Whiskey11

So if I took my car, and threw on a dial indicator on the axle and put the point on the top of the Fays2 tower on the driver side, then a camera to record the change, and went around and pulled a few 1g ish turns and posted the video and it showed no significant movement in the top of that tower, would it change your mind?

Just wondering, because I have the stuff here to do it...

eolson

Someone mounted a video a year back or so of how their through the Pumpkin type watts link wound and released over bumps with a camera. It made it clear that there was no lateral movement to the chassis or frame, just nice even ups and downs as the car went over bumps and dips. Erik

908ssp

No wouldn't make any difference.

JAJ

The design difference is in the location of the roll-center of the rear suspension. The Fays/Steeda design keeps it constant relative to the chassis, while the Whiteline/Griggs unit has it constant relative to the road surface.

I have no doubt that there are functional differences, but frankly in the end it's about what works, and both work well enough that it's easy to debate the differences even though it's almost impossible to measure them.

Norm Peterson

If you've got fairly stiff springs and/or somewhat more than the S197's OE amount of anti-squat, it should make less difference which WL arrangement you choose than if all you did was to fit a WL to an otherwise stock-suspended car.


Norm

Whiskey11

Like this?





908ssp - I figured you'd say that.

Sam Strano

Well, sometimes you can't convince people water is wet and in spite of all evidence they believe what they want to believe.

I absolutely sell and believe in Watts links, and the Fays2. When I installed one on my Camaro (a factory PHB car as well), the decrease in movement laterally of the body was immense.

Not only did I not have to shift the body statically like I did with the PHB to keep the tires from rubbing when driving (and this was with spacers and 17x11's and 315's), I was ALSO able to remove the 3/8" spacers from EACH rear wheel setup as well. If you do the math that's something on the order of 3/4" LESS shifting around than a PHB setup (and a stout one, CM/rod-ended, etc.

No sure what more I can say. Well, other than this. Look at where the PHB or Frame watts links bolt, you don't think the frame of a Fays2 is stronger than the right side body mounts? I sure do. And in fact the frame is a better brace for that than the bars that act as OEM or aftermarket PHB braces too.

eolson

Here's a write up I did over in a Camaro General other car discussion on Sept. 19th for those who still think the PHB set up is as good as the Watts Link:

Yes, I think a 2005-2010 Mustang is more stable while cornering over bumps with a Watts Link as opposed to a pan hard bar set up.

That has been my direct experience with my car in hard bumpy corners, the car no longer skipped slightly laterally with the watts link.

So unless you have driven a car fast over the exact same series of bumpy corners over and over again with the stock pan hard bar and brace, then the Steeda Adjustable Pan hard bar and brace, then the Saleen Generation 1 Watts link(where the support arms were improperly short by 3/4") and then finally with a Techco Watts link with the proper length action arms, and brace.

After direct back to back experiences on the same corners, same tires, same basic air temps, progressively with each of these items added on to the car.

The stock Pan hard bar and brace and the Steeda replacement Bar and brace still had clear lateral deflection, slightly skipping the rear end to the outside of the turn.

The Saleen generation 1 Watts Link displayed a slight deflection of the rear, but not as much as the Pan Hard Bar set ups(action arms to short by a bit).

The Techco Watts link displayed no detectable lateral deflection on the same hard bumpy series of corners as the other items. The generation 2 Saleen Watts link also had the correct action arm lengths, but still had the weaker center bolt throughout the pumpkin, and had reported brakes or failures. The Techco Watts link has had none that I have seen reported, and mine is still working great.

What I was experiencing in my Mustang originally as deflection or butt skip was real, and I searched out and was told by numerous shops and high performance race shops, that the effect was caused by the lifting of the solid axel and the sliding on the frame of the PHB set up. Passengers in my car exclaimed while driving with me over hard curve bumps "what the Hell was that" when they felt the skip or shift in the car.

It is real and present in Mustangs. The Techco Watts Link I have, no matter what the technical explanation is, does in fact, completely eliminate this lateral deflection or butt skip. Weather it is a combination of the solid axel not lifting or effecting the tire grip as much in combination with the diagonal slide of the car on the frame with the PHB being removed as well, I don't know.

All I know is that my car, as well as many, many other drivers, reported the elimination of that lateral momentum hop to the side while in hard corner bumps that is present with the Pan Hard Bar set up. My car now takes those same hard corners as smooth and stable as many (IRS) BMW's, Acura's and other rental cars I've driven over those same exact bump corners.

To repeat, the actual real, lateral rear hop and slight slide present with the Fixed axel in combo with the PHB, is longer present in my car with this properly designed Watts link, and has been reported as being no longer present with dozens of other Mustang owners with properly designed Watts links. Thank you, Erik
__________________
2006 Prem Pkg Mustang GT coupe. Saleen SC,10psi, 454rwhp,442rwtq, Complete Steeda/H&R, suspension change out, with weight loss, Techco Watts link, Stoptech big brakes, Race clutch, Alum. flywheel, Alum 1 pc driveshaft, 9x18,10x18 chrome bullit wheels, 285/40/18,255/45/18 nitto 555 tires. 3545 lbs currently. New car scent air freshener.