Go Back   MustangForums.com > Ford Mustang Tech > 4.6L (1996-2004 Modular) Mustang > 4.6L General Discussion
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?
Search


4.6L General Discussion This section is for non-tech specific information pertaining to 4.6L (Modular) Mustangs built from 1996 to 2004.

Welcome to Mustang Forums!
Welcome to Mustang Forums.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!


Reply
 
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-31-2009, 05:53 PM   #1
jvog
5th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Vehicle: 2002 Mustang GT
Location: PA
Posts: 2,825
Default School me on suspension..

Ok so instead of buying a shortblock I am going to work on puting my power I have to the ground. I was thinking kyb agx shocks and struts and summit uppers and lowers...but what do you guys think..Maybe coil overs?
This ad is not displayed to registered or logged-in members.
Register your free account today and become a member on Mustang Forums!
__________________
jvog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 06:01 PM   #2
Aereon
5th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Vehicle: 03
Location: SF Bay.
Posts: 3,035
Send a message via AIM to Aereon
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jvog View Post
Ok so instead of buying a shortblock I am going to work on puting my power I have to the ground. I was thinking kyb agx shocks and struts and summit uppers and lowers...but what do you guys think..Maybe coil overs?
What are your goals? Coilovers are nice but if you just want to lower the car I'd recommend some supersports w/ tokico d specs (fox body), or a set of steeda sports with the stock shocks/struts on a budget.

Upper control arms are a no no, don't touch them unless your replacing it with rubber bushings. A stiffer LCA would help a ton with wheel hop, with a MM or Griggs LCA, you should be able to remove the quad shocks.

http://miracerros.com/mustang/index.htm <-- good info on mustangs, very knowledgeable and it's corner-carver.com approved.
Corner-Carvers.com (don't post here unless you have a question that hasn't been asked or unless you have something with scientific backing, most people here are actual professional racers/product developers/physicists and will eat you alive if you provide misinformation)

Excellent vendors with lots of great track experience.
Stangsuspension.com
MaximumMotorsports.com
GriggsRacing.com
http://www.maierracing.com/
http://www.evolutionmsport.com/index.php

With the exception of stangsuspension (due to the lucrative nature of selling UCA) notice how none of them sell their own miracle/poly urethane/delrin bushing UCA's?



Here is an excerpt from one of the first Griggs/Suspension articles I've read

Quote:
griggs....


So what are the issues working against you in the Fox and SN95 chassis Mustang? For starters, the unibody structure is lightly built, with insufficient rigidity. High torque and cornering loads deform the structure, causing the suspension to lose precision, doubly so with convertibles. Welding in reinforcing structure is the cure.


Knowing where to reinforce the structure is important, as indiscriminately adding braces wastes money and adds weight without gaining meaningful increases in rigidity. By twisting a Mustang unibody on a frame table, we learned the main problem is in the middle of the car. Ford counts heavily on the rocker panels as the primary structure between the firewall and rear wheelhouses, especially with the '79-'04 cars. This lets the front and rear axle forces to twist the car far too easily.

A dual-plane brace to provide triangulation of the floor pan is required; we do this with our Full Frame Kit. The mid-car twist also explains why we don't offer g-load and strut tower braces. By strengthening one end of the car they actually increase the mid-car twist.

An even larger concern is found in the rear suspension. Ford uses a 4-link design, but with the upper two control arms angled heavily outward. This means the lower and upper rear control arms are not parallel, so as the suspension moves the upper arms are twisted in their bushings. During performance driving this quickly leads to a near total binding of the rear suspension, called roll bind. With the axle bound, it acts like a giant anti-sway bar, causing the rear roll stiffness to skyrocket and the overloaded rear tires to loose traction and spin. This is why the rear end snaps into uncontrollable fishtailing when cornering, and it is also why the rear tires break loose at the drag strip once the body starts rising from the initial power hit.

Ford addresses the roll bind by fitting the upper arms with very soft bushings, a sloppy fix, to say the least. Our cure is to fit a torque arm and either a Panhard bar or Watts link to provide the necessary axle location, then remove the stock upper arms. Roll bind is then impossible, and the tires freely follow the pavement. Additionally, the rear roll center is now defined by the Panhard bar or Watts link instead of the upper control arm angle as Ford had it. Stock the Mustang's rear roll center is far too high, which overloads the outside rear tire and causes oversteer. By lowering the rear roll center with the Panhard bar or Watts link we get the rear tires to carry more of the load so the rear end will stick longer.

