"what would happen is thru bump you would gain or lose caster depending on wich way ya angled the upper arm"

Yep, that's one of the characteristics of using anti-dive. The more you angle the rear of the upper control arm down, the more anti-dive you build into the car and the more the caster goes positive on bump under braking.

In the other plane, angling the upper control arm so that the ball joint end of it is higher than the bushing mount end will contribute to more or less camber gain, something you shouldn't be concerned about unless you're gonna road race the Ranchero. Camber gain will keep the tire tread parallel with the road surface and prevent the outside tire from rolling over onto the sidewall. On the T, I designed in 3 1/2 degrees of camber gain at full bump by angling the upper arm where I wanted it.

You will have little control over bumpsteer if you have used a MII crossmember fabricated by someone else. The rack mounts where it mounts and that's it in relation to the control arms and steering arms/spindles. Again, on the T, I mounted the rack so that I could remove or add shims to move the rack vertically by about 1/2" total either up or down to minimize bumpsteer.

Dave, there is so much involved in drag racing suspension that I suggest you lean on the experts. I learned quite a lot from Dave Morgan in his book "Doorslammers" and suggest it as good material for anyone who'll be setting up a drag suspension. Here's a link to the book and a video by Dave which I haven't seen, but will soon (cause I just found it looking for stuff for you)
http://www.ssapubl.com/index.cfm?do=list&categoryid=9

I also stumbled across some software that you might find interesting....
http://www.performancetrends.com/4link.htm