After having driven my brother's new Nissan GT-R (that bastard), I'm tired of my mustang nose-diving and then the front end rising up skyward during a high-revving downshift with the stock suspension. I feel like there is way too much momentum lost in the springs which could be turned into a simple squat and more acceleration with a few suspension modifications. I know there are lots of options dealing with suspension modifications, but what set-up would be the best just to cure the see-saw response during a high-end downshift? Are springs and control arms (both upper and lower?) enough to help this? Let me know what's worked for you. Thanks for any input.

 

I installed the FRPP handling pack about 1,000 miles on the car odometer, I couldn't stand the sea saw feeling of the suspension either. As for LCA's thats recommended too uppers is not needed.

 

Not to hijack the thread but thought you might be interested in this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iS5UBK3phw

It is of my brother, who has lots of experience at Mosport, driving my car, which is highly modified per my sig. He was determined not to let him go but four wheel drive and all that technology were too much of a challenge.

 

I have a similar setup as sleeper 08... I have tokico springs with the d specs... love em. an adjustable panhard bar by steeda and the lower control arms by steeda really stiffened up the ride also...

I used to have the steeda springs on my car. they helped a lot with the ride, but I definetly recommend the lower control arms and springs... the upper isnt absolutely needed... get some good quality bushings too...

stock suspension is horrible at times but choose wisely, because aftermarket can be worse...

 

I agree with all, except that you do not need the panhard bar. That is more for the lateral movement. some good springs (steeda, H&R, Eibach,etc), shocks (tockico, koni)is a great place top start, then make a judgement.
good luck!

 

I went with Tociko D-specs shocks and struts,Eibach Pro-Kit springs and BMR adjustable Panhard Bar. Just those three mods got my stang hitting corners much better and fixes the wheel gap for a better stance for little over 1k. I plan on doing front and rear sway bars and rear lower and upper control arms next.

 

Sleeper- I love that over lay from the MaxQ data, I have got to play with that more on mine.

Bottom line, youre not going to get your Mustang to handle like the Godzilla (a.k.a GT-R). It all starts with a better set of dampers, then go from there.

 

Matching your revs [better] on the downshift will reduce the nose-dive. Then there will be less nose rise when you're back on the throttle. Think double-clutch downshifts with a rev-match blip of the throttle as you're clutch out going through the neutral gate. Practice.


More squat does not necessarily equal better acceleration (it only looks like it does). What you have to understand that it's having more acceleration that causes more squat, not the other way around. So, unless you're adding more power, deeper gearing, or losing a bunch of weight, getting more squat when you step into the throttle from a roll only means you're getting a softer 'hit' to the rear tires - which probably won't matter in these downshift situations anyway.


Norm

 

I completely understand the need to match the engine revs with the transmission speed, but what is the advantage of a double clutch downshift as opposed to a rev-matching single clutch downshift? I have tried both, and I can't notice a difference in the rev matching or smoothness between the two; the double clutch downshift just seems like an extra time-wasting step when a quick but efficient downshift is needed. The same goes for heel and toe, I haven't noticed much of a difference between letting the clutch out in neutral before the blip and then back into the appropriate gear as opposed to a quick blip with the clutch in while changing to the appropriate gear. Can you explain why a double clutch downshift is needed. Thanks.

 

It makes life a little easier for the synchros, as they then don't even have to speed up the rotating masses ahead of them inside the transmission and up to and including the clutch disc. I think you're also a little less likely to botch it badly enough to grind things with the double clutch method. Single is probably adequate at low rpms where there's only a few hundred rpm difference between the two gears, but most times you can predict when you'll need/want a downshift and there usually isn't any real requirement to minimize the shift time anyway.

This isn't a big enough effect to fix excessive nose-diving (which I normally assume is the consequence of just shoving the tranny into a lower gear and letting out the clutch with no regard for rev matching at all).


Norm