[Calogero6685]

...between autocross suspension and something that will let me launch at higher rpms with minimal wheel hop. Ride quality can be compromised a little bit.

I've got 315 rear/275 front Nitto 555's

Looking to spend ~$2,000.

[JakeM]

If I were you I'd figure out where your car is going to spend more time. The strip or the autocross/road coarse? Your going to have to make some compromises one way or the other. I would set it up biased toward where the most time is spent.

I would do something like this:
Adjustable Struts (My preference would be Koni Yellow's)
Steeda Sport Springs (Not super stiff, but stiff enough.)
J&M or MM Caster/Camber plates or Steeda HD strut mounts.
Strano Adjustable front and Rear sways. (Still easy enough to disconnect the front for the strip. Major plus on the roadcoarse or at a auto-x event.)
UMI LCA's with Poly/Spherical combo or just Spherical Bearings
UMI Adjustable UCA.
UMI Single Adjustable PHB.

This would about tap you out. If you are going to be spending more time on the Auto-X or Roadcoarse track, I would skip a few of the suspension parts for brake upgrades. Such as: Fluid, Stainless Brake lines, extra rotors and performance pads.

So, I would figure out just where you are going to spend more time and then we could probably recommend a more tailor setup.

[Smilieboy]

Originally Posted by Calogero6685 ...between autocross suspension and something that will let me launch at higher rpms with minimal wheel hop. Ride quality can be compromised a little bit. I've got 315 rear/275 front Nitto 555's Looking to spend ~$2,000.

Torque-arm Package, 1999-04 Mustang GT, Standard-Duty Torque-arm, Adjustable rear lower control arms [MMTASS-9] : Maximum Motorsports, the Latemodel Mustang Performance Suspension Leader!

Something like this will do wonders for launching and some cornering. However, you will have to decide what you want more. Once you have decided, contact maximum to see about what springs to use.

[Calogero6685]

I'm definately leaning towards and autocross suspension. As far as taking it to an event or even the strip, I haven't done either. I want to feel less body roll and more responsive steering.

Besides, anything I get will be an improvement over the 119,xxx mile original suspension.

[Calogero6685]

Also, don't leave me too low, because I've got plans for a Steeda side exhaust kit.

[Whiskey11]

I would not even fuss with the PHB and go straight to the watts link and get it over with. That should allow you to take the side to side loads out of the ucas and allow the rest of the suspension to do its job correctly. Free up the bind in the four link, maybe even look into steedas 5 link set up but use the watts instead of the PHB to square up the ucas to reduce bind.

Staggered tires for autox is not that wise of a decision. I would eventually look into some light weight wheels with as wide of profile that you can get and as fat of rubber aw you can put on all 4 corners so you can rotate tires. The amount of static camber you will need with the mcpherson strut to stayy slightly neg in cornering is going to unevenly wear your tires so rotating is a must!

For autox, if you doing things correctly you shouldn't need too much for breaks. Stainless steel lines, good streetable pads on oem rotors with high temp fluids should last quite some time and provide adequate braking. For roadcourse you will want the bigger brake kits and better rotors.

Did the mach 1s get the upgraded clutch packs in the rear diff? If not I would rebuild it with them or replace the diff if you get serious.

[Calogero6685]

Originally Posted by Whiskey11 I would not even fuss with the PHB and go straight to the watts link and get it over with. That should allow you to take the side to side loads out of the ucas and allow the rest of the suspension to do its job correctly. Free up the bind in the four link, maybe even look into steedas 5 link set up but use the watts instead of the PHB to square up the ucas to reduce bind. Staggered tires for autox is not that wise of a decision. I would eventually look into some light weight wheels with as wide of profile that you can get and as fat of rubber aw you can put on all 4 corners so you can rotate tires. The amount of static camber you will need with the mcpherson strut to stayy slightly neg in cornering is going to unevenly wear your tires so rotating is a must! For autox, if you doing things correctly you shouldn't need too much for breaks. Stainless steel lines, good streetable pads on oem rotors with high temp fluids should last quite some time and provide adequate braking. For roadcourse you will want the bigger brake kits and better rotors. Did the mach 1s get the upgraded clutch packs in the rear diff? If not I would rebuild it with them or replace the diff if you get serious.

