[BigSwede]

JJ: Looks like it. Boy, he sure got me there.

"What about bump steer?

Look at the angles on your upper & lower A arms.
With the lower arm angled up you have lost the benefit of the unequal length A arm design, and as well, lost wheel travel.

The proper position for the lower arm is parallel to the track/road surface.
By lowering the car using dropped spindles there are at least three benefits.
One, simply is no loss of wheel travel & compliancy."

So by lowering the car we get McPherson? We still have the unequal length arms, just different angles. Why do you think that the best position is for the lower arm to be parallell with the pavement? Do you really think that track change is a big issue? what does your RC do?
Wheel travel? You can drop the car onto the frame before wheel travel is an issue... Let's face it, we're talking heavily modified street/track/race cars here, 50-60mm bump is about all we will ever need unless playing farmers and then the angles will be quite wrong anyway.

"Another ,key benefit, is a longer(taller) spindle carrier(upright). (remember the knuckle risers on early 101 & 105 racecars?)
This length (added to the bottom under the spindle) increases the angle of the upper "A" arms when the lower arm is still level, which results in more camber change per degree of wheel movement."

101 & 105 cars? Why do you bring them into the discussion? Because it worked on that ill-concieved chassis doesn't mean it's a carry-over solution for the 116 chassis. Do we really want more camber gain? What about bump/rebound? That will throw camber all over the place, during braking for instance you will have loads of camber producing less braking force.

"In rebound (bump or upward movement) which on track is caused simply by body roll entering and through turns, there is a significant increase in negative camber. Enough, that rather than then having "positive camber" and loss of the contact patch between the tire & pavement as with the stock design, You actually have enough negative camber gain, to not just offset the body roll`s resulting movement towards "positive camber" but have a slight increase in "negative camber" to give the tire a better footprint on the pavement.
As well, on the other side of the car, rather than the suspension leaving the inside tire at negative camber, the droop (downward movement) of the suspension results in the upper arms moving the top of the upright farther out, moving the tire into a "positive camber" position increasing that tire`s bite as well."

Rebound equals bump? Now that's a new one, to me those two are just the opposite, bump compress the shock and rebound extends it.
Here is where the roll stiffnes comes into play, if you have a roll-stiff chassis you won't need all that camber gain because there is no loss to gain back and you are left with all the negative stuff like less braking force. You can actually get better "camber gain" functionality with a lot of caster, it leans the tire in the right direction both on the inside and the outside.

"When a car is incorrectly dropped so that both upper AND lower arms are angled upward every movement of the suspension moves the tire in or out severly causing major bump steer. Under braking or bump, you get "toe out", exactly what you do not want. Under droop, you get "toe in" . On the track all this results in a car with unstable conditions under braking, and unresponsive turn in."

You will have some bump steer by dropping it wildly but it wont be incredibly badm the steering arm moves as well and the angle to the LCA will more or less be the same. I have done lots of experimenting with this and there is much more issues from chosing the wrong type outer ball joint in the steering arm Yes, there are several types that doesn't work the same! How many know that or even measure?

"With dropped & longer spindles , with the steering arms returned to the correct position relative to the steering rack, and with some increase in the Ackernan angles (which I do when modifying the spindles & arms), you can set up the car with less overall negative camber, with "0" toe in or out, resulting in less drag, less tire wear, and still result with correct camber footprints under cornering on both sides of the front. As well, the Ackerman changes I make result in increased "toe out" when the wheel is turned off center giving better "turn in" response, when cornering."

Some increase in Ackerman? Looks like it's a lot of change, this will make the bump steer problem look incredibly insignificant in comparison. Unless the person you sell the stuff to knows how to adjust ackerman the car can be pretty useless IMO.