IA94GT

Is a rear stabilizer shock the same thing as an axle damper on a 94 Mustang GT??

AdderMk2

yea.. and with a good set of lower control arms.... you dont need the "quad shocks"

Evil_F

Maby not for drag racing. But I wouldnt removethe quads for road racing.

AdderMk2

the only thing they do with a good set of control arms installed.. is get in the way of big tires. I havent had my quad shocks for a LONG time... and I road race alot!

Monstang

Are these the little shocks that run nearly horizonal?

Evil_F

Yeah', the way this thing sits on the rear solid axle. It needs all the stabilization it can get. Professional Road race guys say it is prone to "rear wheel steer". Which basicly means wiggly rear end. When I bought my car one of the quads was off. And that tire always rubbed when turning and stuff. I know those quads help, even if you have new control arms.

93foxgt

That can be corrected EASILY with a panhard bar... you need the quads off to put big wheels on.

I currently don't have a panhard installed, or quads, but I'm running 275/40/17's on the back, 245's on the front, with bilstein shocks & struts, H&R super sport springs, MM LCA's, and steeda UCA's and I can take a 2006 Audi A3-A4 on the canyons without too much trouble... only thing that stopped me from walking on it was rear-end steer.

nitrous_bob

you can fit an 11" tire by just reversing the quads end for end

and guys go 8's on a 10 1/2" tire

i prefer to leave them on , just flip them around

7upedition

This is like exhaust/headers questions, because there are several different opinions that repeatedly come up... I agree with a good pair of upper/lower control arms, they aren't needed, if you've ever seen the stock uppers, you can see why. But some people including myself prefer to leave them on for various reasons (axle hop/appearance/tires don't warrant removal, etc.)and yes "quad" shocks, axle dampeners, and rear stabilizer shocks are all the same part.