Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I was cleaning out the boot of my r32 looking for any tools or supplies that might’ve fell into the  spare tire well. I found these that the previous owner might’ve left there? Lol. Anyways don’t know what they do or are worth but I found their website and apparently they are a Canadian product. 

9F29BF38-B91D-4F59-B624-6DC1C9F31D42.png

B9517AF4-9E3E-43A8-B551-FE64C601749E.jpeg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/475267-ams-tention-rods/
Share on other sites

The caster rods control the fore-aft movement of the front lower control arm.  Without them, the lower control arm would be able to move forward and backwards in the wheel well enough to crash into the guard liner, because the bushes at the chassis end of the arm aren't designed to take loads applied in that direction.

The stock caster rods are fixed length.  No adjusting them.  The stock amount of caster in these Nissans is a bit low - only a few degrees.  More (positive) caster provides an increase in the amount of dynamic camber (camber that appears in the wheel angle as the wheel is turned in the steering axis).

The stock caster rods also feature huge rubber/hydrogooshy bushes that provide a metric shit tonne of slop.

These aftermarket caster rods provide the ability to adjust the length to get the amount of caster that you want*.  They also usually use rod end joints in place of squishy bushes, thereby completely eradicating any deflection under load.  In my experience, this is f**king Excellent (TM), as it drastically improves the behaviour of the front end.

* R32s in particular do not like having lots of caster wound into them.  You can wind more into R33s because the upper control arm design is superior.  The more you wind into an R32 the worse the twisting/binding that occurs in the upper arm and shit starts to get real with them, much worse/faster.  Therefore the limit for caster on R32s is probably 6°.  I think I'm running ~5.5°, even with tricky upper arms.

8 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

The caster rods control the fore-aft movement of the front lower control arm.  Without them, the lower control arm would be able to move forward and backwards in the wheel well enough to crash into the guard liner, because the bushes at the chassis end of the arm aren't designed to take loads applied in that direction.

The stock caster rods are fixed length.  No adjusting them.  The stock amount of caster in these Nissans is a bit low - only a few degrees.  More (positive) caster provides an increase in the amount of dynamic camber (camber that appears in the wheel angle as the wheel is turned in the steering axis).

The stock caster rods also feature huge rubber/hydrogooshy bushes that provide a metric shit tonne of slop.

These aftermarket caster rods provide the ability to adjust the length to get the amount of caster that you want*.  They also usually use rod end joints in place of squishy bushes, thereby completely eradicating any deflection under load.  In my experience, this is f**king Excellent (TM), as it drastically improves the behaviour of the front end.

* R32s in particular do not like having lots of caster wound into them.  You can wind more into R33s because the upper control arm design is superior.  The more you wind into an R32 the worse the twisting/binding that occurs in the upper arm and shit starts to get real with them, much worse/faster.  Therefore the limit for caster on R32s is probably 6°.  I think I'm running ~5.5°, even with tricky upper arms.

Hmm so these are for thE fronts eh? I would’ve assumed for the rears. 

2 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

Definitely the front.  The equivalents on the rears are called "tension rods" in these cars.  You do not want to f**k about with those.  I have written many words on that subject lately, if you want a read.

And would obviously require an alignment after install yes?  Also with my new coilovers when they come in after I install them even though I’m matching the ore existing ride height do I need a re alignment?

5 minutes ago, SeanR32GtSt said:

And would obviously require an alignment after install yes?  Also with my new coilovers when they come in after I install them even though I’m matching the ore existing ride height do I need a re alignment?

If you set the length of the AMS rods to exactly the length of the stockers (to the centreline of the bolt hole through the front joint) then you won't need an alignment afterwards.  The paranoid would at least get the alignment checked, but the confident would expect the alignment to be unchanged.  Doing so would buy the benefits of reduced slop, but not the potential benefit of winding in a little more caster.  Shortening the rods would best be done AT the wheel aligners, to get the measurement you want.  If you don't know what you want, don't f**k with it.  There is plenty of reading on here to inform you though.

Changing suspension units, even with a small height change, will not require a wheel alignment.  Again, the paranoid would check, the confident would just run with it.

1 hour ago, SeanR32GtSt said:

Is there anything missing from these that would need replacing like a bush inside the endlinks before attempting to install?  And do they actually make a rattling noise?

Now that you mention it....yes, the pair of spacers that goes in the rod end on each one is missing.

Perhaps you should check to see if you have stock arm on the car, or another set of these.

And yes, when rod ends wear, you get metal to metal knocking noises.

