable LCA's and panhard bar.

**Firebirdjones** · 02-28-2014, 04:05 AM

Originally Posted by pajeff02

Only adjustable piece on our rear suspension is the UMI tunnel mount torque arm. Like Dave, our car will never be lowered so I wasn't concerned about going with the non-adjustable LCA's and panhard bar.

I'll go against the grain, I'm with Jeff. Only thing I prefer to be adjustable is the torque arm to set pinion angle. Otherwise I don't need anything else adjustable. I'll never lower the 4th gens (damn things are low enough to drag as it is at stock height) and the last thing I want to do is make it more of a pain in the ass to drive around.
I took my stock control arms and panhard and boxed them in myself for more strength. Been doing this on our 4th gens since the 90's, works great and costs nothing. Prefer the stock rubber bushings as well for a quieter ride. I also run a Strange 12 bolt with all this stock stuff, works just fine.

With these simple tricks and tweaking the pinion angle I've made them go 1.5 60's

**UMI Sales** · 02-28-2014, 05:41 AM

I replied yesterday to what I think was your mail. It immediately bounced back and I had no way of contacting you. See if this is you:

Hi Mark.

Thanks for the message.

The ends you mention are most likely racing rod ends. They are great for performance, not so great in the noise department (as you are noticing).

Roto-Joints are designed to reduce that noise while still providing great performance. Roto's aren't as soft and quiet as rubber or poly but are quieter than the rod ends.

Short answer: Roto's would be quieter but not whisper quiet. It's more of a feel thing than a noise thing though.

Let me know your plan.

thanks

ramey

Originally Posted by Naaman

Speaking of LCAs and PHBs, if you have the extra couple bucks, I agree with others: get adjustable. Install them at stock spec if you want, but if you ever need to adjust, you don't have to buy new parts.

Also, especially for the PHB, they are not that expensive to begin with, so it's not a major financial burden to save up another week or month or whatever for the difference.

I'm waiting for UMI to email me back about the benefits of the roto-joint vs the rod-end joint LCAs. I bought my car with adjustable LCAs (rod-ends) but they are noisy and I don't like it. I'm hoping the roto-joints will be quieter. If clunks and thumps annoy you as you're rolling down the road, definitely consider the regular (polyurethane) LCAs. I'm thinking I will eventually spring for the roto-joints if they are what I think they are, though: the benefits of a rotating joint without the noise/wear&tear issues (?)

**Naaman** · 02-28-2014, 04:48 PM

Ah, okay. Thank you. Yes that is me. I may have mistyped my email... ? In any case, let me ask this as a follow up:

Now, just curious: what does the rotation do for performance/ride quality?

It may be something I don't even need for my daily driver, and if getting rid of and anoying noise without losing the type of performance that I like is possible, I'd like to do it. It's not going to be for another little while, though, since I just dropped $1300 on a bunch of stuff for the car.

I like taking drives on twisty mountain roads with lots of elevation change and corners of all types (tight corners, broad/sweeping curves, etc). Are roto-joints appropriate as an upgrade from a poly or rubber bushing? Or do they affect launch traction more than handling?

**UMI Sales** · 02-28-2014, 06:14 PM

If you like, you can send your direct email to ramey@umiperformance.com and I'll have it on file.

Ride quality or NVH (noise, vibration and harshness) means different things to different people. Some customers cringe at the installation of just one poly bushing in a trans mount while others install solid engine mounts and rod end lower trailing arms and can't get enough.

A properly tightened and lubed poly bushing works pretty well. If you already have rod end lower a-arms it's pretty cost effective to use Roto's in the lower arms and get a medium NVH. If you are completely tired of all noise, you can unload your existing arms and install 2015's for about the same price as two Roto's.

Roto's are an all-purpose thing which helps launch as well as handling. If I spent a high percentage corner carving I'd swap to Roto's. If I were mostly daily driving I'd use poly.

ramey

Originally Posted by Naaman

Ah, okay. Thank you. Yes that is me. I may have mistyped my email... ? In any case, let me ask this as a follow up:

Now, just curious: what does the rotation do for performance/ride quality?

It may be something I don't even need for my daily driver, and if getting rid of and anoying noise without losing the type of performance that I like is possible, I'd like to do it. It's not going to be for another little while, though, since I just dropped $1300 on a bunch of stuff for the car.

I like taking drives on twisty mountain roads with lots of elevation change and corners of all types (tight corners, broad/sweeping curves, etc). Are roto-joints appropriate as an upgrade from a poly or rubber bushing? Or do they affect launch traction more than handling?