Riptide,

LCA relocation brackets will not reduce the cause of wheel hop though you may get less (or MORE wheel hop) if the problem is one of initial bite. To actually reduce the CAUSE of wheel hop you need to reduce the compliance of your control arm bushings. Due to the geometry of the S197's "3-link" axle the most effective way to do this is to swap out the upper control arm bushing with a bushing that is firmer than stock. Many folks who change their UCA first often find they do not need to change their LCAs because the wheel hop is reduced to such an insignificant level.

I usually suggest considering one of the best street combinations I've found, a Steeda Adjustable Comp/Street UCA w/H.D. UCA mount kit used in conjunction with a pair of GT500 LCAs. On a stock height car with the UCA adjusted to the lower and forward adjustment position you not only reduce wheel hop by improved axle location due to the firmer bushing you also improve your instant center WITHOUT changing LCA angle. The improved chassis pick-up point location improves initial tire bite at the hit of the throttle. By keeping your rear axle LCAs at the stock angle you do not create the usual unanticipated rear-axle oversteer when cornering hard or in an emergency maneuver situation that simply dropping the LCA location on the axle side can do.

Because the Steeda UCA reduced the wheel hop issue just about zero due to the improved rear axle location and improved rear axle geometry you can use GT500 LCAs to finish the job and get much better freedom of movement of the rear axle which gives you better ride with OEM noise and ride levels AND OEM durability and reliability.

Conventional straight poly bushed LCAs create an artificial spring and effectively add spring rate any time they are flexed by resisting movement in any direction. Because of the additional spring rate created when poly bushings flex poly bushings produce unnecessary ride harshness and noise with no performance benefit compared to GT500 LCAs when used in conjunction with the Steeda Comp/Street UCA/H.D. UCA mount setup.

The GT500 LCA's OEM rubber bushings are designed to offer very low force just like the stock Mustang LCAs when rotated but more firmly resist the in-plane movements of the LCA which is the only rear axle control LCAs can provide.

Poly bushings when flexed and compressed repeatedly will permanently distort in a surprisingly short period of time. Poly bushings also like frequent lubrication and frequent replacement that the OEM GT500's rubber bushings do not need.

HTH!

 

F1Fan....Would the GT500 LCA still work on a car that is lowered? I'm asking because I got the Eibach Sportlines as a Christmas gift and I wanted to swap them with the Pro-kit. I already have the Steeda adjustable UCA with the mount, adjustable front strut mounts, and adjustable panhard bar. On a lowered car would I need the LCA relocation brackets with the GT500 LCAs? Ihaven't installed anything yet and I get wicked bad wheel hop on the stock setup. Sorry to hijack, but this info may be useful if the OP decides to lower his car......

 

Hey jrockgts197,

Sure, just like stock but with improved axle location. But if you have LCA relocation brackets they do not fit in the top hole of some brackets even if the brackets are welded in. Did you use the forward and lower UCA mounting position? It makes a significant difference if you don't have LCA brackets installed. Oh, I see not installed yet. Don't worry the UCA and GT500 LCAs will resolve wheel hop caused by soft stock bushings. If you like to go to the strip LCAs are a BIG improvement in putting power down at the hit of the throttle. But when adjusted to work well on the strip the car's handling will suffer on a road course and in emergency type maneuvers. So as with most things you have to find the trade off that works for you best.

HTH

 

Do the GT500 LCA's really have a firmer bushing? This was the question of the hour a few months back and I don't think it was ever resolved. Someone on another forum compared bushings in the GT and GT500 arms and said they were actually the same durometer and had the same part number stamped in them.

 

Slaya,

The GT and GT500 LCAs are visually almost identical. The molded and stamped tooling numbers are the same because they use the same tooling for both LCAs but with different rubber. The GT500 LCAs are also slightly different mechanically but there is a difference is in the rubber used.

HTH!

 

F1Fan,

We installed the brackets over the weekend and removed a set of poly/poly LCA that were already installed. We replaced them with a poly/roto-joint fixed length LCA. While the bushings on the old arms seemed OK for the most part - they were oil starved. More so at 10K miles than I expected. I can certainly see that polyurethane is a high maintenance type of material in this application. Now that I know this I will grease them at least once a year or 6000 miles whichever comes first. They clearly aren't gonna make it much longer than that without attention.

I do have the upper which has a roto-joint and will be installing that later this summer along with a mount. Perhaps I should've done the upper first considering your post(s). Having already bought the parts before reading your posts it's to late now to skip replacing the lowers - but it seems like they needed attention anyway. So it will all work out in the end.

FWIW I haven't tested the car out yet but the new lowers and brackets seem to have eliminated some of the rear end squat. It feels a bit firmer out back now. I have a suspicion that the wheel hop situation may already be fixed or at least helped significantly. Until I test however I will not be sure.

 

The rear end squat is not caused by bushing compliance. It is caused by the rear springs compressing during load transfer to the rear under acceleration. By putting your LCA in a lower hole on the brackets, it creates "anti-squat." Basically anti-squat is the amount of load which the control arm takes away from the rear springs. Since the springs dampen out bumps much better than the lower control arms, the more anti-squat you have, the more harsh your rear suspension will be over bumps and such.

 

I've only driven the car once but hell if I can tell a difference in harshness. I'm sure it's there, it just about has to be, but it seems pretty subtle so far. Having switched to the roto-joint for the axle end LCA connection I expected some more noise. During the test drive we drove with the windows down and didn't notice anything. Next time I'll try it with the windows up but I doubt it's going to be terrible or I would've heard it already.

I still have a clunk coming from the rear going over bumps or up my driveway. I assume that is the upper control arm slop most likely. Once we get around to doing the upper and the mount I'm hoping that problem will be gone.

The UMI brackets seem to be pretty stout especially vs. the BMR. They have an extra fastener or two helping to hold them in place. I suspect the UMI pieces are a bit more difficult to install than the BMR. The hardest part of the install was trying to get the brackets slipped over the mount and lined up right. We had to get the dampener screw run part ways through then twist and tap on the mount until the next one lined up, wash/rinse/repeat, etc.. Took quite some time on the driver's side and was not fun.

 

If you are off the power or brakes you probably won't notice the difference in ride relocated LCAs can make with the LCAs adjusted for a more aggressive IC location. When you are on the throttle or on the brakes and hit a square edged bump is when you can really feel the difference especially if you have a poly or rod-end UCA.

HTH!

 

Good to know.