Updated Radius Rod Bushings

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tom Blaney
  • Start date Start date
T

Tom Blaney

Guest
I just finished redesigning the radius rod bushings for the Honda and Acura's that us the stock 12mm radius rod. The new design allows you to adjust caster without using spacers or disassembling the unit. The mounting holes and the outer dimensions are the same as the old unit, but the bearing and sleeves are updated as well.

Your comments are appreciated.
http://www.sbmsinc.com/photos/radius_0.JPG

Thanks
Tom Blaney
 
Originally posted by racer-025:
It looks good. How is the outer machined nut tightened on the radius rod shaft?
Click to expand...

There is a second sleeve that is used to position the rod end that is the exact length of the first sleeve less the ball size. This sleeve is not seen in the picture but will be when they are back from the plate shop this week.

This second sleeve will be cut in 1/2 & 2 1/4's to allow for bulk repositioning of the rod end, then the threads and the front nut lock the position. The sleeve is internally threaded so that it can rotate for fine adjustment without taking it apart. Once the adjustment is made the original nut that hold the unit in place will lock the assembly down.

The unit will fit both Honda and Acura that use the 12 mm Radius Rod. If you have purchased the original unit in the past please let me know and I will apply a good customer discount.



[This message has been edited by Tom Blaney (edited February 15, 2005).]
 
Originally posted by racer-025:
It looks good. How is the outer machined nut tightened on the radius rod shaft?
Click to expand...

I finally got the parts back from the plating shop, and have posted them to my site. Here is a link to a detailed view of the assembly. I added flats on the front end of the center shaft to allow adjustment from the front of the car.

http://www.sbmsinc.com/photos/radius_0.JPG
http://www.sbmsinc.com/photos/radius_1.JPG
http://www.sbmsinc.com/photos/radius_2.JPG

Your comments are welcome



[This message has been edited by Tom Blaney (edited February 26, 2005).]
 
Just have one question...

It appears that these are mounted by drilling 4 holes in the chassis mounting location for the bolts that sandwhich the units together...

Is this legal??? "Bushings" are free... but chassis mods are not... so, if this is indeed how they mount, how are you justifying the chassis mods required??

I'm assuming that the suspensions in question use a tension/radius rod similiar to the ones shown in this picture:

hondafront.jpg



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg


[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited February 26, 2005).]

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited February 26, 2005).]
 
It passed the ARRC tech each year for the last few, so I think it is safe to assume that it will pass your tech.
 
Originally posted by Tom Blaney:
It passed the ARRC tech each year for the last few, so I think it is safe to assume that it will pass your tech.
Click to expand...

Passing "tech" does not make them legal... unless they were specifically addressed and torn down for inspection... which I'm assuming they were not...

You avoided the question... DO you have to drill holes in the chassis to mount them???


[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited February 28, 2005).]
 
Originally posted by Banzai240:
Passing "tech" does not make them legal... unless they were specifically addressed and torn down for inspection... which I'm assuming they were not...

You avoided the question... DO you have to drill holes in the chassis to mount them???


[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited February 28, 2005).]
Click to expand...

I am not avoiding questions, and yes they do require that 4 holes be drilled where the mount is made.

But very frankly this should not be an issue regarding the legality of the item. If this becomes a pissing contest as to how the rules are "interpreted" versus what makes strict logic and application sense than I am not interested.

Do we then also get into a situation where in the rules you may replace the passanger door panel with sheet metal, but because the rule does not specifically say that you can drill 6 holes 8.35" apart where you can use screws to attach the panel then we assume that it has to be magnetic or velcro'd.

The rule states that the bushing is legal, the actual mounting method is also assumed to be part of the process. If there is a performace gain because I drilled holes to lighen the chassis, it was lost because I had to put bolts into the holes to securly attach the approved device safely.
 
Originally posted by Tom Blaney:
I am not avoiding questions, and yes they do require that 4 holes be drilled where the mount is made.

