A-Arm upgrade question

[Tim Boyer]

Hi,
Would a-arms from a Carrera be considered an upgrade for a early ('70) 911? I thought that I saw somewhere that it was, but cannot find that site again!
Any input would be appreciated.
Thank you,
Tim

[equality72521]

Don't know how the a-arm would be better as it's the same part number from 1974-1989.

[Flieger]

A-arm is the same. The crossmember could be considered an upgrade.

[Trackrash]

The A arms are the same except for the sway bar mount, with the older ones having the through the body style.

A good upgrade for your car is to replace the struts with the '72 and newer style which has the improved ball joint and ball joint attachment. At the same time you could upgrade the shocks (if yours are worn) and brakes. Many of the newer struts will have the 3.5" caliper mounts. Bilsteins could also be an option if you wanted to go that route.

[Tim Boyer]

Hi,
Thanks for the input. One more question.
Is the a-arm for a '70 the same as a '74+ as referenced above?
For some reason, I thought that there was a difference that made the Carrera one better.
Of course, I could have been dreaming all of this up in my head!!
Anyway, if anyone knows the difference if there is one, let me know.
tim

[911s55]

Originally Posted by Tim Boyer

Hi,
Thanks for the input. One more question.
Is the a-arm for a '70 the same as a '74+ as referenced above?
For some reason, I thought that there was a difference that made the Carrera one better.
Of course, I could have been dreaming all of this up in my head!!
Anyway, if anyone knows the difference if there is one, let me know.
tim

No, the pre '74 came with tabs for the through the body sway bay which is what you want, especially for an early car. There were many pre '74 cars that did not come with the front sway bar so there are early A arms without tabs or those that could have been added later.

David

[Grady Clay]

Good (and correct) advice above.

The ’69-’73 A-arms are all the same with a few notable exceptions. There is a series of 911E arms that did not have the provision at the front for the torsion bar splines and the lower half U-channel out to the ball joint was not installed. I don’t recall ever seeing ones without the through-the-body sway bar tabs.

The ’74 and later A-arms are identical except for the type on sway bar mount. It is very easy to up-date or back-date any A-arm to whatever sway bar is used. In fact, the early version benefits from improved welding.

A major point of confusion is the 914 A-arm. It appears identical to the earlier 911 version but has different (incompatible) torsion bar splines.

I strongly agree about the improved ’72-> ball joint wedge-pin attachment. I think the pinch-bolt type should have been recalled.

When choosing struts, there is yet another improvement. Starting with the ’74 model, the spindle was enlarged. At the same time the hub was changed to provide hub-cebtric wheel mounting, an improvement over the earlier bolt-centric mounting.

When looking for front-end improvements, consider a reinforcing plate inside the 3-bolt through-the-body mounting. Another is a pair of triangular welded reinforcements between the spindle assembly and the shock tube.

The later cast aluminum front cross member is lighter (just where you don’t need it) but also is a ‘breakaway’ part, limiting chassis damage in a crash. Note that the racers of the period have a forged aluminum cross member.

Best,
Grady