Hyundai Genesis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
13' GRAN PREMIO GRY TRACK
Joined
·
669 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Word of caution if you buy them, they are over engineered and may not work on 13 GC's.

Installed mine today and they are so thick that it caused extreme rubbing issues and they tore an outer CV joint boot.

Apparently I'm too low to use them on my 13.

Not saying it's a bad part just think twice on your height when installing these.
 

·
Jedi Master
Joined
·
6,461 Posts
wait was the prblem that ther eover engineered (term normally reffered to something thats intended to be soft but is to hard) cause this is supposd to almost s100% 0flex solid, sound like they did what they where ment to do, are you slammed, or super low?
 

·
13' GRAN PREMIO GRY TRACK
Joined
·
669 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Over engineered meaning they would survive a nuclear Holocaust I think the links were intended for chuck Norris.

I'm pretty low but not that low. I can still barely make it in oil change bays
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
444 Posts
Installed mine today and they are so thick that it caused extreme rubbing issues and they tore an outer CV joint boot.

Apparently I'm too low to use them on my 13.
post pictures of your ride height, your wheel and tire specs, and pictures of the camber arm to axle boot interference.
 

·
13' GRAN PREMIO GRY TRACK
Joined
·
669 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
They are already off the car and on their way to be rma'ed.
Many thanks to SCW for the kick ass customer service.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,345 Posts
I was about to create post about this to warn everyone, but Mafioso was awesome to get this posted. Here are the pics of the aftermath of using the Megan Racing upper control arms on 2013+

















 

·
Jedi Master
Joined
·
6,461 Posts
to me it looks lke the control arms did what thy where intened on doing. i think the being very low might have some fualt to do with it more hten them being over buiklt,

just wondering why is there over engineering a fault of the damage?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
444 Posts
They do "look" robust. I would not call that being "over engineered."

Ride height is the key factor here. If the car was raised and the suspension never compressed to the point seen in the picture then the Megan camber arm would never touch the axle boot.

BUT.. How many people here need to adjust camber beyond the stock arm's capabilities and don't want to lower their car?

I'd suggest buying a part that has more forethought and R&D.
Oddly enough, they're $20 cheaper too.
 

·
13' GRAN PREMIO GRY TRACK
Joined
·
669 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
well I'm trying to NOT get into a full dissertation regarding the arms, so I will leave it with a couple of key points, what loads could the car actually see that would warrant a 1 1/2" bolt with a 1" adjustment bolt, that to me seems a little over kill. As a result of fitting that huge ass bolt for adjustments the arm has to be wider and thicker.


In person these things are super beefy. I'm not knocking the arms what so ever, nor am I bitching about them I figured I'd give someone else a heads up.

The purpose of an Upper Adjustable camber arm is for lowered cars who have maxed out the lower camber adjustment which I have.

Im sure someone can chime in with a pic of my height other then one of celly pics. if not then I will post one up in the am.
 

·
13' GRAN PREMIO GRY TRACK
Joined
·
669 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
to me it looks lke the control arms did what thy where intened on doing. i think the being very low might have some fualt to do with it more hten them being over buiklt,

just wondering why is there over engineering a fault of the damage?
because sometimes there is a such thing as bigger isn't always better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
444 Posts
Dissertation? It's just a discussion, one that you started. Given the importance of this part's function I'd argue that it's better to photograph and discuss every factor instead of just ending the thread after your initial statement.

The fact that they are bigger is not the problem.

PBM camber arms are just as thick if not larger than Megan's. The difference is the shape. Megan kept the OEM shape while PBM did not. PBM did this to maximize clearance between the camber arm and everything else so it can do its job while still going low if you want to.
 

·
13' GRAN PREMIO GRY TRACK
Joined
·
669 Posts
Discussion Starter #12 (Edited)
The MR arm did not retain the OE shape, the way it's constructed there is a built in gusset which is larger then stock, I'm actually considering the PBM arms if I can't get my fitment issue resolved.

If you look at my BC install thread there is a pic of the height before it settled its about 1/2" lower now, but on a 20" wheel I'm at the limit on camber of the stock arm which is 3 degrees I need more camber or goto a smaller wheel.

If you at the arm pictures they built from 2 half's not a round tube as I would have expected. Since its 2 oval half's welded together there is a clearance issue when going super low. I understand why it was designed like that, but it won't suit anyone's needs for anyone going pretty low on big wheels.

I bet if I had used 19's instead of 20's I'd be hella slammed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,345 Posts
I believe the purpose of this thread is to help prevent others from experiencing this problem. Not to much to debate the build quality or design of the Megan Racing products. Since we experienced this, we felt it would be the right thing to do by sharing this experience.


Sent from my iPhone using AutoGuide.com App
 

·
Jedi Master
Joined
·
6,461 Posts
i wonder what the hop/fitment car for megan racing was?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
444 Posts
I agree, this isn't a debate and I'm glad you guys shared this information/experience.

By discussing this product's shortcomings we are helping other members by giving them more information on which to make their own decisions about which products will satisfy their needs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,345 Posts
I agree, this isn't a debate and I'm glad you guys shared this information/experience.

By discussing this product's shortcomings we are helping other members by giving them more information on which to make their own decisions about which products will satisfy their needs.
We're on the same page. :bigthumbup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,345 Posts
i wonder what the hop/fitment car for megan racing was?
That's a good question. We were all wondering that when we were staring at the busted CV boot in sadness.
 

·
Jedi Master
Joined
·
6,461 Posts
you have bc coils and megan are very similar, so i doubt it was the coilover fualt, it's posible that the parts where fitted and test on a stock hieght, i know that a lower car does change the weight and pressure displacement on the car, i wonder, other then raising the car, what the solution would be? also wondeering if cusco or pbm... something like that, parts have had this problem, or did they take this in consideration, or was this a freak accident.

btw i know that the 5 point multilink suspension between 2010-2012 and the 2013 is different material, suppsoed ot be better bushing and stuff. i wonder if that was also a factor
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
444 Posts
It does look like Megan tested their arm on a stock height car otherwise you would think they'd have seen this issue.

The PBM camber arm will hit the frame rail before coming close to touching the axle boot. And you'd have to tuck serous rim to get the suspension compressed that far. As low as I am I'm no where near touching the camber arm on anything.
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Top