Expierience with Magnum force?

Knebel

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
1,369
Reaction score
497
Location
Beaverton, Oregon
I am looking at their tubular control arms. They are about $350 in the raw and I am wondering if anyone has expierience with their parts?

I have read mixed reviews about them but all of them were like 'i had a friend who had a friends whos this and that broke'.

Anyone used them?
 

Davea Lux

Old Man with a Hat
FCBO Gold Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2017
Messages
8,913
Reaction score
8,069
Location
Cornelius Or
I am looking at their tubular control arms. They are about $350 in the raw and I am wondering if anyone has expierience with their parts?

I have read mixed reviews about them but all of them were like 'i had a friend who had a friends whos this and that broke'.

Anyone used them?

The factory control arms are pretty much bullet proof. Those units survived being curbed, run over center medians, railroad tracks and all kinds of other abuse in C-Bodied police cruisers and they rarely got bent. Why do you want to change them?

Dave
 

TX67FURY

Member
Joined
May 20, 2015
Messages
56
Reaction score
36
Location
College Station, TX
Magnum Force has a sketchy reputation, if you google them the reviews aren’t kind. If you’re definitely going to get tubular CAs I’d look at Firm Feel. But that’s just my opinion!
 

Knebel

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
1,369
Reaction score
497
Location
Beaverton, Oregon
I want to upgrade to be able to get more camber. My car isn't factory ride height either....
 

CBODY67

Old Man with a Hat
Joined
Mar 27, 2011
Messages
7,250
Reaction score
4,423
There are special front upr control arm bushings to provide what you might desire, without CHANGING the control arms for something else. You might also discover that all of the aftermarket brands of bushings have this feature already.

Usually, if you lower the front end a bit, you also effectively decrease the CASTER as you also put a bit more negative CAMBER into the mix, too? Personally, I'd be more concerned about having positive caster, myself.
 

1970FuryConv

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2014
Messages
3,636
Reaction score
3,814
Location
Richmond, VA
Is the ride height lower than stock or higher?
Are you retaining torsion bar suspension and stock steering linkage?
Is it only the upper control arms that you want to replace?

Firm Feel is my recommendation generally. Thanks in advance for clarifying.
 

Knebel

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
1,369
Reaction score
497
Location
Beaverton, Oregon
Yes I am looking at just the upper arms. Ride is a little lower than stock. I just managed to align it in the garage with about +3.5° caster and -.5° camber. I would call that good enough I guess for now.
 

1970FuryConv

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2014
Messages
3,636
Reaction score
3,814
Location
Richmond, VA
Yes I am looking at just the upper arms. Ride is a little lower than stock. I just managed to align it in the garage with about +3.5° caster and -.5° camber. I would call that good enough I guess for now.
I sold a pair of upper control arms to a guy who was restoring a 70GT. He said that rust had thinned the metal in the originals.

I can see why you want more camber.
 

1970FuryConv

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2014
Messages
3,636
Reaction score
3,814
Location
Richmond, VA
I want to upgrade to be able to get more camber. My car isn't factory ride height either....

Do you mean caster?
I meant camber. Usually, the spec is slight tilt outward at top of tire. 1973 left side spec, for instance, is .25-.75° positive to create more stability when driving straight ahead. I thought that was what you were looking for given the desire "to get more camber".

If you meant more inward tilt at the top of the tire, then I misunderstood you. Negative camber is supposed to improve handling in curves. Maybe you're thinking with 3.5° positive caster, which is generally more positive than factory spec, instability going straight is not a concern. In the end, it's a matter of what works for your car.
 

Knebel

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
1,369
Reaction score
497
Location
Beaverton, Oregon
Oh my bad, I mixed them up. The control arms give both, greater Caster (which I was after) and better camber adjustments. Right now my car drives okay with the 3.5 caster, but it could probably use a tad more. I was aiming for about 4.5° but then i would get positive camber, which I want to avoid.

@commando1 the tubular arms have more build in caster and camber so you can get the alignment more into modern specs. Especially when there are other suspension modifications.
 
Last edited:

1970FuryConv

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2014
Messages
3,636
Reaction score
3,814
Location
Richmond, VA
Oh my bad, I mixed them up. The control arms give both, greater Caster (which I was after) and better camber adjustments. Right now my car drives okay with the 3.5 caster, but it could probably use a tad more. I was aiming for about 4.5° but then i would get positive camber, which I want to avoid.
Thanks for the explanation. Please let us know if you find a tubular upper control arm that's good quality and has good reputation and reviews. I'm sure my friend with the GT is not the only one here who might have rust thinning issues in his upper control arms. Best of luck!
 
Top