[03_StangGuy]

My suspension is stuck besides the LCAs, poly/spherical bushing. And Im putting down almost 500whp so traction sucks! Im planning on getting DRs with my tax return in the spring but was also wondering what/if anything else I can do to help with the grip.

The car is my summer DD. I dont hit the strip much and dont know if Ill ever road race, maybe a lil auto-x for fun. IMO the car handles pretty well as it is now. I want to increase straight line grip and still keep it a decent in the corners. I want a strong all around car, Im not expecting to excel in in anyone specific area. And I cant seem to find info for and all around suspension setup.

[4.6DreameR]

Double adjustable ucas, and some sticky tires.
Panhard bar/toque arm if you want to spend a pretty penny.

[ReverendDexter]

You're not finding info on an all-around suspension because it doesn't really exist; once you get past some basic stuff you're either optimizing for cornering OR straightlines.

The general things that all Mustangs can use are LCAs and weld-in, full-length subframe connectors. For some better straightline grip without too much cost to your cornering, look into LCA relocation brackets. Spherical-jointed adjustable UCAs will help you dial in pinion angle and give you better control over axle wrap and lateral axle location.

And of course, the right tires for what you're doing. Allseasons are great for a DD, but give up traction everywhere when compared to non-compromised summer and winter tires. Drag radials are fantastic for off-the-line grip, but have too much sidewall slop if you're pushing in the twisties.

tl;dr
*LCA relocation brackets
*FL-SFCs (welded in)
*UCAs - spherical bushed/adjustable length.

[03_StangGuy]

Originally Posted by 4.6DreameR Double adjustable ucas, and some sticky tires. Panhard bar/toque arm if you want to spend a pretty penny.

How is the vibrations and noise with UCA? I know I noticed a lil bit more with the LCAs. I was originally thinking Panhard bar and Torque arm but its like a grand. More than I was hopin to spend with buyin DRs as well.

How much benefit would adding just a panhard bar give me for the time being? Would UCAs work better?

[ReverendDexter]

Panhard bar isn't going to help with your traction on launch.

Torque arm will, but a TA conversion is an expensive proposition for someone who's not a cornering fiend, and really, a properly set-up 4-link is better on the strip.

UCAs would definitely be a better way to go.

[cbjohnson9]

I would definitely address the rear end first, but front coil-overs will help with handling and should help with launch due to better suspension articulation.

After driving a mustang with and without an PHB, it would be the second thing i ever do to one after FLSFC's

[SteedaTJ]

Our adjustable Upper Control Arms will help provide better traction with high HP Mustangs.

The adjustable Control Arms will give you the ability to set your pinion angle and eliminate the torque deflection associated with the factory piece.

Steeda Adjustable Upper Control Arm for 2005 and Up Ford Mustang 555-4105 555-4107 555-4108

Chad is our suspension expert along with Gus if you want to give them a ring or use our chat feature. They can help piece together different options, work with what you already have on the car, etc.

Steeda has a tremendous reputation when it comes to suspension and getting a consumer to the level they need.

Phone calls and advice are free... Our parts are not

954-960-0774

Thanks

TJ

[Jazzer The Cat]

SteedaTJ has linked an upper for an S197, by mistake. You really (<--- cannot emphisize enough!) should use one with a spherical end, as mentioned above. I don't see on on the Steeda site, but pretty sure they have one.

Originally Posted by ReverendDexter Panhard bar isn't going to help with your traction on launch. Torque arm will, but a TA conversion is an expensive proposition for someone who's not a cornering fiend, and really, a properly set-up 4-link is better on the strip. UCAs would definitely be a better way to go.

I have read some input from Norm Peterson and he actually made a case where a PHB was an improvement in launch. Probably not huge, but suggested keeping the axle centered under the car, would help with squat and such. Anway, TGR is on target here, so follow his advice on post #3 above.

As for grip, if your spinning the wheels and NOT hopping.... this is a tire issue The other mods mentioned will be helpful, but your car needs tires and some better foot control

Jazzer

[03_StangGuy]

Thanks for the input guys! The only reason I was shying away from UCAs in the first place was I heard the spherical can be pretty harsh ride wise and noisey? Any input on this?

Originally Posted by cbjohnson9 I would definitely address the rear end first, but front coil-overs will help with handling and should help with launch due to better suspension articulation. After driving a mustang with and without an PHB, it would be the second thing i ever do to one after FLSFC's

The front will come in time, but right now I wanna get full use of the added power I have from the blower. The money is kinda being wasted since i cant use all the power.

Originally Posted by Jazzer The Cat As for grip, if your spinning the wheels and NOT hopping.... this is a tire issue The other mods mentioned will be helpful, but your car needs tires and some better foot control Jazzer

Well im not talking bout lauching the car, not sure if the matters, but the tires light up in second above 4.5k rpm or so. I realize tires will greatly help and like I said Ill have those this spring. I was hopin to increase the mechanical great as well, so I wont be relying on just the tires and help get a lil more life out of them.

[brokenweasel]

Originally Posted by 03_StangGuy Thanks for the input guys! The only reason I was shying away from UCAs in the first place was I heard the spherical can be pretty harsh ride wise and noisey? Any input on this?

eagle2000 can answer that question better than I can.

Him and I are both curious how relocated uppers work on the street, want to be our test-mule and try them out? They are supposed to give you better traction and I can't see how they would negatively affect cornering. Team-Z is great to work with as well.

