buddy club extended ball joints
- Thread starter Peebs988
- Start date
JohnTurbo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2013
- Messages
- 942
Whys that Kozy?
They do use them in the Civic Cup - I assume they improve the lower LCA angle on a lowered car and improve bumpsteer.
If the VX220 equavalent of this is anything to go by it would make a noticable different to track handling.
In short I've been considering a set....so interested in feedback from people who have them.
They do use them in the Civic Cup - I assume they improve the lower LCA angle on a lowered car and improve bumpsteer.
If the VX220 equavalent of this is anything to go by it would make a noticable different to track handling.
In short I've been considering a set....so interested in feedback from people who have them.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2008
- Messages
- 4,081
Careful of the 'Because Race Car' argument, they're Bluddycrud products, it's a Bluddycrud championship. They have to run them, if they didn't, people would ask questions as to why... 
The fact is few people actually know what they are trying to change with these components, all they do is fit them then go, "yea that's different, I like it". I italicised different, because different doesn't equal better. Truth be told it is often very difficult to identify an actual improvement, but very, very easy to notice a difference and simply draw an opinion on it. People do it all the time with brakes. Fit big front brakes, notice the difference in pedal feel, increased pitch angle under braking, draw the wrong conclusions that they've made an improvement.
The theory is that they change the LCA angle to horizontal to raise the roll center, offsetting the lowering of RC you get from lowering the ride height. This increases roll stiffness and 'improves turn in'.
Ask yourself this.
Why is changing the LCA angle beneficial? Is horizontal optimum?
Why is a low RC bad? What does it even do?
Why is the front RC lower than the rear as standard? You don't change the rear RC height, is changing the roll axis inclination, by raising the front RC, desirable?
Raising the RC too high induces jacking loads into the suspension. Jacking is bad. If increasing the RC increases jacking, and jacking is bad, then surely lowering it reduces it, which must be good? Why are we raising it again?
On the topic of bump steer, I've done a kinematic analysis of the Civic front suspension, while it wasn't the most accurate model, it's still a damn sight closer look at how it works vs a blind guess. The effects on bump steer were bad enough that any relative inaccuracy of pickup point locations was made kinda moot.
For zero bump steer, you need the tie rod pointing at the IC, and while lowering moved it away from that point, creating bump steer, the EBJs/RCAs moved it by a far larger amount, which creates more bump steer.
Add in the reduced longevity of these parts, both by the questionable QC of aftermarket vs OEM and the effect that lengthening has on increased loading, and I really struggle to see any real benefit.
Yes, they'll feel different, and some people like it. Even if I drove a car with them fitted and liked how they felt, I'd still not fit them to my own car, based on the above.
The fact is few people actually know what they are trying to change with these components, all they do is fit them then go, "yea that's different, I like it". I italicised different, because different doesn't equal better. Truth be told it is often very difficult to identify an actual improvement, but very, very easy to notice a difference and simply draw an opinion on it. People do it all the time with brakes. Fit big front brakes, notice the difference in pedal feel, increased pitch angle under braking, draw the wrong conclusions that they've made an improvement.
The theory is that they change the LCA angle to horizontal to raise the roll center, offsetting the lowering of RC you get from lowering the ride height. This increases roll stiffness and 'improves turn in'.
Ask yourself this.
Why is changing the LCA angle beneficial? Is horizontal optimum?
Why is a low RC bad? What does it even do?
Why is the front RC lower than the rear as standard? You don't change the rear RC height, is changing the roll axis inclination, by raising the front RC, desirable?
Raising the RC too high induces jacking loads into the suspension. Jacking is bad. If increasing the RC increases jacking, and jacking is bad, then surely lowering it reduces it, which must be good? Why are we raising it again?
On the topic of bump steer, I've done a kinematic analysis of the Civic front suspension, while it wasn't the most accurate model, it's still a damn sight closer look at how it works vs a blind guess. The effects on bump steer were bad enough that any relative inaccuracy of pickup point locations was made kinda moot.
For zero bump steer, you need the tie rod pointing at the IC, and while lowering moved it away from that point, creating bump steer, the EBJs/RCAs moved it by a far larger amount, which creates more bump steer.
