[Chrysler300] 1955 C300 front alignment specs

[Rich Barber <barber@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for reposting the old alignment communications.  They were 
understandable and credible.

Can anyone advise of recommended alignment specs for a 1955 C-300-with 
bias or radial tires?  Heavier antisway bar?

It seems like the difference between coil front springs and torsion bars 
might change some of the recommendations in the communications.  
Certainly with respect to ease of raising or lowering.

Rich Barber
Brentwood, CA
1955 C-300.


Thomas Miller wrote:

>Howdy Folks,
>
>Here's the info I originally posted in March of 2000 on KYB partnums:
>
>
>Front - KG4507 (trim lower mounting sleeve to 1.25"
>long)
>Rear - KG5511 (no modification req.)
>
>Plus, a good posting on alignment from this listserver in 1998:
>
> Hi Gary, and Mike
>
>Gary: from '57 service manual, page 207: for power steering cars, specs
>for
>caster are +3/4 degree, +or- 3/4 degree. I would also like to refer you
>to
>Mike Laiserin's well-circulated article on alignement, which basically
>says
>to dial in as much caster as possible while keeping camber within
>specs. Let
>me know if you want a copy of this article, I can e-mail it to you.
>
>
>Hi to all,
>
>This following articles from Mike Laiserin, as well as the next one
>from
>David Grove, have been the most requested piece of information that
>ever
>came through the listserver. These were also printed in a past Club
>news or
>newsflite issue, by the way. I re-post to the list, as there are many
>new
>members since last posted, and urge you to save it for further
>reference !
>
>300'ly
>
>John
>
>FIRST ARTICLE,  BY MIKE LAISERIN
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <Mwl1967@xxxxxxx>
>To: <Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Thursday, November 12, 1998 10:12 PM
>Subject: wheel alignments & sway bars
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi All...
>                  Just thought i'd put my 2 cents worth in regarding
>the
>caster etc...  years ago, when i used to autocross my dodge charger i
>learned
>a lot about alignments..   for straight line stability you want as
>much
>positive caster as the car can take while still giving you camber
>readings
>that are acceptable.  The only disadvantage to all the positive caster
>( i
>had
>almost 5 degress on the charger ) is that the steering effort
>increases...
>and, based on how much assist they built into our power steering units
>we
>can
>easily see why they wouldnt want to do anything to increase  steering
>effort.
>trust me... its not that bad and the car will handle so much better
>that
>you'll think you are driving a different car.   Just look at old
>alignment
>specs on cars...  cars which came with manual steering had less caster
>specified than cars with power steering.. they wanted to make steering
>effort
>light.
>
>someone esle suggested that the front wheels will look tilted heavily
>when
>the wheels are turned lock to lock.. this is due to the high positive
>caster
>but  you wont see this on our  300's as we can never get that much
>caster...
>an example of cars which had very high factory positive caster was old
>mercedes benz, or damilers, or .. oh anyway,,  those cars had extremely
>high
>caster settings and the wheels tilted on turns but take another look at
>the
>mercedes.. the older ones anyway.. look at the steering wheels, they
>are
>huge.. again to offset the added steering effort due to the caster but
>then
>again,,, noone ever complained that these cars couldnt handle the high
>speeds
>of the european autobahn
>
>caster is the angle created when you draw an imaginary line runnng from
>the
>upper ball joint to the lower, positive caster is when the upper ball
>joint
>is
>set rearward from the lower.
>caster does not affect tire wear
>camber is viewed if you are looking at the front of your car, its the
>angle
>of the top of the tires in relation to the center of the car... of the
>top
>of
>the tires appear to tip in towards the center of the car camber is
>negative
>(
>great for cornering, bad for tire wear ) , if the camber is positive
>the top
>of the tires appear o tip outward, or away from the center of the car.
>you want zero, or slightly negative camber for spitited driving.
>
>now..  here's a trick...   have your alignment shop rotate the upper
>control
>arm cams at the rear all the way in to give you the most positive
>caster..
>now
>he will tell you that he cant get camber within specs however....
>camber is
>changed when vehicle height changes ( as the car bounces down the road
>) if
>camber is too positive with the high caster ( cams turned in all the
>way )
>you can adjust the torsion bars either high or lower to bring the
>camber
>into
>specs.. usually lowering the front increased negative camber while
>raising
>the