Upper Control Arms

[ReverendDexter]

Originally Posted by brokenweasel They are supposed to give you better traction and I can't see how they would negatively affect cornering.

Dropping the axle-side of the LCAs is going to move the IC of the rear suspension rearward and upward, which is going to affect your roll rates and front-to-rear balance. Off the top of my head I can't say those will be negative changes, though I'm assuming that they are, but not significant enough that you'd notice on the street.

[03_StangGuy]

Originally Posted by ReverendDexter Dropping the axle-side of the LCAs is going to move the IC of the rear suspension rearward and upward, which is going to affect your roll rates and front-to-rear balance. Off the top of my head I can't say those will be negative changes, though I'm assuming that they are, but not significant enough that you'd notice on the street.

The IC is moved when you change the mounting points but its also moved when you lower the car, moved forward. What balance are you speaking of? My understand is that it affects acceleration/tunes acceleration.

[ReverendDexter]

Balance I'm talking about is front grip to rear grip... basically the slope between the front and rear roll centers (roll axis, I think it's called). By moving the rear instant center upward, you're changing where that axis is, which is going to change the handling dynamics of the car.

Again, I don't think it's enough that you'd notice it driving on the street.

[03_StangGuy]

Originally Posted by ReverendDexter Balance I'm talking about is front grip to rear grip... basically the slope between the front and rear roll centers (roll axis, I think it's called). By moving the rear instant center upward, you're changing where that axis is, which is going to change the handling dynamics of the car. Again, I don't think it's enough that you'd notice it driving on the street.

WOuld it be better than to do a LCA relocation bracket? Would it affect the front end handling less and still increase the rear grip?

[DickH]

Been using relocated uppers for a couple years now on my car as a DD without any problems. It really seemed to stiffen up the rear a good amount, but I cant recall a time where it hurt me any. If you do this, you should get torque box reinforcements to avoid any problems.

[03_StangGuy]

Originally Posted by DickH Been using relocated uppers for a couple years now on my car as a DD without any problems. It really seemed to stiffen up the rear a good amount, but I cant recall a time where it hurt me any. If you do this, you should get torque box reinforcements to avoid any problems.

What do you mean by stiffen up the rear? Other than removing the crap rubber bushings there not real stiffening goin on. What do you use your for?

[ReverendDexter]

Originally Posted by 03_StangGuy WOuld it be better than to do a LCA relocation bracket? Would it affect the front end handling less and still increase the rear grip?

Mind you, this is on the borders of my knowledge, so take what I'm saying here with that in mind, and confirm it with a more trustworthy source

If we're talking about roll center height (which I'm not saying is or is not the instant center) raising it gives the body less leverage over the springs which makes the car act like it's stiffer sprung. That's the opposite end of what happens when you do a torque arm conversion, wherein it drops the rear roll center height, giving the body much more leverage over the springs; that's why when you go TA, you have to go to a ~150% stiffer springrate out back to keep the same handling.

So, basically what DickH said makes sense - by lowering the axle side of the LCAs and thereby raising the rear roll center, you would decrease the leverage the body has over the rear springs, and effectively increase your rear spring rate... at least where body-roll is concerned.

Just as an FYI - that's why these cars have such huge swaybars up front - the roll center is way too low, so you have to add a bunch of roll stiffness as springs that satisfy NVH requirements just won't cut it.

Now, what that doesn't even get into is the IC's location vs the COG, and how that's going to affect grip under braking and acceleration, which I don't really understand well enough at the moment to be able to explain at all.

[03_StangGuy]

Thank you Rev, Your knowledge is a lil bit more in depth than mind which is why Im askin about this. I think im give Steeda a call at lunch tomorrow and see what they can tell me as this is getting way complicated and I dont feel like redesigning my entire suspension based on my own knowledge.

[Bullitt5566]

So I think it is time for someone to do some real world testing of how the roll center affects traction. I know when I lowered my car my autocross performace dropped dramatically. Some of it could be driver error but the car just wouldn't put the power down. You can calculate your roll center by measuring the height of the mounting points on the rear control arms then tranfer the measurements to paper and draw the line between the mounting points to find the roll center. 60' time would provide a good measurement of traction. I bet if you measure 60' time before and after lowering, the lowered car will have worse 60' times.

[ReverendDexter]

Originally Posted by Bullitt5566 So I think it is time for someone to do some real world testing of how the roll center affects traction. I know when I lowered my car my autocross performace dropped dramatically. Some of it could be driver error but the car just wouldn't put the power down. You can calculate your roll center by measuring the height of the mounting points on the rear control arms then tranfer the measurements to paper and draw the line between the mounting points to find the roll center. 60' time would provide a good measurement of traction. I bet if you measure 60' time before and after lowering, the lowered car will have worse 60' times.

True, but you'd also have to isolate geometry from spring rate to have scientifically valid results. Most, if not all, lowering springs have increased rate over stock both because a stiffer spring is going to afford more body control and with the shorter range of travel you need the increased stiffness to not bottom out. That increased stiffness is going to resist weight transfer, which will cost some grip off-the-line compared to a car that can get 100% of it's weight over the rear tires at launch.

So, really, you'd need 4 setups to get a valid comparison: stock height w/ stock spring rate; lowered w/stock spring rate; stock height w/stiffer springs; lowered w/stiffer springs.