Quick question:
Anyone know if aftermarket UCA's can be added (Calmini or SLR), PML height be kept, and the truck be aligned properly? I would like to still be able to fit in my garage with a basket on top and square up the front wheels.
Thanks in advance..

If you are going to have the same wheel travel and suspension height as with the PML...why bother to spend the money on UCA's?

The long travel shocks for the 3" lift will work with the PML...so you're OK there....and all the arms do is let you force more droop to lift the truck AND STILL GET ALIGNED...

In other words, lets say the front has a total of 7" of total wheel travel, say 3.5" up, and 3.5" down to pick some numbers...

Now, do a SL, (either PML or UCA type lift uses a t-bar crank to get higher) so it doesn't matter what type we mean here...

So - You crank the t-bars, and raise the truck 1.5" higher...and now have 2" of down travel left (3.5" - 1.5"), but have jumped to 5" of available up travel (3.5" + 1.5").

With the exception of the (Stage 1+) SLR UCA's, which let you droop a bit further...you'd have the same performance with the PML as with the UCA's if running a 1.5" lift.

In short, the cost benefit ratio is very weak if doing UCA's to run 1.5" taller.

So - THE UCA's are for ALIGNMENT at a height, not height itself.

(There's a lot of simplification above...but the advice is sound)



Use the UCA $, and get a steering kit or revolver shackles...or the longer Bilsteins, or whatever else might have a better cost benefit ratio, and that you don't already have.

the UCA's DO allow more droop. they DO increase wheel travel. Crank the pml to 3 inches, and you are on the bumpstops. use aftermarker uca's, crank to 3 inches, and you are not.
There are "long travel" kits that increase wheel travel far more, as in giving more downtravel when "cranked" (as in coil overs) to 3 or 4 inches..
If you "adjust" anything up front, allign it, or start saving for the tire tax...

Do the measurements...the UCA's are the same length as stock, not longer....they are just contoured differently to leave the tires flatter when drooped instead of swung down/tops tipped out....

They just let you pre-droop....so you have more uptravel...but less down travel proportionally as you use some of it to droop.

The SLR stage 1+ Do give more droop, as the contouring allows it, but the other's...last time I looked, give stock travel, but allow alignment at the pre-drooped new ride height.

If you use them at 1.5" SL, which is the real question being asked, will they still align, or, being made to align at 3", will the tops of your tires want to tilt out too much to be able to get a good alignment.

The front end of the X hardly moves...the shocks have 4" of travel compressed/extended...that's it....and that even works with the SLR extended Bilsteins, due to the shock's mounting position...

I miss live axles.

sniff sniff....

I noticed the Ad for the new AC UCA's claim that they are longer than stock - which would make them different from ALL of the other 3" SL UCA's available...I wonder what the dimension are for those?

gezus!! This arguement again???

Once again, AC's UCA on the passenger side, stock on the driver side. Truck jacked up in air so both front wheel are off the ground. Shocks installed. Anti-sway bar removed. Notice the angle of the dangle in the CV's, tie rods, and control arms:



For the love of god, can we PLEASE realize that SLR's stage 1 UCA's are NOT the only aftermarket ones that give additional droop??? AC's do it, too, for half the price. Don't know about Calmini's. Do we need to beat this horse some more???

Here is the thing. Parked in a level lot, my truck's front end visibly looks like this ---> \-/ (exaggerated, but I can see it)

According to the dealer and Gemini goodyear, the truck is within alignment specs. Yet, the outside edges of my REVO's are wearing prematurely. I do not race around curves or take turns hard, etc. Especially since the second set went on the front.

I guess I would like to know if those with a 3" SL have the same visible condition in the front end, or do the UCA's correct it. Stock X's sit square. PML'd X's do not, even when aligned. Or is there a great enough range of camber adjustment to make a visual difference and still be withing spec?

Porche - you didn't see where I mentioned AC's new UCA's directly above your post?



Actually, in your pic, it looks like the distance from the bottom of the tires to the bumper plastic is the same on both sides, but the headlight to driveway distance is different, and the truck is leaning, rather than drooping more?

(Although I was mentioning that they advertise a longer UCA, etc...this pic doesn't show any difference from stock droop.)



Is there a better angle/optical illusion explaination? - I'm rooting for the AC's....we NEED these to work.

Unfortunately, when I put on my lift and snapped this picture, I never knew there was a huge debate on whether or not they gave more droop. I just thought it was cool that they did. So I didn't set up the shot for undisputable evidence.

Unfortunately, right underneath the driver's side tire, is a hump in my driveway. It's not flat, and it's extremely annoying. So that's why it appears the ground is closer on the driver's side.

Yes, the truck isn't sitting perfectly level, becuase my driveway (again) isn't level; right after the hump, is a depression. So the driver's side jack-stand is sitting a little lower.

BUT, the good news is, the way that the truck is sitting, would make the droop look like LESS on the passenger side, and MORE on the driver's side. If it were angled the other way, then it'd be opposite.

Since things are dirty in the pic, it's hard to look at. But if you draw an angle of the lower control arm to the crossmember, you'll see really quickly that the angle on the passenger side is more. Which means it's drooping more.

I know for a fact that both tires are completely off the ground, 'cause I didn't have to jack up the truck anymore to get the driver's side tire off. But looking at the photo, since I wasn't trying to setup an evidence shot, you can't tell that for sure. You just have to take my word for it (which I know some people aren't gonna' want to do).

As for the bumper plastic... I believe at the time the lift went on, I had only ripped the front bumper off 3 times. But it could have been 4. It's hard to say. At any rate, the passenger side of the front bumper always hung a little lower after the first (incident)... I ripped the left side completely off, and destroyed the metal tie-bar that helps support the lower portion of the plastic.

As for AC's "new" UCA's?? Don't know anything about 'em. I put the lift on about 2.5 years ago, so if they've got a newer design since then, I don't know about it.

Here's an edit to the image, to show the actual angles:

Cool.



A logical explaination.

The "Articulator" package, or soemthing like that, is the "New" AC SL...which might be the old UCA's, or not...can't tell, plus revolver shackles....so it may be that Calmini is the odd man out.

the easiest wat to tell is have someone with stock uca's crank then to 3", compare bumpstop clearence to someone with aftermarket uca's. The arms are longer for allignment purposes, and the bumpstop pads are relocateed for more travel. The length does nothing for travel, as the lower is unchanged. the upper and lower are of different lengths, so to allign it when cranked, the upper has to be slightly longer to get the spindle back to vertical.

Hell, at least you guys can use a standard 22 1/2 inch floor jack to get your front tires off the ground. I have to use my Hi-Lift.

Ed.

Craftsman floor jack and a 12x4 block of wood!

I measured, the after market UCA's are NOT longer, just shaped differently....at least the Calmini and SLR, I never measured the AC's.