36 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

Now that you mention it....yes, the pair of spacers that goes in the rod end on each one is missing.

Perhaps you should check to see if you have stock arm on the car, or another set of these.

And yes, when rod ends wear, you get metal to metal knocking noises.

I’ll be getting under it in a few days to check. 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Thanks for all that information I appreciate it. To answer your questions: - Yep that's what I mean. These guys are professional painters to so I must be missing something. It's a bit hard to explain. - With the primer landing on clearcoat, I make sure that the surrounding clearcoat is scuffed to 240 grit as my epoxy primer says that I only need to sand the area to 240 grit. - Yeah so similar to the first question, assuming that the paint landed on the unscuffed clearcoat because I've seen that happen. - Yep I want to prep the surface in that order. Only reason because epoxy primer will protect it from rust and I need that atm with this crappy Sydney weather. I think I was worried about time, if I try to put the filler down but screw it up somehow and I don't have time to sand it off and reapply it then need to put primer later that it might start to rust again so I wanted to apply the primer as quick as possible to not deal with rust.  - My car has heaps of small dents, that definitely need filler but are you also sanding the area to 240 grit to fill it in with filler? I always thought you have to go to bare metal for filler to stick but that contradicts the point then that you can put filler on epoxy primer.  If you aren't going to bare metal, AND not putting epoxy primer how are you making the dent stick to the paint?
    • I did. I went to a suspension guy and he told me because I don't have adjustable camber arms it's the reason why my car veers towards the left if I take my hands off the wheel but if I drive my other every day car and take my hands off the steering wheel it goes completely straight. I think it's common with Skyline's. In order to fix the problem, I likely need gktech camber arms then nismo bushes since I have poly bushes atm, then a wheel alignment after that. With my car if I take my hands off the steering wheel on a really bumpy road before stopping at a light I have to hold my steering wheel somewhat tight otherwise my car will legit just go completely in the other direction quite quickly and I'll slam into something lol instead of stopping straight. I Believe this YouTuber had the same issue and fixed it with gktech arms. At timestmap 6:05 he talks about how the car doesn't veer anymore after installing these arms.  
    • hello! does anyone have a schematic that shows how to test the blower motor resistor for the vac system? i believe the part# is 27761-15U00. I think the resistor is toast, but would like to be able to test it somehow before i embark on the journey to find a new one. cheers! 27761-15U00
    • I don't know the answer to this, but did you have a look at the parts diagrams on amayama.com and see what they list around it for your car? As an example this should be it on my car. That's how I would check for required clips and things like that. But, I take no responsibility for you ending up with a box full of random OEM hoses, washers and clips after going down that path a few times. This definitely has never happened to me  
    • Most driving should* be done on one side of single lane divided roads. In the RHD world, you drive on the left side of the dividing line and the road is probably cambered equally on both sides. So your side of the road slopes away to the left. The same is true for the LHD world, just everything swapped to the other side and opposite slope. With a perfectly neutral, straight ahead wheel alignment designed to drive straight on a perfectly flat surface (or at least one that is level on the left-right axis, even if it has some slope in the fore-aft axis) you will not be able to drive on a cambered road without the car wanting to drift down the camber. You will need to add steering input in the opposite direction all the time. This is annoying. The solution has always been to set the camber and/or the caster to produce a continuous turning force in the opposite direction of the camber. The car will drive straight on the kind of camber for which it was set up, presumably as described in the top paragraph. But.... when the car is set up this way, as soon as you get into a lane, usually on a multi-lane surface road or highway, where the camber is not as presumed during setup, the car will usually pull to one side. In the RHD world, if you are in the fast lane on a big divided road, you are probably on the opposite camber compared to what the car was set up for (ie, sloping down to the right) and the combination of the setup and that camber will make the car want to go right pretty hard. Even a perfectly flat lane will tend to want to go right. There's no getting around it. Civil engineers who know their stuff (which is not an assumption that can always be made) will attempt to keep the variation in camber across a multi-lane road as small as possible, and if they can will attempt to make the fast lane as close to flat, or even cambered in the same direction as all the other lanes. This takes a lot of planning for drainage, control of levels, ability to deal with the elevation changes that occur at road junctions, etc etc. So it's not trivial to get it right. When they do make it work, then the annoyance is reduced, along with tyre wear, fuel consumption, etc. In theory, the civil engineers are supposed to worry about those aspects of road design also. * This used to be true, but now with very large highway systems, even just multi-lane surface roads running everywhere, it is less true now than it was, but the old assumption is the basis for describing the phenomenon, so let's just run with it for the moment.
×
×
  • Create New...