vbspec

So u read it on the internet and bc it hasent been settled perminatley you feel it has a place (would be intrested in your thoughts on bigfoot, alien **** probes and obamas birth cirtificate too.... lol jk)? I have an 88 crx and i have run both arms on the car... theres no difference.... the whole *** happy idea is from guys who just read stuff off the web and regurgitate it as often as possible.. IF the was a chance of a slight toe change... which is what a google search will tell u its all thrown out the window when the car is lowered...

beanbag

ITR is 1.41 and regular is 1.35

Tyson

geometries are absolutely identical.


88 arm comparison to 89+. (should be same as ITR)





the shock bolt is in a slightly different location, because the mounting is totally different, obviously. but if you follow the angle of the shock position, its directly in line. so no change.

Tyson

im open to a sensible technical discussion, but your "the eye-arm has a tendency to 'steer along'" analysis makes absolutely no sense.

the old and obsolete myth of the LCA causing "passive rear steering" is total bunk because simply the change in how the car handled is at the rear toe compensator attachment point to the chassis. and quite frankly, all hondas have some degree of "passive rear steering" aka rear toe curve tuned into its design. its what multilink rear suspension does.

and i have very reliable second hand knowledge from those who were responsible of the change. and ive measured and verified the change on the two chassis as you probably saw documented in your google search.

unfortunately there just is no verified reason for the change in arms for overseas models. all i can assume is that honda tuned a different shock for road surfaces outside of japan and the change in shock mounting just came along with the different shock.

but really, its not pertinent to THIS thread which is more about swaybar linkage. i just dont like hearing unfounded and false statements regurgitated over the internet without being corrected.

Tyson

did you consider the 89+ control arm has the shock point lower than the centerline between two outer bushings, as well as a bit closer to the end, AND the non perpendicular angle of the shock to the control arm when calculating this?

i think youll see when you consider the actual change in motion of the shock/spring to the wheel its actually the same.

kristo

I meant:
Any solutions for the EK except a complete custom LCA?

Todd00

Unless you are racing for money and your series allows such vast mods, I wouldn't lose any sleep over the OEM Honda rear swaybar/LCA setup. It has been working fine as-is for 99.99% of the people over the last 20 years or so.

chrisb

I agree. Nothing beats stock in many cases. Do the RTA and front compliance bearing/radius rod. Front LCA is nice too. Everything else is gravy. My car has stock rear LCAs and I could convert them nearly for free.

descartesfool

OK, next question after the motion ratio one, assuming that is resolved and that the arms provide identical geometry.

What is the weight of each type of rear arm? Any other benefits? Stiffness?

beanbag

This is what I wrote back in 2008:

"I measured both lcas to be 13 7/16 inch from subframe bushing to TA bushing. The GSR shock mount bushing is 3 5/16 away from the TA bushing, and 3/4 below the line connecting the subframe bushing to TA bushing. The ITR mount point is 4" away from the TA bushing, and 1/4" down. All measurements are +/- 1/16."

So the GSR shock mount point is 11/16 further outboard and 1/2" lower. It really does place the shock further outboard.

Finland

I wanted to continue a technical conversation about why in the world Honda used a different rear LCA on the ITR vs. using a parts-bin unit that fits that was already designed in the 90's if not earlier.

I tend to agree with Tyson in regards to the sway bar mounting and lca design itself to be irrelevant since there's not a logical reason to just change the lca unless you wanted to run a different shock.

If that's why the LCA is different, why would the shock design be so limiting that they couldn't make one with a fork mount like the civics?

Is the ITR shock made by a supplier that could not make it with a fork?

was it perhaps cheaper to make the ITR LCA since it's a stamped steel piece vs. the cast arms of the past? I would guess so.

Also, has anyone ever weighed the ITR LCA vs. the civic LCA? Could it have been done for weight reduction?

I would LOVE to know the answer to this...

Tyson

If it was for weight reduction, how much weight do seriously think would make (capital) any difference?

ITR was a limited build with custom valves sporty shocks. They weren't going to make new shocks to fit the US LCA's. End of story.

Davidss

lib

I know this is old..

I was pressing out rear ITR LCA bushings with hardrace (which were too small). I noticed the bushing in the ITR has two steel plates in the rubber similar to the RTA bushing. Maybe to limit travel left and right? Looks much more complicated than the Hardrace bushing. I'm thinking about just buying two new arms from Acura for $70 each.

Hardrace, can you please send me the correct bushings?

TheShodan

iTrader: (14)

Call Hardrace directly for support. They don't view here.

KoRn_vIRuZ

Cool topic. It's old but still relevant.

Just wanted to share that although the regular EG6 had eyelet rear LCAs, the group A racing version used fork type LCAs for some reason (this can be seen in the FIA homologation papers). I found that interesting.

Dilbones

Something I noticed by feel when comparing a GS-R rear control arm to an ITR rear control arm (I bought ITR Koni Races used from someone off here) is that the ITR is slightly lighter.

Don't know the actual weight, but someone can confirm this.

The "U" shape of the arm with the shock mounted inside of it may still allow for rigidity while having this "U" shape which seems to be made out of formed steel vs a cast may also allow for lightness at the same time.

Less unsprung weight? Just some thoughts-- but I think they make sense.

Tyson

that point was made like.... 20 years ago. not an original thought.

and it doesnt matter.

and dont forget the weight of the missing shock bushing on the control arm when trying to justify some unsprung weight advantage....

useless discussion.

Dilbones

Thanks bro. I'll think before participating in useless discussions next time.

I mean, this subforum seems to be so lively with activity that I guess it's an inconvenience to weigh in on a subject.

+1 for helpfulness

Dilbones

Thanks bro. I'll think before participating in useless discussions next time.

I mean, this subforum seems to be so lively with activity that I guess it's an inconvenience to weigh in on a subject.

+1 for helpfulness