CPP 500 box with stock arms

[56onAir]

Had planned on using a cpp 500 box with my stock a arms, was reading on some other forums where this could be an issue? is this true? also was exploring using cpp tubular arms, i am installing air ride in the front of my car would this be an issue with the cpp arms??

[TheHotrodHandyman]

I have installed a half dozen CPP boxes with stock arms and no issues at all.:tu

-Bruce

[Rick_L]

While the extra caster is nice, I think sometimes the need for it is overstated.

Put it together and see what you think.

The upper control arm and air ride shouldn't really affect each other.

On the other hand, you're willing to spend the $$$ for air ride and not control arms?

[56onAir]

Rick, unfortunately im not independently wealthy like some guys here, Im a coach/teacher and have to build my car from extra $$ i make doing side projects and work during the summer. So an extra $800-$1100 for control arms if they arent necessary is a big deal to me. Any preference between the CPP arms and other manufacturers like air ride tech etc?

[Rick_L]

You don't have to do a lower arm with the upper ones. The lower arm does nothing for the alignment. Sometimes they have something that suits a coilover mount, but obviously you think the air ride doesn't need a new lower arm.

In other words, tubular lower arms are mostly for looks, and doing only uppers would save you a bunch compared to doing both.

To expand on my other comment, if you are trying to save money, why air ride either? Many other cheaper ways to get there.

If you want air ride, that's fine. Just trying to put it all in perspective.

[56Mark]

You can get just the uppers for about $350. I put a 500 box on mine about three months ago and still have stock a arms. It drives fine. When you turn a corner the wheel doesn't automatically return to center as fast as a new car. The new upper a arms will give you 5 or 6 degrees of caster. There is another option that will give you about 2 more degrees, and that is new upper offset control arm shafts for about $75. I haven't decided what I am going to do yet, if anything. Also, watch CPP's ebay store for a deal on a 500 box. Sometimes they run discounts. I got mine with a rag joint for about $340.

By the way, I love the power steering.

[56onAir]

Rick, im doing my best to build an awesome car on a budget. I cant drop $18,000 for a complete chassis with tube arms, willwood brakes and ford 9" so i have to get creative. I dont mind spending the $$$ if its necessary but some of the stuff people use is just overkill or to say "hey look what i can afford" as for the air ride, i have 2 vehicles on air ride and its the only way to go. Ill never own another static dropped vehicle again. May consider the tubular uppers depending on budget demands.

So am i to understand that the tubular uppers would improve the steering of the car?

[USA1]

I just recieved 2 sets of CCP shafts they are now $60 pr.

[cpptech]

Had planned on using a cpp 500 box with my stock a arms, was reading on some other forums where this could be an issue? is this true? also was exploring using cpp tubular arms, i am installing air ride in the front of my car would this be an issue with the cpp arms??

Thanks to RickL and others for jumping in with the great info. Like what has been mentioned, the use of lowers in not needed to gain the caster that the upper arms add. Using uppers alone will do that.

The nice thing about the lowers when using air is our lower spring plate is flat and will accept the air bag much easier then the stock arm and without having to use an adapter bracket so that is one thing to keep in mind.

The 55-57 chevys with the 500 series are a night and day difference over the older 605 conversions as it is. You can use stock a-arms but as one person mentioned the "self centering" feel will not be there. Also, as mentioned there are 2 degree upper a-arm shafts available to help this a little bit. Definitely better then no change but also one thing to remember; if the cross-member of the car has sunk a little, these shafts will primarily help with the camber issue and not allow any more caster.

So if the alignment is in the negitive camber state, the upper tube a-arm would be a better choice.