Modded Mustang Forums banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
334 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
MM linking doesn't work well, so I'll quote some of it off their site.

maximummotorsports.com said:
The Launch Box extends the capabilities of the Street & Strip Box to the next level. A Front Coil-Over Conversion Kit adds adjustability and saves weight. The Panhard Bar and Torque-arm’s long lever arms really improve rear tire bite while eliminating the upper control arms and the need for upper torque box reinforcement. Our stiff, Adjustable Rear Sway Bar reduces body roll during launch. Top it off with the safety of our NHRA legal roll bar, and you will have a package capable of consistent 1.56 60-foot times without unduly compromising street manners. Items different from the Street & Strip Box are italicized.
  • MM Caster/Camber Plates
  • MM Full Length Subframe Connectors
  • MM Drag Race Adj. Rear Lower Control Arms
  • Tokico D-Spec Struts
  • Tokico D-Spec Shocks
  • H&R Sport Springs, rear pair
  • MM Panhard Bar
  • MM Heavy Duty Torque-arm
  • MM Adjustable Rear Swaybar, 7/8" x .188"
  • MM Roll Bar, 6-point, swing-out door bars
  • MM Front Coil-Over Kit
  • Hypercoil front springs, 2-1/2"
what are everyone's thoughts on panhard bars/torque-arms w/o upper control arms?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,424 Posts
MM linking doesn't work well, so I'll quote some of it off their site.



what are everyone's thoughts on panhard bars/torque-arms w/o upper control arms?

Panhard bars are pretty much not needed. Tried and true, properly adjusted metal bushing and even poly bushed control arms have been taking the wins for along time. I have a LOT of body roll on launch, other than running the risk of torque box damage or bushing damage, MY car is pretty controllable, thats just me tho.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,367 Posts
Just for comparison purposes, I've gone 1.55 60 foot with a real mild EFI 302, stock struts, stock shocks, BBK upper and lower control arms and BBK lowering springs. Nothing fancy at all so their claim of 1.56 60 foots actually makes their products sound inefficient. If that rear anti roll bar bolts in the stock location it is a waste. Connecting the two control arms without tying them to the body isn't going to reduce much if any body roll. The panhard bar and torque arm are not needed. No need to reinvent the wheel. The stock style Mustang suspension works awesome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
i say ditch the panhard bar and torque arm and get an anti roll bar....works really well

also, i'm not a fan of the h&r springs...stockers work well, or the eibach drag launch rears are solid
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
299 Posts
Just for comparison purposes, I've gone 1.55 60 foot with a real mild EFI 302, stock struts, stock shocks, BBK upper and lower control arms and BBK lowering springs. Nothing fancy at all so their claim of 1.56 60 foots actually makes their products sound inefficient. If that rear anti roll bar bolts in the stock location it is a waste. Connecting the two control arms without tying them to the body isn't going to reduce much if any body roll. The panhard bar and torque arm are not needed. No need to reinvent the wheel. The stock style Mustang suspension works awesome.

What kind of tires were you running when you had this car. my car has the same suspension but hooks like crap. I know it has a lot to do with the nitto drag radials. I plan on get some real tires soon just don't know which ones to go with.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,367 Posts
What kind of tires were you running when you had this car. my car has the same suspension but hooks like crap. I know it has a lot to do with the nitto drag radials. I plan on get some real tires soon just don't know which ones to go with.
26x8.5 Mickey Thompson slicks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,572 Posts
4 cylinder springs with 90/10 and 50/50s and some sort of boxed upper and lower control arms work awesome ( i paid less then 200 for the super cheap summit upper and lowers and they work pretty good ) 1.59 on 2 year old 275 50 15 bfgs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,424 Posts
4 cylinder springs with 90/10 and 50/50s and some sort of boxed upper and lower control arms work awesome ( i paid less then 200 for the super cheap summit upper and lowers and they work pretty good ) 1.59 on 2 year old 275 50 15 bfgs
This is my exact set-up I have down to the brands and everything. I also like this set-up, It works, and is verry cheap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,572 Posts
for the money it's hard to beat:3gears
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,367 Posts
I think everyone should read this. Especially those that think 4 cylinder springs are helping them. These links will explain in detail how a Mustang suspension works.

BaselineSuspensions.com.........Launching A Drag Car

Baseline Your Suspenison

BaselineSuspensions.com.........Setting Pinion Angle

BaselineSuspensions.com.........Setting Suspension Preload


"Rear springs should be a little stiffer for a drag car but many people think that the car should "squat" during the launch so they install softer rear springs on the car to accomplish this. The only cars that should be squatting during the launch are those cars that shock the tires very hard (4-speed cars) and with enough power where the car will overpower the tires. Prostock cars actually squat during launch because they develop enough torque and hit the tires so hard that the squatting helps absorb some of the shock and keeps from overpowering the tires. But, setting up the car to squat is not a function of the springs. It is the position of the Instant Center (IC) that determines how the car squats. The STOCK mounting points for the control arms already cause the car to squat which can unload the tires. So in order to compensate for this squatting the springs need to be stiff to transfer the force to the tires.
If the rear end squats that means that the rear springs/shocks are not pushing the rear tires into the ground. They are just compressing. For the most part you don't want the rear to squat because you want some resistance from the springs/shocks to transfer the force/weight to the tires.
Example:
Make a coil spring out of a coat hanger and place it on a bathroom scale. Push on the spring. The scale is not going to read much because you are not transferring any force to the scale through the softer spring. Now take the spring out of your car and place it on the scale and do the same thing. The scale will read more pressure because it IS transferring more force through the spring."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,424 Posts
I'm referring to 4 cyl springs on the front, not the back. All stock rear springs are the same 4, 8, or gt. With the exception of the vert.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,367 Posts
I'm referring to 4 cyl springs on the front, not the back. All stock rear springs are the same 4, 8, or gt. With the exception of the vert.
Either way, read the links. There is alot of good info there. There is alot to gain in the suspension.

Rear springs are not the same for 4cylinder and 8cylinder cars.
 

·
Anatidaephobic
Joined
·
2,370 Posts
:lmao i thought this was about a Modded Mustangs LUNCH box. i was like HELL YEA bitches!!!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,367 Posts
FYI 1984 1/2-93 rear coil springs - 4cylinder specific rate 160 - V8 variable rate 200-300
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,424 Posts
Either way, read the links. There is alot of good info there. There is alot to gain in the suspension.

Rear springs are not the same for 4cylinder and 8cylinder cars.
Good article, but the rear springs are the same, they are listed as the same part number. I'm not going by what I've heard, I did my homework.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,367 Posts
Good article, but the rear springs are the same, they are listed as the same part number. I'm not going by what I've heard, I did my homework.
The 1984 1/2-93 4 cylinder springs are specific rate 160 pound springs. 1984 1/2-93 V8 rear springs are variable rate 200-300 pound springs. If you put a V8 and 4 cylinder spring side by side the difference is very visible. Where every you found the part number to be the same between the two was a misprint or screw up. They are definitely different. The 93 Cobras used 4cylinder rear springs also which is yet a different part number even though every aspect of the spring is the same as 4 cylinder spring.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top