Ridetech Tru Turn System issues 69 Camaro
 

I realize this has been beat to death but I'm opening my own thread giving my real world experience thus far with the Ridetech Tru Turn system. I'm copying and pasting this from another members thread. There have been more than a few people with fitment issues in the wheel house. I have worked around this with inner wheel house mods. We already knew this would be necessary. The issues I am having now are with a huge loss in turning radius and tire/wheel too far back in wheel opening with the UCA's/LCA's that Ridetech provided at their built in +3.8 caster angle...and with added shims to give me more + caster.

Now that I have the car on the road....clearly some of issues that glr0212, cwylie, and others are having, I am having as well. The car is now fairly useless in parking lot conditions.

My set up:

69 Camaro
Full height frame bushings
Frame specs good. Checked on frame machine. Son works for body shop.
Full Ridetech suspension....Muscle Bar, TQ Air springs, Tru turn, everything
Tobins rotors/hub from Kore 3
18X9.5 wheels with 5.75" bs up front
275/35/18's
Caster +5 Camber -1.5 Toe in: 1/16"
Delphi 670 box
67 Camaro 5.8" pitman/idler

I worked around the clearance issues on the inner wheel house but clearly either I was shipped the wrong control arms or this system pushes the wheel way back in the wheel opening which in my opinion looks stupid. I was already concerned about the clearance (side to side) issue prior to ordering wheels so I went with a 9.5 and an 5.75" offset that would give me a 1/4" of clearance on both sides of center with the narrower wheel. edit (which I realize I lost the 1/4" on the inside due to the Kore 3 rotors -.25" of factory center but that should put me back to Ridetechs position for WMS to frame clearance)

I also am running into an issue with hitting the Muscle bar, either direction at full lock. Actually, I don't imagine I am even close to full lock. And, the steering stops are on the wrong side of the LCA for Ridetechs steering arms. After a call into their tech group, I was told that I must use factory Camaro steering arm to utilize the built in steering stops. I would have to fabricate my own stops. Irregardless, if I do add the stops to prevent hitting the Muscle bar, I will loose a huge amount off turning radius with this system. The other issue, the rear of the front tire does rub the inner wheel house on occasions while turning, leaving rubber. Eventually this will wear through.

While this system may be great for the guy that enjoys an occasional auto cross, it is nearly useless as it stands on my car for every day driving unless I maintain a straight line...and I don't live in Kansas. Lol. I have to make at least two stabs at entering any parking spots. I don't imagine the Auto Cross I wanted to compete in at Springfield in May will even be an option now. Those tight parking lot turns wont allow it. For what we spent on this system...well, I'm at a loss of words. Lol.

As my system stands:

You will lose turning radius with this system!

You will have to modify your wheel house for clearance with 275's....but we already know that.

And at almost 8 grand into this system, I have earned the right to complain! I am literally so frustrated at this point, that I about to gut this stuff and start over.

Provided pictures are of the drivers side only

I have no problem notching my frame to get my turning radius....but where does that leave me with the sway bar and the tire rub I'm experiencing at the rear of the tires to the wheel house. I'd have to move the mounting point back and come up with a shorter sway bar arm for the Muscle bar in order to clear the wheel at full lock. What I feel needs to happen is the wheel/tire should be centered in wheel opening...moving wheel/tire up to an inch forward would probably clear the Muscle bar. I really think I have been shipped the wrong control arms. Ordered these through Matt at MCB. Hopefully he still has the original invoice. Not sure how to tell what was actually sent verses what the invoice says was sent. What a conundrum!

On a good note, I am enjoying the LS in the car. As long as I'm going straight I'm fine. But this wasn't purpose built for a drag strip only scenario.

I know at some point, around late 2013, or early 2014, Ride Tech started making their lower arms with the ball joint moved forward. Normally, to get more caster the upper ball joint is moved rearward, and this caused the tire to hit the rear of the inner wheel well. Maybe your arms are older? The LBJ should be forward of a stock A arm if you have one to compare to.

Are you using the ridetech spindle for this kit?

Great, so I may have ended up as a guiney pig for a test run of parts. I'm so tired of falling prey to marketing. Lol. Sure wish I had the time to have got everything going when I first got all of this. Then I would've known much sooner. Oh bugger!

Thanks for the help David. I move back to your reading material on Camaro front suspensions often for inspiration. Good stuff!

David

I'm fairly certain I am using the taller spindles as I did order the complete Tru Turn kit from Kim at MCB at nearly $1000. I found the invoice finally. And the pictures I have show the much taller spindle with two sets of holes (one low for steering arm and one high for caliper bracket). But I verify for certain when I can get back out to my dad's shop. Car is on hiatus while I get the Vintage Air (fittings-hoses) set.

Still love doing this stuff! But the loss of turning radius bugs me.

David

Please understand folks, I'm no stranger to aggressive marketing schemes. It has helped this industry grow into what it is today. Holley for instance in my opinion has one the most obtrusive and aggressive marketing campaigns for our industry. I have jumped right in and on more than one occasion throughout this project I have found that a couple of Holley's products just wouldn't work out for me....but Holley stepped up and worked through it with me. For instance, Todd at Holley took a set of headers and altered the location of the first two primarys so I would have the clearances I needed for my application at no cost. He spent his time to correct an issue that I felt should've been noticed on the first run, but understandably they are not going to have a product that fits every single application variance. But again, they stepped up and didn't leave this customer dangling. Lol.

Now I'm giving Ridetech a chance to redeem themselves and help me sort this issue out so I can get out there and smash come cones with the rest of you. :)

David

Original Invoice from Kim at MCB dated 04/05/13
 

1 04/05/13 64614*
SUMMARY COPY
67-69 tru turn complete package1 0 0 11169500 939.0000 -- 939.00
* 11169500 HAS BEEN SHIPPED SEPARATELY *
67-69 F body front tubular stongArm
upper pair
1 0 0 11163699 379.0000 -- 379.00
* 11163699 HAS BEEN SHIPPED SEPARATELY *
67-69 F body front tubular stongArm
lower pair
1 0 0 11162899 469.0000 -- 469.00
* 11162899 HAS BEEN SHIPPED SEPARATELY *
67-69 F body front shockwave TQ1 0 0 11163007 1353.5000 -- 1353.50
* 11163007 HAS BEEN SHIPPED SEPARATELY *
67-69 F body front muscle bar1 0 0 11169100 469.0000 -- 469.00
* 11169100 HAS BEEN SHIPPED SEPARATELY *
67-69 F body rear muscle bar1 0 0 11169102 469.0000 -- 469.00
* 11169102 HAS BEEN SHIPPED SEPARATELY *
67-81 Camaro - Ridetech 4-Link
ShockWave System - TQ Series
1 0 0 24350701 1279.5000 -- 1279.50
* 24350701 HAS BEEN SHIPPED SEPARATELY *
MERCHANDISE INVOICE TOTAL $ 5358.00
INVOICE TOTAL $ 5358.00
BALANCE FOR THIS ORDER $ 5358.00

I've been told elsewhere that I can always sell my a-arms and buy Ridetech's latest product. My answer: how can I in good conscience sell my used product that I know will not fit right to a fellow builder just so I can go out and buy the most recent correct product. I can not and will not do that to anyone.