Notices
Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain discuss the wondrous effects of boost and your miata...
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: 949 Racing

NB sub-frame in NA

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 27, 2018 | 09:56 AM
  #21  
The Driver's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 250
Total Cats: -64
From: Lakewood (Green Mountain) CO.
Default

Originally Posted by Savington
NB lower U-joint will fit the NA shaft. That's what I have done on all the NB>NA swaps I've done.
And I get that now, and thanks for your response. I just found out the hardway that the NA U-joint would not work. It wasn't listed in any of the threads I saved for this swap. Nor did the NA tie rods worked either, though luckily Rock Out has the MOOG ones priced CHEAP!. Now at least, people will have a thread to go to, listing those A-most parts for a swap!
Old Aug 27, 2018 | 12:46 PM
  #22  
Savington's Avatar
Former Vendor
iTrader: (31)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,442
Total Cats: 2,106
From: Sunnyvale, CA
Default

NA tie rod ends work just fine. The FUCA balljoint is longer to accommodate the deeper NB taper pocket, and the NB steering arm point on the spindle is lifted, but you can bolt the NA tie rod end to it. In fact, that's the preferred setup for lowered cars. I can't recall where I read this, but IIRC Bob Bundy did the math and said that an NB subframe/rack/spindle setup with 93LE/94R tie rod ends produced nearly zero bumpsteer all the way to full bump travel.

To swap an NB subframe into an NA, you need these parts and only these parts (and why you need them):
  • NB subframe (this alters the FLCA pickup points and improves camber gain)
  • NB steering rack, inner tie-rods, and mounting hardware (this is more reliable than the NA rack)
  • NB lower steering column universal joint (required to attach NA shaft to NB rack)
  • NB front upper control arms (or NA arms with NB balljoints) and NB-specific upper balljoint nuts (required to use NB spindles)
  • NB front spindles (this reduces bumpsteer)
  • NA 93LE tie rod ends (this further reduces bumpsteer, to effectively zero)

Last edited by Savington; Aug 27, 2018 at 01:10 PM.
Old Aug 27, 2018 | 01:00 PM
  #23  
The Driver's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 250
Total Cats: -64
From: Lakewood (Green Mountain) CO.
Default

Originally Posted by Savington
NA tie rod ends work just fine. The FUCA balljoint is longer to accommodate the deeper NB taper pocket, and the NB steering arm point on the spindle is lifted, but you can bolt the NA tie rod end to it. In fact, that's the preferred setup for lowered cars. I can't recall where I read this, but IIRC Bob Bundy did the math and said that an NB subframe/rack/spindle setup with 93LE/94R tie rod ends produced nearly zero bumpsteer all the way to full bump travel.

To swap an NB subframe into an NA, you need these parts and only these parts (and why you need them):
  • NB subframe (this alters the FLCA pickup points and improves camber gain)
  • NB steering rack, inner tie-rod ends, and mounting hardware (this is more reliable than the NA rack)
  • NB lower steering column universal joint (required to attach NA shaft to NB rack)
  • NB front upper control arms (or NA arms with NB balljoints) and NB-specific upper balljoint nuts (required to use NB spindles)
  • NB front spindles (this reduces bumpsteer)
  • NA 93LE tie rod ends (this further reduces bumpsteer, to effectively zero)
I do have the 93 LE tie rod ends. But I have no clue what is an "inner tie rod end", but I'll assume is just the tie rod. And if so, you just confirmed what I stated earlier regarding the MOOG NB tie rods I bought. They have their own part number, different from the NA tie rods.