But very frankly this should not be an issue regarding the legality of the item.

...

The rule states that the bushing is legal, the actual mounting method is also assumed to be part of the process. If there is a performace gain because I drilled holes to lighen the chassis, it was lost because I had to put bolts into the holes to securly attach the approved device safely.
Click to expand...

Tom,

No pissing contest here... The issue IS the mounting method, and whether or not it's "assumed to be part of the process"...

The rule states that bushing MATERIALS are unrestricted, but another rule says that mods, other than those specifically allowed, are not authorized... this would include drilling holes in the chassis for an alternate bushing design... which, frankly, is illegal as well...

The rule for bushings specifies that the "material" is "unrestricted"... it says NOTHING of a mounting method being assumed, nor of an alternate design being allowed, just that the "material" is unrestricted...

ITCS 17.1.4.D.5.d.6

Bushing material, including that used to mount a suspension subframe to the chassis, is unrestricted.
Click to expand...

I still fail to see how these bushings are legal, per the ITCS... I would LOVE for them to be, because it would allow the rest of us a much simpler and less costly method of upgrading our suspensions... However, these are bushings of an "alternate design", and it seems a stretch to justify them, per the rules, as simply being "unrestricted bushing material"... especially considering that the chassis must be modified to install them...


------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg


[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited February 28, 2005).]
 
Ok than answer this question, it says that alternate material can be used for the passanger door panel, since the original door panel was not held on with screws, and the replacement door panel is a flat sheet of the same thickness as the body panels, than how is it suppose to be attached?

It all comes down to common sense if we are going to nit pick the entire process down to how the parts are fastened, and effectivly waste everybody's time in tech studying the un-important concept of nut versus bolt, then the SOB who uses illegal pistons in a Honda can run most of the season as a cheating jerk while you and I determine if we should re-study the concept of is it legal to drill a hole or not.

THIS IS ONE OF THE DEFINING PROBLEMS WITH THE RULES PROCESS. It does not matter if it is a nut or a bolt, but it does matter that people are running illegal cams and pistons.
 
Originally posted by Tom Blaney:
Ok than answer this question, it says that alternate material can be used for the passanger door panel, since the original door panel was not held on with screws, and the replacement door panel is a flat sheet of the same thickness as the body panels, than how is it suppose to be attached?
Click to expand...

First, I don't see what door panels have to do with suspensions, but here is my answer to the question:

ITCS 17.1.4.D.9.f

"Door interior trim panels MAY BE REPLACED with 0.060" aluminum SECURELY ATTACHED TO THE DOOR."
Click to expand...

The method is expressly left up to you... it essentially "says you can" use any method you wish... to "securely attach" the panel to the door... Screws, welding, pop-rivets, etc... I read it all as OK... so long as the panel is secure...

I see NO correlation between this, and a suspension rule which simply states that "bushing material" is "unrestricted"...


It all comes down to common sense if we are going to nit pick the entire process down to how the parts are fastened, and effectivly waste everybody's time in tech studying the un-important concept of nut versus bolt, then the SOB who uses illegal pistons in a Honda can run most of the season as a cheating jerk while you and I determine if we should re-study the concept of is it legal to drill a hole or not.
Click to expand...

Just common sense... really???... OK, well then someone is going to have to make me a list of those rules which we can ignore simply because common sense says we should, because to me, if you have a handling advantage because you've broken a rule, I consider that every bit as much of an infraction as one who might use illegal pistons...

This is only my opinion, but to this point, I still see no justification in the rules that allows the kind of MODIFICATION to the suspension design... It does more than simply replace the bushing material... It's a competitive advantage obtained by illegally modifying the chassis, as well as an alternate bushing design that alters the basic design of the as delivered vehicle... A very far cry from simply replacing the material...

But, that's just my opinion, and you certainly don't have to justify what you do to me...