More compromised geometry is found in the front suspension, a point made abundantly clear when driving a car with the rear suspension fixed and the front suspension stock. Ford built the Mustang with generous steering axis (king pin) inclination, which requires equal amounts of caster to keep the tires flat to the ground when turned. Unfortunately, Ford gave the Mustang only minimal caster, a condition we reverse with caster plates and redesigned K-member.

Also at the front, Ford's tall ride height comes into play. Lowering the entire car benefits the center of gravity, but causes the front suspension geometry to lower the front roll center well below ground level. Combined with the tall rear roll center, this results in a roll couple (the relationship between the front and rear roll stiffness, of which roll centers play a part), to heavily load the front tires. Imagine trying to drive your Mustang around a corner with the front end squashed below ground level and the rear end raised a yard or so in the air; obviously the car would be trying to turn using just its front tires. That's about what the stock suspension tries to do. Lowering the rear roll center with the Panhard bar or Watts link helps this condition, of course, but we also raise the front roll center, accomplished by relocating the points where the front suspension attaches to the chassis. Moving the suspension pickup points is done by redesigning the K-member, which is the crossmember the front suspension attaches to. Redesigning the K-member also allows us to add more anti-dive to the front suspension help correct the lack of caster.

Ackermann is also a concern on stock Mustangs. Ackermann is the steering geometry that steers the inside front tire more than the outside tire, a necessary condition as the inside tire follows a smaller diameter turn radius. With the Mustang, Ford actually ended up providing reverse Ackermann, meaning the front tires toe-in slightly when turned. We also cure this with our K-member.
__________________


Big corral, very few horses.

Member of Team IRS-GT #0 ^^

The bucket is up for sale.

Last edited by Aereon; 01-31-2009 at 06:28 PM.
Aereon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 06:14 PM   #3
WhiteFoxGT
Resident Ford Troll
 
WhiteFoxGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Vehicle: 98 Cobra
Location: Delaware
Posts: 5,926
Default

Well before we go talking setups and whatnot, do you want to be lowered and stiff, or do you actually wanna go fast and sacrifice handling?
WhiteFoxGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 06:16 PM   #4
tdcalhoun89
4th Gear Member
 
tdcalhoun89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Vehicle: 2004 Toyota Tacoma TRD
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 1,972
Frank_Drebin1
Default

I've got tokico d specs, they make a HUGE difference. I was going to do coil overs as well, but with my body kit I didn't want to scrap going out of my drive way.
__________________


2004 Mustang GT - Sold
2004 TRD Tacoma
tdcalhoun89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 06:16 PM   #5
Aereon
5th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Vehicle: 03
Location: SF Bay.
Posts: 3,035
Send a message via AIM to Aereon
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteFoxGT View Post
Well before we go talking setups and whatnot, do you want to be lowered and stiff, or do you actually wanna go fast and sacrifice handling?
Lowered doesn't always = stiff, my car is lower than most and many have said my car rides smoother, it's all in setup. Going fast while sacrificing handling is the main reason why mustangs are so expensive to insure (too many idiots think the car is greater than it is).

But yes, I'd like to know you're budget and goals for the car as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdcalhoun89 View Post
I've got tokico d specs, they make a HUGE difference. I was going to do coil overs as well, but with my body kit I didn't want to scrap going out of my drive way.
I have coilovers, they are night and day difference over the modified macphearson setup. I have no real issues with scraping and they actually make more sense when it comes to scraping worries. I have a spanner wrench that I can adjust the height of the car without lifting it, although it is never recommended. The major downfall for coilovers is that in order to install/align/adjust them correctly, you need to have the car corner weighted while its adjusted.

---

Forgot to mention in the other post, one of the first things anyone should do to their mustangs suspension/handling is to install a set of full length sub frame connectors, either a MM or Griggs unit is recommended, Maier Racing custom fabs one for you if you can get to them. The thing you need to be the most careful of when you get the subframes welded on is to make sure you take it to an experienced welder and that the car is on a drive on lift (suspension loaded)
__________________


Big corral, very few horses.

Member of Team IRS-GT #0 ^^

The bucket is up for sale.