I just got screwed last night on the U-joint to the steering shaft. For that part number: NC10-32-850 hooks it all up. I mean you posted it on your list, but I found out last night, as it wasn't listed anywhere else. Not here, not on M.Net or even the Grassroots Forum. It is in 2 out 3 now!
Old Aug 27, 2018 | 01:09 PM
  #24  
Savington's Avatar
Former Vendor
iTrader: (31)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,442
Total Cats: 2,106
From: Sunnyvale, CA
Default

Oop, yes. I misread. Yes, the NB inner tie rods are different and correspond to the rack. I thought you said you needed NB outer tie rod ends, which is not the case.
Old Aug 27, 2018 | 02:11 PM
  #25  
afm's Avatar
afm
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 985
Total Cats: 510
From: Berkeley, CA
Default

Make sure you get NB-style inner tie rod end retention washers. It’s nice to avoid reusing them.
Old Aug 27, 2018 | 05:28 PM
  #26  
The Driver's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 250
Total Cats: -64
From: Lakewood (Green Mountain) CO.
Default

Originally Posted by Savington
Oop, yes. I misread. Yes, the NB inner tie rods are different and correspond to the rack. I thought you said you needed NB outer tie rod ends, which is not the case.
All good ace!
Originally Posted by afm
Make sure you get NB-style inner tie rod end retention washers. It’s nice to avoid reusing them.
The MOOG tie rods came with them. I got a new found respect to Rock Auto!
Old Aug 28, 2018 | 07:42 PM
  #27  
Leafy's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 9,491
Total Cats: 105
From: NH
Default

Now that I think of it my NB rack came with the U joint and I used that one on the NA shaft because I couldnt get the NA u-joint off the rack.
Reply
Leave a poscat -1 Leave a negcat
Old Aug 29, 2018 | 12:28 PM
  #28  
bbundy's Avatar
Elite Member
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,502
Total Cats: 146
From: Anacortes, WA
Default

You will want NB knuckles as well. Bump steer is crazy with NA knuckles on an NB sub frame. Yes the knuckles are different. I think the best setup is all NB front end with LE tie rod ends for an aggressively lowered car.
Old Aug 29, 2018 | 04:14 PM
  #29  
Savington's Avatar
Former Vendor
iTrader: (31)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,442
Total Cats: 2,106
From: Sunnyvale, CA
Default

Originally Posted by bbundy
You will want NB knuckles as well. Bump steer is crazy with NA knuckles on an NB sub frame. Yes the knuckles are different. I think the best setup is all NB front end with LE tie rod ends for an aggressively lowered car.
I distinctly remember reading a post by you saying that you had measured the bumpsteer with that combo (NB subframe/spindles + NA LE tie rods) and it was ~1/16" from static ride height to full bump.
Old Aug 29, 2018 | 05:47 PM
  #30  
bbundy's Avatar
Elite Member
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,502
Total Cats: 146
From: Anacortes, WA
Default

Originally Posted by Savington
I distinctly remember reading a post by you saying that you had measured the bumpsteer with that combo (NB subframe/spindles + NA LE tie rods) and it was ~1/16" from static ride height to full bump.
yea NB subframe knuckles with LE tie rod ends was the best. NB with NA knuckles was not so good and LE tie rods made that mismatch combo worse. If you run at stock OE ride height probably just stay all stock NB almost nobody in these forms runs stock ride height however.


Old Aug 31, 2018 | 12:09 PM
  #31  
k24madness's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,421
Total Cats: 95
From: San Rafael, CA
Default

I added LE tie rods to the NB subframe last year after reading Bob’s findings. Thanks Bob!

If class rules allow adding a NB subframe is well worth the effort. I paid $300 for a complete assembly. Pretty easy install too.
Old Aug 31, 2018 | 01:23 PM
  #32  
The Driver's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 250
Total Cats: -64
From: Lakewood (Green Mountain) CO.
Default

Originally Posted by k24madness
I added LE tie rods to the NB subframe last year after reading Bob’s findings. Thanks Bob!