That first paragraph is a foreign language to me. I can talk about a valvetrain and ever component from rings to blowers, but suspension is ćhîńêşę to me.

I have my factory 17"x8". What tires would be recommended?

[Whiskey11]

Your mach 1 has the four link rear suspension. Two lower contol arms that are perpendicular to the axle (parallel to the chassis) and two upper control arms that are angled slightly in near the pumpkin on the axle and further apart on the chassis. When the four link goes through cornering proccess the ucas can cause issues because they can bind up because they have two jobs, the first is to help control vertical movement of the axle and sadly to help locate the axle laterally in the car (side to side centering).

The pan hard rod system used in the steeda 5 link allows the ucas to be perpendicluar to the axle and serve no lateral location purpose. A panhard bar is used instead. Basically a phbs sole job is to deal with lateral location of the axle. It does so by attaching one end to the chassis (usually the right side if you are looking at the front of the car to the rear) and attached to the axle at the left. Ideally it is horizontal at ride height but because it is fixed at both ends and is not length adjustable what happens as the suspension travels is that it moves up and down in an arc which will cause the rear to move. In the 3 link on the s197 it is almost an inch or two at the extremes which can create an unsettled feel of the rear axle due to constantly changing roll centers and a bunch of other technical terms. It is a huge improvement over the four link rear though as it is almost bind free.

The watts link is a little more complicated to explain but basically it properly centers the axle at all points in suspension travel except at stupid extremes of travel. Basically it has two arms that are parallel to the axle that are attached to the body and to a vertical "propeller" attached to the differential that can rotate. During suspension travel the fixed parallel arms cause the propeller to rotate slightly and prevent the axle from moving. An alternate method is to attach the parallel arms to the axle and the propeller to the chassis. Both accomplish the same task, but attaching the prop to the chassis reduces unsprung weight which helps the suspension travel smoother. Do a google search if you absolutely desire to see how one works, wikipedia has a good animation for it that I can't pull up on my phone to post. What centering the axle properly will do is allow the suspension components to focus on doing their tasks properly which helps settle down the rear axle when it goes over bumps in the road and can aid in keeping traction during cornering.

Oi, that was a lot to type on a phone keyboard. Sorry for any spelling errors.

[Smilieboy]

So wait, your suspension is completely stock? If that is the case:

sub-frame connectors
Bilstein HD's
Ford racing c or MM springs
MM CC plates
Eibach sway bars
Strut tower brace

or something like this, 2002-04 Mustang GT hardtop Road & Track Box [RTB-8] : Maximum Motorsports, the Latemodel Mustang Performance Suspension Leader!

Reason i say this before others jump on me is because this is a good set up if your just looking to have fun with it. The watts link is good idea if you were going to become very serious and/or competitive. If your budget is around 2000, that will cover you fairly well. Don't forget your brakes.

[Calogero6685]

This is my only car/daily driver. I doubt she'll ever be a dedicated track car.

I have subframe connectors, but the Steeda side pipe set up won't work with the subs.

How much body roll/twist will I feel of I take those out, and if i do take them out, is there an alternative to the subs?

[Calogero6685]

Originally Posted by Whiskey11 Your mach 1 has the four link rear suspension. Two lower contol arms that are perpendicular to the axle (parallel to the chassis) and two upper control arms that are angled slightly in near the pumpkin on the axle and further apart on the chassis. When the four link goes through cornering proccess the ucas can cause issues because they can bind up because they have two jobs, the first is to help control vertical movement of the axle and sadly to help locate the axle laterally in the car (side to side centering). The pan hard rod system used in the steeda 5 link allows the ucas to be perpendicluar to the axle and serve no lateral location purpose. A panhard bar is used instead. Basically a phbs sole job is to deal with lateral location of the axle. It does so by attaching one end to the chassis (usually the right side if you are looking at the front of the car to the rear) and attached to the axle at the left. Ideally it is horizontal at ride height but because it is fixed at both ends and is not length adjustable what happens as the suspension travels is that it moves up and down in an arc which will cause the rear to move. In the 3 link on the s197 it is almost an inch or two at the extremes which can create an unsettled feel of the rear axle due to constantly changing roll centers and a bunch of other technical terms. It is a huge improvement over the four link rear though as it is almost bind free. The watts link is a little more complicated to explain but basically it properly centers the axle at all points in suspension travel except at stupid extremes of travel. Basically it has two arms that are parallel to the axle that are attached to the body and to a vertical "propeller" attached to the differential that can rotate. During suspension travel the fixed parallel arms cause the propeller to rotate slightly and prevent the axle from moving. An alternate method is to attach the parallel arms to the axle and the propeller to the chassis. Both accomplish the same task, but attaching the prop to the chassis reduces unsprung weight which helps the suspension travel smoother. Do a google search if you absolutely desire to see how one works, wikipedia has a good animation for it that I can't pull up on my phone to post. What centering the axle properly will do is allow the suspension components to focus on doing their tasks properly which helps settle down the rear axle when it goes over bumps in the road and can aid in keeping traction during cornering. Oi, that was a lot to type on a phone keyboard. Sorry for any spelling errors.

