UPRSharad

That's a pretty solid setup for max launch grip!

I'd leave off the swaybar upgrade if you're going for drag launches, because a stiff front bar will hurt your ETs.

I'd also recommend these Strange 10-way adjustable shocks & struts instead of the Lakewoods, because they let you tune the suspension however you'd like, easily with no tools, and they cost about the same as the Lakewoods.

http://www.uprproducts.com/strange-m...-strut-05.html
http://www.uprproducts.com/strange-m...-shock-05.html

^^you'll need FRPP GT500 strut mounts with the lakewoods or the Strange struts.

Also, you'll need a rear swaybar relo kit for those 15x10 rear wheels:
http://www.uprproducts.com/mustang-r...on-kit-05.html

clowe1965

Never mind.

mtflyboy25

awesome I am glad you agree. Yeah the swaybar relo kit is in your package deal. It says it comes with basically everything. hmm I will have to think about the strange struts.

what are opinions on the eibach drag launch springs? anyone suggest anything else?

UPRSharad

The Drag Launch springs work well. They ride a little higher than the Eibach Pro springs, but they transfer weight like crazy. My daily driver has the UPR/Eibach Pro springs on it, so that's what I'm used to. But when I drove UPR's 2010 GT (which sits on the Drag Launch springs) I was blown away by how well the weight transfers on the launch. The day I drove our 2010 GT, it was on 18" Drag Radials instead of its usual 15" DRs, but man, I swear I almost think it would pull a wheelie on the 18" DRs! And that's saying something! (the car pulls massive wheelies on 15" DRs with UPR Pro Street suspension)

Anyway, another interesting factor to mention about the Drag Launch springs rather than the Pro springs, is that the Drag Launch springs have a more comfortable ride. They're definitely the way to go, unless you're into high speed cornering.

JIM5.0

I believe what he is trying to convey is the thought about torsional rigidity; well, rigidity as far as a the engine causing flexure on the chassis by putting a longitudinal torque.
A 4 point brace will help some to give more rigidity against this flexing, but your thoughts are right: a cage with more points and more bars that go across transversely is more rigid.

My thoughts however is that the S197 chassis is considerably more rigid than the SN95 chassis and even more so than the Fox body chassis. The S197 has so much rigidity that I think modders have confirmed that the stock S197 chassis is more rigid than an SN95 chassis with subframe connectors.
If anyone can recall where this article form one of the Mustang mags, please link; I cannot remember where it was written.

Just a guess on my part, but I doubt that you would need any sort of additional rigidity over the stock chassis until you break 550ft-lbf, maybe above 600ft-lbf. Hell, even the 2013 GT500 uses the standard S197 chassis but adds additional rigidity with an engine bay tower brace.
Someone correct my guess where I'm wrong, I cannot remember the exacts.

clowe1965

Lol, yes that was where i was going, just gave up on trying to explain it.

UPRSharad

I think it was in 5.0 Mustang Magazine's huge write up on the S197 chassis. They said the torsional rigidity was around 1,000% stiffer than the Fox chassis. I know I've read that the S197 is stiffer than a Fox on a 6-point rollbar. I'd believe it too. I wouldn't try to run 9s in a Fox convertible with no rollbar and no subframe connectors, but we did it with UPR's 2010 GT: