10-08-2015, 01:41 PM
Last edit by: IB Advertising
See related guides and technical advice from our community experts:
Browse all: Steering & Suspension Guides
- Ford Mustang Gt 1996 to 2004: Suspension Modifications
Overview of popular modifications to customize your Ford Mustang
Browse all: Steering & Suspension Guides
The Official Suspension Guide
03-05-2013, 01:53 PM
#71
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location:
Posts: 1,817
Is this the link to them (http://m.uprproducts.com/ystore/yhst...trol-arms.html) ?? At the bottom it says requires the removal of the rear sway bar. Does that mean you have to remove the sway bar and reattach to the new lca's (duh) or that I cannot use the stock rear sway bar at all?
03-05-2013, 04:29 PM
#72
Retired Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 9,235
Silly... 
Yes, that is a link to the same LCA's of which I was referring. The new LCA's have that mounting plate and your original sway bar goes right back onto that plate and you're good. I believe there may be a left/right arm, as I think the plate may be off-set slightly to one side.
Jazzer
Yes, that is a link to the same LCA's of which I was referring. The new LCA's have that mounting plate and your original sway bar goes right back onto that plate and you're good. I believe there may be a left/right arm, as I think the plate may be off-set slightly to one side.
Jazzer
05-09-2013, 06:30 AM
#76
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 19
Q for Jazzer
First-
Thanks for taking the time to post all this valuable information, I had limited knowledge prior to reading, now have more confidence in learning about suspension and all the intracacies.
My question relates to lowering and camber angles.
I purchased Vogtland springs, Advertised to lower 1.4" all around, actual is ~5/8" lowered all around (No big deal as the 4 corner set was $50 new)
Camber after lowering was -0.9 D and -1.9 P (-1.0 imbalance side to side)
I rotated the strut uppers after doing a little research results
-0.2 D and -1.2 P (0.7 change) The upper has about 6-7 mm offset on the center hole for the strut in relation to the 4 mounting holes.
After thinking about it, you could get 4 possible combinations for adjustment with the stock uppers by rotating 90 degrees at a time.
1. full in for more neg camber
2. full out for least camber
3. offset back for middle camber and more positive castor
4. offset forward middle camber and more negative castor
(I think castor is correct? leaning back is negative?)
Anyway, hope this helps people out there.
Getting back to my dilema-
I thought about balancing the camber side to side by shifting the k member one side to the other, loosen all related bolts and assuming there is enough clearance with the boltholes, I could acheive this. Say 0.5 degrees from one side to the other.
Not being a math whiz, since I got a change of 0.7 degrees on the top side from a 12-14 mm shift of the uppers (Remember the 6-7 mm offset is rotated 180 so it double the offset)
That in mind, a k member shift to move 0.5 degrees one side to the other would be about 9 mm? (About 3/8")
Jazz have you ever done a K member shift like this or know of others that have, and what could I expect to get for my efforts?
thanks for your advise on this. My quest is to learn how to do my own wheel alignments in my garage, and to see if I can do more with less, so to speak. I could go out and buy CC plates, but wanted to do this to see if it can be done.
Shawn
Thanks for taking the time to post all this valuable information, I had limited knowledge prior to reading, now have more confidence in learning about suspension and all the intracacies.
My question relates to lowering and camber angles.
I purchased Vogtland springs, Advertised to lower 1.4" all around, actual is ~5/8" lowered all around (No big deal as the 4 corner set was $50 new)
Camber after lowering was -0.9 D and -1.9 P (-1.0 imbalance side to side)
I rotated the strut uppers after doing a little research results
-0.2 D and -1.2 P (0.7 change) The upper has about 6-7 mm offset on the center hole for the strut in relation to the 4 mounting holes.
After thinking about it, you could get 4 possible combinations for adjustment with the stock uppers by rotating 90 degrees at a time.
1. full in for more neg camber
2. full out for least camber
3. offset back for middle camber and more positive castor
4. offset forward middle camber and more negative castor
(I think castor is correct? leaning back is negative?)
Anyway, hope this helps people out there.
Getting back to my dilema-
I thought about balancing the camber side to side by shifting the k member one side to the other, loosen all related bolts and assuming there is enough clearance with the boltholes, I could acheive this. Say 0.5 degrees from one side to the other.
Not being a math whiz, since I got a change of 0.7 degrees on the top side from a 12-14 mm shift of the uppers (Remember the 6-7 mm offset is rotated 180 so it double the offset)
That in mind, a k member shift to move 0.5 degrees one side to the other would be about 9 mm? (About 3/8")
Jazz have you ever done a K member shift like this or know of others that have, and what could I expect to get for my efforts?
thanks for your advise on this. My quest is to learn how to do my own wheel alignments in my garage, and to see if I can do more with less, so to speak. I could go out and buy CC plates, but wanted to do this to see if it can be done.