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg
 
it has been my opinion that these parts are illegal as well due to the drilling of the subframe. It is too bad as they are very effective in their intended use and a well made unit. I can only hope that further ingenuity will be applied at making them with a legal form of attachment. Just because a lot of Hondas with radius rods use them and have pasted tech at the ARC doesn't make them legal. Many a car has passed tech in the shed at the ARC but were still obviously illegal according to the rules. I remember seeing pictures of Bob Stretchs 240 sx up on jack stands in the tech shed , and visible plain as day were fully threaded AD aluminum shocks. Performance advantage..questionable, illegal at that time...You bet it was.
 
Swish on this one: bushing material is free, but where does it allow changes to the bushing dimensions?
 
I disagree with your analysis of the legality of the product, and being that the item itself is free and the basic design is in align with the intent of the rules. The fact that the radius rod is not modified, and the suspension mount point is not relocated makes this a legal part in my mind.

So at this point I am going to agree that we disagree and until somebody with absolute authority can state catagorically that the design is illegal, I will continue to use the product.
 
Originally posted by SETUP:
it has been my opinion that these parts are illegal as well due to the drilling of the subframe. It is too bad as they are very effective in their intended use and a well made unit. I can only hope that further ingenuity will be applied at making them with a legal form of attachment. Just because a lot of Hondas with radius rods use them and have pasted tech at the ARC doesn't make them legal. Many a car has passed tech in the shed at the ARC but were still obviously illegal according to the rules. I remember seeing pictures of Bob Stretchs 240 sx up on jack stands in the tech shed , and visible plain as day were fully threaded AD aluminum shocks. Performance advantage..questionable, illegal at that time...You bet it was.
Click to expand...

Sorry, threaded body shocks were never illegal. However, using the threads on the shock body for ride height adjustment was illegal. As long as you permanently locked some sort of perch to the body of the shock and then slid a coil-over sleeve over the body, it was perfectly legal.
 
The pickup point is actually relocated as this part changes the center of pivot of the radius rod. The sphereical bering is not located in the center of the hole in the subframe as is the stock bushing. Rather it sits to one side of the center changing the geometry of the radius rod, esentially changing the pickup point. Is this legal? Don't get me wrong. the Item is very well made and thought out... however it is not legal. Address the attachment and geometry issues. This kit is by far the best one on the market I only wish it were legal for IT. I have tested cars with similar kits and ones without. The ones with, perform noticebly better, and do have a performance advantage.
 
The picture I refer to was of an Advanced Design fully threaded aluminum body rear shock. not a threaded sleeve which at the time was legal. Please correct me if what I saw in the pic was indeed a sleeve and not as I stated.
 
Originally posted by SETUP:
The picture I refer to was of an Advanced Design fully threaded aluminum body rear shock. not a threaded sleeve which at the time was legal. Please correct me if what I saw in the pic was indeed a sleeve and not as I stated.
Click to expand...

Threaded body shocks have always been legal, but using the threads on the body for adjustment has not. So the car that you saw, just because it had threaded body shocks on it, doesn't make it illegal.
 
Originally posted by Tom Blaney:
...and being that the item itself is free and the basic design is in align with the intent of the rules.
Click to expand...

Again, I'll put it directly to you... WHERE is the rule in the ITCS that backs your case?

I've specifically quoted to you the rules that prove my point... You are modifying the chassis in order to install these, and you have gone WAY beyond using an "unrestricted material"... Unless you can quote me the specific rules that allow these parts, you can disagree all you want, you'll just remain wrong...

You show us a rule that proves me wrong, and I'll be happy to give you a full and humble appology...

------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg
 
Originally posted by metalworker:
Threaded body shocks have always been legal, but using the threads on the body for adjustment has not. So the car that you saw, just because it had threaded body shocks on it, doesn't make it illegal.
Click to expand...

Guys... This is kind of off the topic, and it's irrelevent now anyhow... Coilovers are legal as of 2005... Bolt-on and enjoy...



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top