Add in the reduced longevity of these parts, both by the questionable QC of aftermarket vs OEM and the effect that lengthening has on increased loading, and I really struggle to see any real benefit.
Yes, they'll feel different, and some people like it. Even if I drove a car with them fitted and liked how they felt, I'd still not fit them to my own car, based on the above.
Last edited:
Tegiwa Imports
EK9 Dealer
- Joined
- May 20, 2007
- Messages
- 2,717
Careful of the 'Because Race Car' argument, they're Bluddycrud products, it's a Bluddycrud championship. They have to run them, if they didn't, people would ask questions as to why...
The fact is few people actually know what they are trying to change with these components, all they do is fit them then go, "yea that's different, I like it". I italicised different, because different doesn't equal better. Truth be told it is often very difficult to identify an actual improvement, but very, very easy to notice a difference and simply draw an opinion on it. People do it all the time with brakes. Fit big front brakes, notice the difference in pedal feel, increased pitch angle under braking, draw the wrong conclusions that they've made an improvement.
The theory is that they change the LCA angle to horizontal to raise the roll center, offsetting the lowering of RC you get from lowering the ride height. This increases roll stiffness and 'improves turn in'.
Ask yourself this.
Why is changing the LCA angle beneficial? Is horizontal optimum?
Why is a low RC bad? What does it even do?
Why is the front RC lower than the rear as standard? You don't change the rear RC height, is changing the roll axis inclination, by raising the front RC, desirable?
Raising the RC too high induces jacking loads into the suspension. Jacking is bad. If increasing the RC increases jacking, and jacking is bad, then surely lowering it reduces it, which must be good? Why are we raising it again?
On the topic of bump steer, I've done a kinematic analysis of the Civic front suspension, while it wasn't the most accurate model, it's still a damn sight closer look at how it works vs a blind guess. The effects on bump steer were bad enough that any relative inaccuracy of pickup point locations was made kinda moot.
For zero bump steer, you need the tie rod pointing at the IC, and while lowering moved it away from that point, creating bump steer, the EBJs/RCAs moved it by a far larger amount, which creates more bump steer.
Add in the reduced longevity of these parts, both by the questionable QC of aftermarket vs OEM and the effect that lengthening has on increased loading, and I really struggle to see any real benefit.
Yes, they'll feel different, and some people like it. Even if I drove a car with them fitted and liked how they felt, I'd still not fit them to my own car, based on the above.
Buddyclub actually have nothing to do with it anymore
Tegiwa Imports
EK9 Dealer
- Joined
- May 20, 2007
- Messages
- 2,717
@Kozy
Civic Cup cut ties with them at the end of 2012, and since then we have been the 'title sponsor'. Last year the average grid was around 13-15 cars with Oulton having 22. Next year its on TV and with over 30 cars are due to run Civic Cup is definitely going places.
Double Victory for Tegiwa at Rockingham | Tegiwa
Civic Cup cut ties with them at the end of 2012, and since then we have been the 'title sponsor'. Last year the average grid was around 13-15 cars with Oulton having 22. Next year its on TV and with over 30 cars are due to run Civic Cup is definitely going places.
Double Victory for Tegiwa at Rockingham | Tegiwa
JohnTurbo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2013
- Messages
- 942
I might yet do the Civic cup, but its pretty hardcore! I want some experience in a less dodgem series first.
I was about to say its now Tegiwa and the ball joints are the only buddyclub relic....but im a bit behind.
I do believe the Civic cup guys will have a take on these parts, as small gains are important when racing to a formula. I will ask Mr chapman or SW perhaps.
I only know that wishbone angles like my civic has made a huge negative effect on my previous car....enough to warrant 2k on billet hubs to some racers.
I was about to say its now Tegiwa and the ball joints are the only buddyclub relic....but im a bit behind.
I do believe the Civic cup guys will have a take on these parts, as small gains are important when racing to a formula. I will ask Mr chapman or SW perhaps.
I only know that wishbone angles like my civic has made a huge negative effect on my previous car....enough to warrant 2k on billet hubs to some racers.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2012
- Messages
- 8,917
Civic cup won't allow b16b if you run an ek9. Well they don't allow it this year.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2008
- Messages
- 4,081
On the VX?