Shawn
05-09-2013, 08:15 AM
#77
Retired Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 9,235
^ thanks, but postive caster leans the wheel backward and can be an improvement for cornering
Boy, that is a LOT of work to shift the "K" around and not likely to solve your issue. If it does, it may create some other "imbalances" and hurt you in another way. Just pick up a set of CC plates and have the camber set to your liking. The Mustang is by no means a perfectly built car, in regards to being "true" on each side. Bushings, amount of miles, curbshots and general manufacturing all come into play here. It is possible that the frame, "K" or "A" arms are slightly bent, but unless you are aware of a pretty serious accident or have other issues related to an accident, I see you as needing CC plates to address a balance between sides. That being said, some will intentionally have a bit of difference between sides to account for the weight of a driver without a passenger.
Jazzer
Boy, that is a LOT of work to shift the "K" around and not likely to solve your issue. If it does, it may create some other "imbalances" and hurt you in another way. Just pick up a set of CC plates and have the camber set to your liking. The Mustang is by no means a perfectly built car, in regards to being "true" on each side. Bushings, amount of miles, curbshots and general manufacturing all come into play here. It is possible that the frame, "K" or "A" arms are slightly bent, but unless you are aware of a pretty serious accident or have other issues related to an accident, I see you as needing CC plates to address a balance between sides. That being said, some will intentionally have a bit of difference between sides to account for the weight of a driver without a passenger.
Jazzer
06-03-2013, 07:11 PM
#78
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 4,616
Nice article, I used it on my fox to test.
But the article is missing something, that is a wheel spacer.
Using a 2 inch spacer on the front and rear of my fox,with intentions to give me a better arcing fulcrum in corners.
I was able to achieve a better arc in cornering, that is like you standing up holding your elbows in toward the body or holding them out from the body.
The spacers coupled with caster camber plates,aggressive alignment, drop springs(front and rear perfectly even), and new Z-rated tires,
That was all I did to slam the corners past any car I run into, including the new chevy camaro, dodge charger, and challenger, and some others.
Everything else stock.
Wider tires were not the answer, too much flex and too much pattern trying to touch the road, sucks in rain.
Stock 16 inch size on ponies with spacers worked wonders, all the way to the high triples.
VERY IMPORTANT-ALIGNMENT, TIRE RACK AND AFTERMARKET RIM INSTALLERS HAVE THE BEST ALIGNMENT MACHINES, MAKE SURE A PERSON IS SITTING IN THE DRIVER SEAT SIMILAR TO YOUR WEIGHT WHILE ALIGNING , THEN RE-CHECK THE SETTINGS AFTER A MONTH.
What concerns me the most, is the flex in the seats from the chassis, and flex on the fox itself.This is not easily corrected with just subframe connectors. The entire floor pan is weak,and Its been proven, welding in plates on the floor very effective with scary seat roll and a roll cage for chassis roll.
But the article is missing something, that is a wheel spacer.
Using a 2 inch spacer on the front and rear of my fox,with intentions to give me a better arcing fulcrum in corners.
I was able to achieve a better arc in cornering, that is like you standing up holding your elbows in toward the body or holding them out from the body.
The spacers coupled with caster camber plates,aggressive alignment, drop springs(front and rear perfectly even), and new Z-rated tires,
That was all I did to slam the corners past any car I run into, including the new chevy camaro, dodge charger, and challenger, and some others.
Everything else stock.
Wider tires were not the answer, too much flex and too much pattern trying to touch the road, sucks in rain.
Stock 16 inch size on ponies with spacers worked wonders, all the way to the high triples.
VERY IMPORTANT-ALIGNMENT, TIRE RACK AND AFTERMARKET RIM INSTALLERS HAVE THE BEST ALIGNMENT MACHINES, MAKE SURE A PERSON IS SITTING IN THE DRIVER SEAT SIMILAR TO YOUR WEIGHT WHILE ALIGNING , THEN RE-CHECK THE SETTINGS AFTER A MONTH.
What concerns me the most, is the flex in the seats from the chassis, and flex on the fox itself.This is not easily corrected with just subframe connectors. The entire floor pan is weak,and Its been proven, welding in plates on the floor very effective with scary seat roll and a roll cage for chassis roll.
Last edited by aode08; 06-03-2013 at 07:25 PM.
11-01-2013, 07:18 PM
#80
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: CA
Posts: 2
Jazzer,
In post #2 of this thread you have a description of bumpsteer. It really isn't correct. Bumpsteer isn't caused by any relationship between the angles of the suspension or steering components and the ground. Nor is it caused by pivots in the suspension reaching their angular limits. It is caused by the geometry of the suspension and steering system causing toe changes as the suspension moves up and down in bump and droop travel.
Below is a link to a post I made on the Corral. In it I've linked some videos I made to demonstrate bumpsteer as well as a sketch to show what the optimal geometry is. Feel free to use any of the text or images.
http://forums.corral.net/forums/8565296-post36.html
In post #2 of this thread you have a description of bumpsteer. It really isn't correct. Bumpsteer isn't caused by any relationship between the angles of the suspension or steering components and the ground. Nor is it caused by pivots in the suspension reaching their angular limits. It is caused by the geometry of the suspension and steering system causing toe changes as the suspension moves up and down in bump and droop travel.
Below is a link to a post I made on the Corral. In it I've linked some videos I made to demonstrate bumpsteer as well as a sketch to show what the optimal geometry is. Feel free to use any of the text or images.
http://forums.corral.net/forums/8565296-post36.html