Mustang Suspension

[guffsx125]

I am building a 1990 mustang coupe for ITB. I was wanting to know what everyone is using for shocks, springs, and swaybars.

thanks Anthony

[Ron]

We use circle track style front springs with Adjustable upper spring perches welded directly to the K member. I want to say the fronts are 5 1/2 inch. On the rear we use 5 inch Circle track stuff with the adjustment welded to the lower control arm. The great thing with the springs are they only cost about $45.00 a corner. With the adjustment we can corner weight the car and change the ride height at will. For shocks we use the Koni double adjustable on all 4 corners. You need to machine the front spindles so the shocks will fit. The mounting area is an 1/8 of an inch to wide and the Konis only fit the 87-93 V-8 cars. We have built a custom front sway bar set up once again using more cheap circle track stuff. Hollw bar with the mounting points relocated about 5 inches lower, aluminiun arms that we bent with some heat and a double heim joint set up to connect to the front control arm. We have moved away from a rea sway bar. We are working on a cocpit adjustable rear. Someday we will get it to work. Are car is fairly stiff rate wise. Global west has great solid delrin bushings for the front. We have the car pretty dialed in and easy to drive. Hell I suck at typing so if you want to know more please feel free to call me.

Ron Sattele

cell 770-757-1447
Home 770-218-9967

[trueblue]

If you want your mustang to handle with the best, follow Ron's advice.

[Knestis]

Where's a Rules NERD when you need one? ;)

K

[Greg Amy]

If you want to be illegal, follow Ron's advice.

[Doc Bro]

I think I know why Ron's car is fast. It's more prod. than IT.

R

[Andy Bettencourt]

I'm not shy. You may want to look into these items before you take anyones advice. Legality is more important to some than to others:




...with Adjustable upper spring perches welded directly to the K member.

...with the adjustment welded to the lower control arm.

...You need to machine the front spindles so the shocks will fit.

...with the mounting points relocated about 5 inches lower, aluminiun arms that we bent with some heat and a double heim joint set up to connect to the front control arm.

...We are working on a cocpit adjustable rear. [/b]

[Knestis]

Hey - I'm not shy. I'm just out of the NERD business. :lol:

K

[lateapex911]

It's tough to say exactly on a couple of the items, but, if legality is important (and in an honor system such as ours, it should be), i would steer clear of the methods prescribed in Andy's list. Specifiacally items 1 and 2 are clearly not cool, item 3 might be, tough to say without specifics, item 4 seems fine if it's sway bar related, and item 5 is a huge no no.

[Rabbit07]

My ITB Mustang has adjustable spring perches, but they are not welded to anything. If you use 2 1/2 coil springs they are much lighter than 5's or 5 1/2's. My car has 750's up front and 250's in the rear. I have the equivalent to the steeda 5 link in the rear. You can balance handling with front and rear bars and rear roll center.

It is true that many of the shocks available for the Mustang today require that you machine the knuckle. I am fortunate in that respect that my car was built about 10 years ago when struts were still available for 2.3 powered cars. Don't fret there are options that are legal, you just have to spend a bit more money.

The real issue with the Mustang in ITB is making power. You can make it handle very well, but the VW's and
Volvo's will still pull you down the straights.

[trueblue]

Adjustable spring perches are legal. Would it be better received if they were bolted in v/s welded in? I have a set of adjustable perches bolted in on my control arms.

This could be considered a gray area. You can buy struts that fit the thicker 4 cyl spindles but they are sorry. Modifying the spindle is safer than modifying the strut. Were talking about shaving an 1/8" of extra material here, not a major modification. The Fox mustang has been out of production for a while and parts just are not available. Face it no one outside of SCCA has a desire to keep the 4cyl parts therefore aftermarket vendors will not build the parts we need. There is a larger modification done to a VW when converted to coil over shocks. Running the struts available for the 4cyl limits the spring rate you can have. Try to run stock shocks with 1000 # springs and see what happens.

