clintster77

Is there a difference in adjustment from brand to brand when it comes to setting the bound and rebound ? More specific, dose any brand offer the bound to be adjusted independently from the rebound and vise versa ?

GotMunchies?

It looks like the mount points for that IRS are based off of the existing mounts for the panhard bar and sway bar mounts - while the tube structure of the IRS itself looks strong enough - I doubt those brackets are up to the task of supporting the cornering forces an IRS implies. That said, it does look like the geometries are headed in the right direction - unequal length control arms for camber control under load.

Norm Peterson

I assume you meant to say "bump". Anyway, the list starts out something like this.

bump and rebound adjustable but not independently so = adjustable
bump not adjustable, rebound adjustable = single adjustable (achieving the opposite is equally possible but not as generally useful)
bump and rebound independently adjustable = double adjustable

Norm

blksunshine

It looks heavy. I wonder what the difference in weight is.

Norm Peterson

The weight difference concerns me less than the load paths for acceleration and braking forces - they should not involve bending any of the tubes. Threaded fasteners in bending also make me a little uneasy, hopefully the threaded sections use rolled rather than cut threads and are large diameter fine thread.

Tube bending = flexibility = effects on rear caster/camber/toe. While I can't know how significant (or not) these effects might be with this specific arrangement without running a deflection analysis on it, the idea that they will be present would have me driving very carefully and only gradually finding out what might happen as I lean on it more. Hammering it down the first twisty road right from the installing shop's driveway (because now I've got IRS - yay!!!) would be a big mistake.


I don't think it would be hugely difficult to improve this, though. I'd like to see the acceleration and braking loads taken by the tubes that run to the OE LCA chassis side pickups, as that's where it is known that Ford designed the S197 to be able to take those loads.


Norm

clintster77

By ''improve this'' do you mean ,stiffening the mounting points ? stiffening the mounting points would not be to hard to do with a little creativity . Wouldn't the fact that the IRS tube frame would stiffen the mustang mounting points because the IRS sub frame ties the points together ?

Norm Peterson

I think the IRS tube frame itself leaves a bit to be desired in terms of stiffness. It will deflect under load, and deflection affecting the rear of an IRS tends to make the car feel "twitchy". It'll ride just fine, but may discourage you from driving it really hard. Rear deflection effects required certain changes in the Shogun (very limited production "hotrod" Festiva with an SHO powertrain in the back seat area) in order to make it even driveable.

Load goes where stiffness exists to resist it (otherwise, you get lots of deflection with little resistance). When there is more than one path for it to follow, load divides in proportion to stiffness.

I'd rather see the tubes that run forward to the OE LCA chassis-side pickups carry the acceleration thrust, for the reason given previously. Right now, those forward load paths make three changes in direction for the forward/rearward forces that are coming in from the tubes carrying the lower control arm brackets, and every change in direction and the offset that results adds flexibility (reduces stiffness).

The tube paths going rearward/laterally and upward look to be somewhat better, but themselves could be more rigid. Note that this requires that the S197 chassis be strong enough at those attachment points. Maybe it is, but I'd want better reassurance than simply "it will bolt up there".

Norm

screaming_pc

Just get a Watts Link and call it a day.

If you want an IRS, buy a different car.

JoblessMike619

​​​​​​ you only have one performance option if you want independent rear suspension with a Ford family car in the years of the d2c Era the jaguar S type r 4.2l v8 with Eaton 112 blower has irs its a dew platform from 2000-2008 then the xf sv8 and xfr till 2015