>front height increases positive camber.
>
>i could probablt write a book here but i'll quit while there are a few
>of
>you
>still with me. One more thing... a change that made more a diference in
>how
>my
>300K handles    ( even more than when i changed from 14" bias plys to
>15"
>radials !  )
> is having a custom front anti-sway bar made for the car..  basically,
>i
>replaced the original 7/8" bar mounted in rubber bushings with a made
>to
>order
>1-1/4" bar with urethane bushings ... BINGO !  a totally different
>car..
>corners almost completely flat, it was astounding.  i had a company
>called
>addco build it for me.. i dealt with john in their research and
>development
>dept who made the bar and seemed quite interested in making a big old
>chrysler
>handle !     He even made a custom rear bar for the car which i havent
>had
>time to install as of yet.  All i can tell you is that the fatter front
>bar
>is
>inexpensive, and almost indistinguishable compared to an original bar
>but it
>will make your car much more pleasurable to drive...
>just think.. if you can take freeway exits at 50 when it used to have
>to be
>25 mph, think how much better the car will handle under "normal" exit
>speeds
>,
>or just cruisng along at 75 or 80mph
>Hope this helps you out
>Michael
>
>AND THE NEXT ONE, FROM DAVID GROVE:
>
>In response to Amtonello's problem - outside of the obvious things
>(steering box loose at the frame, steering box worn out or out of
>adjustment), and assuming the suspension is "ship shape":  Something no
>one
>has mentioned is the "caster".  I find nowadays that front end
>alignment
>shops do not believe in a lot of positive caster - this is what makes
>the
>car track straight down the road, as well as let the steering wheel
>return
>to center after a turn.  I don't know why more + caster is not put in,
>and
>I'm not a "front end man" per se, but the last time I had a rear-drive
>car
>aligned, I was surprised at the specs that the alignment shop had to
>set
>the car.  Something like +1/2 positive caster.  I aligned front ends in
>a
>Chrysler dealership for a while back around 75 or so, and we always
>used at
>least +1 1/2 caster - and more if we could get it (not always
>possible).
>Now I know some cars will tilt the wheels at a weird angle during
>sharp
>turns with a lot of + caster dialed in - but I don't believe the
>Chryslers
>were affected this way.  Back to the last alignment - I told the
>alignment
>dude that I wanted more positive caster than his specs called for,
>whereupon he told me that there would be absolutely no "warranty" on
>this
>alignment.  Whatever the hell a "warranty" is on an alignment - I
>don't
>know - either you do it right or you don't.  Anyway - he went ahead and
>put
>2 degrees + caster in the car, and it drove & handled like a dream.  I
>can't understand why the specs are listed in this manner.  I would
>take
>that 300G to a shop where they will do what the customer wants and
>align it
>thus:  0  camber (or as close as you can get), and 2 1/2 positive
>caster on
>the right wheel, and 2 1/4 positive caster on the left, toe - 1/8 inch
>IN.
>If it doesn't do better, I'll be real surprised.   One more thing -
>and
>this is IMPORTANT::::  when you have radials on you "non-radial" car,
>be
>VERY careful with your steering box adjustment (for free play) - you
>know,
>the 5/8 nut with the allen head in the middle - if this is the least
>bit
>too tight - it will wear you out!  In fact, it is better to be a little
>too
>loose than too tight.  If you are having severe "wandering" problems,
>make
>sure someone didn't "do you a favor", and tighten this adjustment up
>for
>you.  Radial tires produced today do not have nearly the adverse effect
>on
>"non-radial" cars as they did 20 years ago.  You can use them on just
>about
>anything - and if you still have problems with "handling" - install a
>front
>sway bar.  We used to do this back when the radials first came out, and
>it
>would "straighten them right up"!.  I guess that's all I have to say on
>the
>subject, so I won't take up any more of your time.  DaveG.
>
>
> 
>Best Regards,
>
>Thomas F. Miller
>tfm@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
>
>'57 300C, '57 NewYorker T&C Wagon(s)
>
>
>  
>




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Give the gift of life to a sick child. 
Support St. Jude Children's Research Hospital's 'Thanks & Giving.'
http://us.click.yahoo.com/5iY7fA/6WnJAA/Y3ZIAA/8LmulB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

To send a message to this group, send an email to:
Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

For list server instructions, go to http://www.chrysler300club.com/yahoolist/inst.htm 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chrysler300/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Chrysler300-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/