Romanknight said:
"Depends on how you correct the caster. One advantage to drop brackets, the axle is not turned - except for whatever delta there may be from the drop to the actual sping height gain from spring variation (ala clown_midget). So the pinion should still be pointing at the same angle."
Yes, but the axle is 3 to 4 (or more) inches lower than stock. Does THAT make a difference?
EDIT: I hope we are talking about the front axle only here....
Not trying to make a huge wave here, and maybe I am not understanding you, clown_midget, and Walking Eagle, but this theoretical BS seems to be just that.
Lets assume for a moment the degree of caster correction is equal amung all options; bushings, caster plates, drop brackets...Caster plates, bushings, or control arm drop brackets the pinion angle is altered, the agle at the transfr flange is constant relative to the vehicle. So conversely, the pinion flange is the variable. So whatever the option plates, bushings, drop brackets the "physical" axle goes from \ to --.
Stealing Christo's technical diagram expertise...
Lift, no caster correction.
P\/|T
Caster Bushings & plates
P|/|T
Drop Brackets
P| / |T (notice the increase in distance from T to P flange)
Maybe I am envisioning a different animal than is being discussed. But I am not quite sure what this stement; "One advantage to drop brackets, the axle is not turned" is trying to describe. I think it is important to add... relative to what??? Because in fact the axle "is" turned with drop brackets, it is not turned (assuming bracket drop exactly equals lift height) relative to the stock axle rotation-but relative to its "uncorrected" lifted rotation-yes it is "turned"/rotated. Furthermore, speaking in terms of the axle housings rotation only-this can be achieved with all alternative caster correction options.
True, drop brackets would result in the axle postion, relative to the vehcile (back/forward), remaining constant with respect to its stock postion and independant of lift (and as before assuming drop bracketry exactly matches lift height). Which would thereby decrease the u-joint angles at the Trnsfr output and pinion flanges (relative to other caster options) -but I would envision this decrease to be minimal (i.e. not make up the difference to eliminate the need for a CV shaft-in such an instance where one is found to be required..er...wanted).
IMO saying; "One advantage to drop brackets, the axle is not turned" is like saying "Diet Dr. Pepper tastes more like regular Dr. Pepper." As opposed to what!? Lemonade? - I would hope
And as far as the point about correcting caster resulting in more lift from removal of spring "bow" and thereby needing additonal caster correction. I would like to see this-really! I know someone is aching to hop on to CAD.. how many people have "witnessed" an increase in lift height after caster correction? How much lift did you see vs. lift spring height/spacer height??? I can't imaging the alteration is going to make or break the effectiveness of the chosen caster correction option....