Sooooooo confused. I sent that to my phone through text, so later when I get off work, I'll crawl under there and explain it to myself outloud. lol

[Jazzer The Cat]

Originally Posted by JakeM If I were you I'd figure out where your car is going to spend more time. The strip or the autocross/road coarse? Your going to have to make some compromises one way or the other. I would set it up biased toward where the most time is spent. I would do something like this: Adjustable Struts (My preference would be Koni Yellow's) Steeda Sport Springs (Not super stiff, but stiff enough.) J&M or MM Caster/Camber plates or Steeda HD strut mounts. Strano Adjustable front and Rear sways. (Still easy enough to disconnect the front for the strip. Major plus on the roadcoarse or at a auto-x event.) UMI LCA's with Poly/Spherical combo or just Spherical Bearings UMI Adjustable UCA. UMI Single Adjustable PHB. This would about tap you out. If you are going to be spending more time on the Auto-X or Roadcoarse track, I would skip a few of the suspension parts for brake upgrades. Such as: Fluid, Stainless Brake lines, extra rotors and performance pads. So, I would figure out just where you are going to spend more time and then we could probably recommend a more tailor setup.

I am sorry, but I beg to differ on a couple things here

1 ~ Running a spherical UCA is not a great idea on AX or open-track situations. The UCA's, whether spherial or solid poly are your worst enemy in these situations.

2. Do not go sway bars on either end, at this point. They are a tuning device and should be the very last thing one does on a suspension system.

You will not be able to have a "true" street/strip/AX/open-track car One can have a great twisty car that is OK on the strip, but a great strip car will be horrendous.

Originally Posted by Whiskey11 I would not even fuss with the PHB and go straight to the watts link and get it over with. That should allow you to take the side to side loads out of the ucas and allow the rest of the suspension to do its job correctly. Free up the bind in the four link, maybe even look into steedas 5 link set up but use the watts instead of the PHB to square up the ucas to reduce bind. Staggered tires for autox is not that wise of a decision. I would eventually look into some light weight wheels with as wide of profile that you can get and as fat of rubber aw you can put on all 4 corners so you can rotate tires. The amount of static camber you will need with the mcpherson strut to stayy slightly neg in cornering is going to unevenly wear your tires so rotating is a must! For autox, if you doing things correctly you shouldn't need too much for breaks. Stainless steel lines, good streetable pads on oem rotors with high temp fluids should last quite some time and provide adequate braking. For roadcourse you will want the bigger brake kits and better rotors. Did the mach 1s get the upgraded clutch packs in the rear diff? If not I would rebuild it with them or replace the diff if you get serious.

Unless the UCA's are completely removed, the bind will still be present It will not be as bad, with JUST a PHB or WL, but need a TA to remove them and have a car that accels at AX and open-track.

Calo.... Have you been to AX or open-track to this point? If not, don't mod ANYTHING yet. Hit up 5~6 events and learn to drive your car exactly as it is in that environment. Upgrading stuff without this experience can allow you to learn bad habbits early.

Jazzer

[Whiskey11]

Jazzer feel free to correct me but the steeda 5 link set up for the sn95 changes the uca mounting so that they are perpendicular to the axle right? At which point you could just find a way to relocate the ucas to be perp and run a phb or watts correct? Wouldn't that reduce the bind to near zilch? With the quadra-bind, as I've read the four link to be appropriately called , you are right, it would still bind some but it wouldn't and shouldn't be nearly as bad as the sideways forces are being taken care of by the watts so that should in a perfect world leave the ucas to deal with vertical motion only.