Last edited by Aereon; 01-31-2009 at 06:25 PM.
Aereon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 09:46 PM   #6
jvog
5th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Vehicle: 2002 Mustang GT
Location: PA
Posts: 2,825
Default

So most people only get LCAs? I don't want to get springs. Is there a way to make it cut good 60s at the track yet still have decent handling or is it just one or the other lol..
__________________
jvog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 10:47 PM   #7
jvog
5th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Vehicle: 2002 Mustang GT
Location: PA
Posts: 2,825
Default

Is there anything wrong with getting the cheaper J&M subframe connectors from AM?
__________________
jvog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 11:27 PM   #8
teej281
4.6L Section Moderator
 
teej281's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Vehicle: 2002 Mustang GT Convertible
Location: South Central PA
Posts: 10,280
TJ Brillhart
Default

If you want good 60's and can still handle...get adjustable shocks and struts. I have Strange 10 ways and they are awesome. I can go from handling to drag racing in a minute flat. they work wonders!!!
__________________





Member of Team IRS-GT #2

Quote:
Originally Posted by PurpleIcedGT View Post
Saying there is a 1whp difference between the X and H and trying to justify it as a performance difference, is like walking 100 feet to your car and eating a cheeseburger while saying its fine because you just did "cardio".
teej281 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2009, 01:14 AM   #9
Aereon
5th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Vehicle: 03
Location: SF Bay.
Posts: 3,035
Send a message via AIM to Aereon
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jvog View Post
So most people only get LCAs? I don't want to get springs. Is there a way to make it cut good 60s at the track yet still have decent handling or is it just one or the other lol..
No, most people make the mistake of buying UCA/LCA's then they complain about ripped torque boxes and such. If you're looking for both a decent handling + good traction out of the hole you're gonna wanna get rid of the stock 4 link setup and go with either a panhard bar, torque arm, heavy duty LCA setup, evm tri link, watts link setup, or a mixture of them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jvog View Post
Is there anything wrong with getting the cheaper J&M subframe connectors from AM?
Really, I would not recommend it, the main reason is because I have had no experience and cannot vouch for fitment. For full length sub frame connectors, you need them to line up perfectly with the chassis before its welded. If there are any discrepancies that cause the welder to push or bend the sfc's in order to install them, the car will bend to fit the contours of the sfc's and not the other way around. It's because of this that I recommend MM, Griggs, or Maier. I have never heard of any problems with any of their sub frames. With suspension setups, the phrase "you get what you pay for" holds very true, there can be good deals to be had with used items, but the reason why MM and griggs charge so much for their products is due to the research and development involved. Companies like granatelli that simply copy and outsource their parts to China to lower prices have no place on a properly built car. They skimp on production, skimp on research and development, what makes you think they won't skimp on raw materials?

Quote:
Originally Posted by teej281 View Post
If you want good 60's and can still handle...get adjustable shocks and struts. I have Strange 10 ways and they are awesome. I can go from handling to drag racing in a minute flat. they work wonders!!!
Strange 10 ways are great for a budget setup, but they do have an issue with noise and issues with valving (cause of noise) I would save the pennies and do things right the first time, spend your time researching, calling companies, questioning all the hype they spew and then decide whats best.


OP: what is your budget?
__________________


Big corral, very few horses.

Member of Team IRS-GT #0 ^^

The bucket is up for sale.
Aereon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2009, 01:36 AM   #10
jvog
5th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Vehicle: 2002 Mustang GT
Location: PA
Posts: 2,825
Default

Heres my list

Chrome Moly or QA1 k member kit
Maximum Rear Coil Over kit
UPR Radius Rod Upper Control Arm and Spherical Bushing Kit
Chrome Moly LCA
CE 3 way shocks
Not sure what struts yet
4 bolt CC plates
__________________
jvog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2009, 01:36 AM
MustangForums
Ford Mustang




Paid Advertisement

 
 
 
Reply

Tags
2008, agx, center, diagam, forum, front, geometry, ii, inclination, kingpin, kyb, mustang, rear, roll, shocks, suspension

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mod Motor guy checking in. School me on Windsors. 35thAnni99GT 5.0L General Discussion 13 08-18-2008 06:48 PM

Advertising

Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory
New Sponsors
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:51 AM.

© Internet Brands, Inc.


This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company
Emails Backup