Thinking about building one. Of course, I will change the design a little bit so as not to get into any kind of patent infringement issues if I decide to sell some.

 

are you looking for adjustability?
looks like it would work, i would change some of the stuff on it though


actually, i would change quite a bit i think..

 

I will probably make the lower bars adjustable like the tops are. I think I probably have enough chromoly tubing and rod ends left over from making snowmobile suspensions to do it.

 

I'm not too crazy about... actually I really dislike the upper link mounts both on the housing and the chassis. Been looking at the different 4 link set-ups on the market and honestly, triangulated 4 links are not very complicated. One can be built for well under $400 by acquiring parts from suppliers such as http://www.bluetorchfab.com/store/ or http://www.ballisticfabrication.com/

 

Why is that? Not questioning your judgement, just curious as to what you are seeing that you don't like.

 

i also dont like how the uppers are mounted to the housing. i would have welded tabs onto the housing instead of that huge *** thing he has there..

 

I agree. I was looking at it and thinking "What the hell is that all about?" I am using a Fab9 custom housing anyway so I will probably just weld the mounts to it.

 

First question: what purpose is this rear suspension supposed to be used in, and what are you trying to improve?

In the pictures, I'm at least as concerned about the lateral tube that carries the coilover spring and shock loads and what the geometry might be.

How differently would the arrangement have to be to fit under a Classic Mustang, which I'm guessing is the reason for the question being asked here.

For all that's involved, I'd do a different arrangement altogether; the S197 Mustang (3-link) is currently the car of choice in SCCA F Stock autocross, leaving the torque arm 3rd/4th gen F-bodies and converging 4-link Fox and later Mustangs behind. The arrangement in the pictures is simply one variation on the converging (or triangulated) 4-link.

I'd expect the pictured arrangement to end up being better than the converging 4-link in my '79 Chevy Malibu . . .



but not as good as the 3-link in my '08 GT . . .





Norm

 

I am building a big horsepower twin turboed 67 fastback for a street/show car and want to do something about the crappy stock rear suspension. I also have a problem with cutting up a classic car so a bolt in setup is what I am wanting. I want to build it myself to keep costs down and because I like to see cars at shows that the owner actually put some blood, sweat, and tears into without just writing a check. I don't like torque arm rear suspensions, no matter how good they may be. Too much of a pain in the *** to deal with when working on the rear diff and I think they are ugly.

 

Just off the top of my head, I don't see the top 4 link bar setup even coming close to working in any classic Stang with out "cutting it up" at least to a MODERATE amount, and like Norn, to my eye, the top mount for the coil-overs seems a little wimpy at best.

If corralling high HP is the goal, perhaps a more simplistic ladder bar/coil over setup might fit the bill? More appealing to the eye than all of the afore mentioned alterntatives... IMO of course....