No problem with the parts, just the installer. It sounds like the bolt in version is install-proof, but the weld-in leaves some room for error. Just give the installer instructions to only do one side at a time, and it should be OK.

Luckily, I already have UMI adjustable LCAs as well so I can return my rear back to where it needs to be. I think this will bottom out my adjustment range though, or at least take it very close.

 

The bolt-on ones can only be installed one way, there really is no way to install them wrong. I think the majority of people that are having problems are on cars that sit really low. I think people with stock springs or just alittle bit of a drop seem to be fine? Cars like mine that have prokit springs or like that seem to be the trouble makers. Thats just what I make of things.

Bottom line is its better to have adj lca's so you can correct it, if it does turn out uncentered.

Unfortunately I ordered non adj lca's with my relocation brackets

 

Another FYI about my car: it's still at stock height on stock springs, with stock shocks at all 4 corners. Hopefully the problem doesn't get worse when I lower it because my LCA's will only go so short.

 

I didnt have any problems with mine, even though i have bmrs.

 

UMI most CERTAINLY had a bad batch, as the brackets I received around this time last year were DEFINITLY not what was pictured and when fit to the car would push the rear end back...

Want proof? I went out and reinstalled one and took pictures:

http://www.darklogic.net/BadUMIReloBrackets/

If you notice, having the rear end in 'driving height', swinging the control arm down, bolting in the bracket, and swinging the control arm back up, IT DOES NOT LINE UP in EITHER set of lowered bolt holes. If you notice, with the bracket then removed, it swings up perfectly back to the stock mount point perfectly.

It is obvious that the 'arm' on the relocation brackets that bolts where the shock does is WRONG!

I called UMI before on this, I sent them measurements, and they STILL said it was correct. By this pics it is OBVIOUS it is NOT!

Hell, by the pictures supplied by UMI of thier own brackets in teh instructions you can see visually that the 'arm' on the brackets is much shorter on the ones I received. They say they never changed them, but it is obviously shorter. The pics I provided on the install PROVE that.

I ended up cutting the arms off, grinding off the powdercoat and welding the brackets in.

At this point I just want the $30 difference in weld-in vs bolt-in brackets. I purchased the brackets through Byunspeed, so who do I contact to get a refund?

I will say it is horrenous for a vendor to claim there is no problem when it is BLATENTLY obvious they had a bad batch. They claim it couldn't be, but I have done CNC machining (including wire-edm and other forms of cutting) and it is VERY simple to modify a program either before posting it to the shop or even on the machine itself. One dimension change by someone and BAM! a whole batch is bad. To lie and claim it is not is just bad business. To not want to accept something like a batch of relo brackets back and then just sandblast them and cut off the arms to make a batch of weld-ins just does NOT make good business sense...

Also, to add more data to this, the install was on a 1995 Camaro Z28 with stock rear. I also tried fitting these to a 1994 Z28 stock rear ad a 1997 Trans-Am with stock rear and all had the EXACT same issue. There is NO WAY to fit these brackets differently, so "install error" is a non-issue. They only bolt in one way. And you can see by the pics provided that they were installed the only way they can go on.

I just want my $30 refunded to me at this point. I would LOVE to be able to get refunded for my installation hassles (cutting the brackets, grinding off the powdercoat, welding), but we all know THAT won't happen.

And the sad part is I really LOVE the UMI subframe connectors. I was planning on going with a UMI Torque-Arm this year, but the major let-down of a badly produced part with the relo-brackets really soured me on UMI. I mean why would you risk future sales over a $90 part??? Just produce the right part and exchange the bad ones... Greed too many times really screws up business.

I mean, if GM changed rear end geometries (which would mean they also changed the rear lower control arms), and certain rear ends need different setups, why isn't this a well-known issue? I mean you state you installed one of these 'defective sets' on your own car??? How the hell is that possible if it is a 'factory' rear??? Again all of this does NOT add-up. (and for reference I tried teh install with both Global West control arms on my car and stock control arms on teh other cars, so no adjustability was available for a 'quick-fix', or hmm, is it possible that is your 'solution'? Sell adjustable LCAs???)

Oh, and if you had not noticed, I am just a little pissed by the stonewalling attitude that there is no problem with the part, and the obstinance of denying it.

 

Ouch!!! Someones a little pissy.
But thats exactly how mine looked. Holes are to far forward, which in return pushs the rear end to far back.
Nice pics.

 

the pictures dont show the arm that goes to the lower shock mount. seeing how that was positioned with them installed would tell the true story.

 

Sure it does. First pic shows the curve and it sitting flat against the shock mount arm, sandwiched between the shock bolt and the arm.

Pic:



You can see the bottom flat of the L portion flat against the shock mount on the far right of the pic.

 

not a clear shot of it at all, but take your word for it.

 

Good to hear

 

i had the same issue. back wheels were 1/2-3/4 inch towards the rear of the car. the front/rear wheels were the exact same distance from each other (measured at center of front/rear wheels) so you can rule out sloppy installation of relocation brackets.

if my car wasn't lowered, the wheels would have been centered in the wheel wells. i noticed this when i was loading up the rear with a jack to check.

i just adjusted the (adjustable) lca's by 1/2 inch each and now the tires are centered in the wheel well. i'm still driving around to make sure there's no rubbing issues, but so far it seems fine.

 

Im having the same problem with the umi ones also.

 

Hmm, interesting, UMI posts up and down this thread, but when there is evidence and proof they are *strangely* quiet...

I guess I may have to resort to posting a link on thier visitors page to get them to respond???

 

Damn someones out for blood.

 

the thread was originally about BMR, but it seems like everyone has the same issue with both BMR and UMI's brackets. i'm guessing both designs are exactly the same . which brings me to wonder who came out with it first

here are before/after pictures of the passenger side.
this is a bad picture for the angle, but you can get a good look at the space between the forward facing part of the tire and the body.
with aftermarket lower control arms (spohn adjustable rod/poly) at stock length (measured at bolt holes).


after shortening the lower control arm 3/5"


before and after the adjustments, the front/rear wheels were the same distance (measurements taken with a tape measure, flat on the ground against chalk lines made using a ruler lined up with the center of the wheels) from each other as compared between driver/passenger sides, so it wasn't a sloppy install. like everyone else is implying, it just looks like there isn't enough of an arc built into the relocation bracket.

what else could it be?

 

We have responded MULTIPLE times, it has done no good. We can only do some much in a thread. If you have a problem call us or e-mail us. For installation questions we prefer a call as e-mails are too hard to explain in detail. Threads are too hard to keep up with and offer techinical advise for every customer.

One customer sent his back and they checked out ok, we randomly pulled sets out of stock and they are ok as well. We personally installed them on my vehicle.. the set sent back moved the rear 1/16 of an inch. If you have problems please call Jerry in technical support and he will be glad to help you.

Our phone #- 814-857-5400

Thank you,
Ryan

 

Ok folks I would like give UMI the chance to answer all your questions via the phone. They have been nice enough to dedicate alot of time to try and help via this forum but apparently this medium is not working to everyone's satisfaction. Therefore I strongly suggest that if you still have a concern please contact them directly via phone to help get the issue sorted out instead. A phone call goes a long way and is usually quicker to get resolution than an internet forum. Therefore I'm closing this tread.

If you would like to provide feedback about UMI or any sponsor for that matter, please do it in the sponsor feedback section.

Thanks,

MLS