Op take a look at this site as it can explain your set up better than I can on my phone :

Late Model Mustang Suspension Basics

Jazzer does your comment on bearings apply to the 3 link as well? I understand the no poly all around though!

[Calogero6685]

I am absolutely lost. I can understand what you're saying, but the acronyms, an the fact that I'm nuitrition able to picture any of this because I've never bothered with it. I think I'll do some more reading amd looking around.

[JakeM]

Whoops! LoL... Assumed this was a S197. Thanks for the corrections Jazzer!


Follow Jazzer's advice..

UCA = Upper Control Arm (Rear in this case)
LCA = Lower Control Arm (Also rear in the conversation)
TA = Torque Arm

Any other acronyms your confused on Caloger?

[Calogero6685]

My car needs new suspension as it is, and not only that but I want a setup that I can grow into. I want to know that the suspension is capable of outperforming my driving capabilities.

In all honesty, she probably won't ever see the track with this engine. Probably just spirited driving more so than actual performance and endurance.

So to get a little list together (I'll stick with either Steeda or MMS since they seem to be the big dogs and have the best reputation.), should I just start with the basics?

Springs
Shocks
UCA
LCA
TA

[Smilieboy]

Originally Posted by Calogero6685 My car needs new suspension as it is, and not only that but I want a setup that I can grow into. I want to know that the suspension is capable of outperforming my driving capabilities. In all honesty, she probably won't ever see the track with this engine. Probably just spirited driving more so than actual performance and endurance. So to get a little list together (I'll stick with either Steeda or MMS since they seem to be the big dogs and have the best reputation.), should I just start with the basics? Springs Shocks UCA LCA TA

TA will negate the UCA. You also might want to get some CC plates and my favorite is a solid steering shaft from MM.

[Whiskey11]

Originally Posted by Smilieboy TA will negate the UCA. You also might want to get some CC plates and my favorite is a solid steering shaft from MM.

I would also check your scca rules as it may bump you out of your class to put a ta on. Check the mounting rules too as I. Know their are restrictions for welding in new braces in some classes.

[Jazzer The Cat]

Calogo... I realize all the acronyms are a PITA, but I have a legend ***HERE*** that will help out for all this stuff

OK.. the absolute fundamental issue, in regards to taking corners, with the pre-S197 cars, is the 4-link suspension out back (UCA's are the issue here)

It is designed very poorly and binds up like a sum-o-bitch on hard body-roll! This binding causes snap-steer issues and can be seen in the following video at about the :30 second mark:

Snap-steer

Snap-steer

If you have ever pitched a 4-link very sideways, chances are you have felt this and can easily make one lose control of his/her ride. The second issue presented by the UCA's is a high roll-axis (RA) and pushes the inside arse-end upward and places excessive forces on the outside front wheel. This is the biggest reason for front end push or understeer in the pre-S197 Stangs:



In order to alleviate this issue, the OEM UCA's must go bye-bye The most common way is a PHB or WL with a TA. The 5-link that Whiskey11 mentined, is something I know very little about. I know it is MUCH more work to install and also does away with the "quadra-bind" SN95 rear-end. The one issue I have with it is the RA remains higher than with a TA:



The TA is what now creates a new RA and is now about dead-level with the ground and why my car is leaning a bit, but parallel with the road surface in my sig pic.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Calogero... What are the ULTIMATE goals for your ride?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is the #1 question that MUST be answered to be efficient with the money you spend on your ride. After all, don't you want to see the car you ALWAYS wanted in your own driveway....?

... I do!

Jazzer

[Whiskey11]

From the pictures of the 5 link I've seen it installs into the factory locations and requires no welding. Having seen it installed however, I'm not sure it is nearly as good as some of the other designs I've seen.

The TA and Watts are probably the best option for the SN95 chassis. Like I said though, I'd read through the rules about TA installing in the SCCA rule book as I know there are restrictions on welding or bolting crossmembers between the Sub Frames to mount the TA.

Jazzer is a great resource for your generation cars, I'm kind of shooting out what I know and making assumptions. I have ZERO time in or around an SN95. I'm just spouting what I'm reading