If class rules allow adding a NB subframe is well worth the effort. I paid $300 for a complete assembly. Pretty easy install too.
Hehe, I paid $10. Right price, right place at the right time. I spent more on the U-Joint ($40) and the steering rack bracket ($2 used, NLA by Mazda, I bought 2 of them!), than I did on the rack and subframe itself!
Reply
Leave a poscat -1 Leave a negcat
Old Sep 3, 2018 | 10:59 PM
  #33  
The Driver's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 250
Total Cats: -64
From: Lakewood (Green Mountain) CO.
Default

And the NA steering column intermediate shaft won't work on the NB U-joint... If one tries to buy part NC10-32-090D new, is NLA. You then have to buy NC10-32-100D and new that one is oer $350, but used is less than $40 for both, thank GOD!
Old Sep 3, 2018 | 11:10 PM
  #34  
Savington's Avatar
Former Vendor
iTrader: (31)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,442
Total Cats: 2,106
From: Sunnyvale, CA
Default

I believe that's false. I read that on M.net before I did Rover's swap, so I ordered the NB intermediate shaft too. It's identical to the NA one. I then skipped it when I ordered the swap parts for my current customer S1/ST4 build, and it worked just fine. NA column, NA intermediate shaft, NB lower universal, NB rack.
Old Sep 3, 2018 | 11:37 PM
  #35  
The Driver's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 250
Total Cats: -64
From: Lakewood (Green Mountain) CO.
Default

Originally Posted by Savington
I believe that's false. I read that on M.net before I did Rover's swap, so I ordered the NB intermediate shaft too. It's identical to the NA one. I then skipped it when I ordered the swap parts for my current customer S1/ST4 build, and it worked just fine. NA column, NA intermediate shaft, NB lower universal, NB rack.
Really? The intermediate shaft is too long to bolt with the NB steering U-joint! I mean, could you describe how you made it work? I'm supposed to order the NB intermediate shaft tomorrow!
Old Sep 3, 2018 | 11:54 PM
  #36  
The Driver's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 250
Total Cats: -64
From: Lakewood (Green Mountain) CO.
Default

https://www.miataturbo.net/suspensio...me-swap-62426/

Darn it, right here is spelled out that the NB steering IMS is needed. Gosh darn it.
Old Sep 4, 2018 | 12:04 AM
  #37  
Savington's Avatar
Former Vendor
iTrader: (31)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,442
Total Cats: 2,106
From: Sunnyvale, CA
Default

Post #19 from Doward says the u-joint is required, but not the shaft. The shaft is the long metal thing with the male splines, the u-joint is the bendy thing with female splines.
Old Sep 4, 2018 | 12:09 AM
  #38  
The Driver's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 250
Total Cats: -64
From: Lakewood (Green Mountain) CO.
Default

Originally Posted by Savington
Post #19 from Doward says the u-joint is required, but not the shaft. The shaft is the long metal thing with the male splines, the u-joint is the bendy thing with female splines.
I get that boss! But it looks like one of us is misreading post#19. I read it as "The little shaft with the boot, is that what y'all are calling the "intermediate" shaft? If so, it is an NB piece and splined perfectly with my NA column", right?

I may just be tired, which I am, and in no way I'm trying to argue, just confused, that's all!
Old Sep 4, 2018 | 12:19 AM
  #39  
Savington's Avatar
Former Vendor
iTrader: (31)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,442
Total Cats: 2,106
From: Sunnyvale, CA
Default

Yes, but it has nothing to do with an incorrect length as you alluded to. The length is correct, the spline diameter is just larger on the NB rack. You need the NB u-joint for the diameter, not the length.
Old Sep 4, 2018 | 12:33 AM
  #40  
The Driver's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 250
Total Cats: -64
From: Lakewood (Green Mountain) CO.
Default

Originally Posted by Savington
Yes, but it has nothing to do with an incorrect length as you alluded to. The length is correct, the spline diameter is just larger on the NB rack. You need the NB u-joint for the diameter, not the length.
The problem I'm having is that the NB U-joint is bigger than the NA, which makes the shaft too long to fit. Looks like I'm doing something wrong, but exactly what?
Should I unbolt the rack, plug the u-joint to the shaft, and bolt the rack back?
Sorry for all the stupid q's, but I'm at a loss here!



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:59 PM.