Sway bars are open. You can put in a custom sway bar. For that matter you can install swaybars in a car that never had them. No one tells you how you have to build it. I have a hollow aluminum swaybar, it just happens to mount to the stock location.

As to why the car is so fast I'll stand up for Ron a little and give some credit to his driving. No one likes to admit it when a driver is fast. Seat time, seat time, seat time.

I am no guru when it comes to the rules. Read them yourself and come up with your own interpretation. :wacko:

[Rabbit07]

b. Springs and Shock Absorbers
1. Shock absorbers may be replaced provided they attach
to the original mounting points. The number and type
(e.g., tube, lever, etc.) of shock absorbers shall be the
same as stock. The interchange of gas and hydraulic
shock absorbers is permitted. Remote reservoir shock
absorbers are prohibited beginning 1/1/03. As of
1/1/03, external adjustments of shock control shall be
limited to two (2). No shock absorber may be capable
of adjustment while the car is in motion.
2. MacPherson strut equipped cars may substitute struts,
and /or may use alternate inserts. Spring seat ride height
location may be altered from stock. Remote reservoir
struts and/or inserts are prohibited.
3. Springs of any origin may be used, provided they are of
the same number and type as originally fitted, i.e., coil,
leaf, torsion bar, and that they shall be installed in the
original location using the original system of attachment.
The joining of two or more coil springs by any means is
prohibited. The use of tender springs (designed to capture
the spring within the perches at full droop) are permitted
provided the tender springs are completely compressed
when the car is at static ride height. Shackles or spacers
may be used to adjust leaf spring ride height. Spacers,
including threaded units with adjustable spring seats,
may be used with coil springs. Coil over threaded body
shock/struts are permitted.

I don't see where the adjustable spring perches are a problem?

c. Suspension Control
1. Any anti-roll bar(s), traction bar(s), panhard rod or
watts linkage may be added or substituted, provided
its/their installation serves no other purpose. The
mounts for these devices may be welded or bolted to
the structure of the vehicle. No suspension control
mount or component shall be located in the trunk or
driver/passenger compartment unless installed by the
manufacturer as original equipment. Traction bars used
to control axle rotation shall be one piece solid bar or
tube. Heim rod ends may be fitted.

Looks like other than a cock-pit controlled bar everything is legal there too.

[lateapex911]

The adjustable spring seats are fine, but the attachment is problematic. Welding them to various components, such as the control arms could be a strengthening issue. It's really altering the component that it's being attached to, which is expressly forbidden.

Sway bars are free, but cockpit adjustable is clearly not allowed.

And while struts are free, the spindle area is gray at best in my mind. I'm not familiar enough with the spindle/strut relationship in this case to be knowedgable.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Always remember:

If it doesn't say you can, then you can't.

[Ron]

Spring seat ride height
location may be altered from stock. Spacers,
including threaded units with adjustable spring seats,
may be used with coil springs.

That right there covers the use of my spring perches on both the car side and the control arm side. It serves no ther purpose. Welding is a non issue how would you make them stay on? Trust me I will post pictures if it will make is any more clear. What I have done is very crude to say the least.

The sway bar is a non issue. I will stop work on the adjustable one. I have read the rules so many times that I thought that the bar could not enter the car but if you feel the control is part I will conceed that point. I will just put it in the trunk so that we can still due quick tunning, but not from the seat. The only reason I have all that stuff is that it was givin to me nad I thought it would be fun to try.

If grinding off a few thousandths off a big old spindle is cheating than I will fix that by taking the plasma cutter to the strut and modify it. I'm sure none of you have has ever filed anything to make it fit.

Greg, Doc, Andy how has what I have done been cheating. I read the rules at least once a month. I share what I have done so that others can see it because we are on the honor system. I'll even post our engine dyno sheets so everyone sees that we are not making stupid power. Ask David Lera from Flordia, he and I have had great battles over the years. At Roebling Road the car is fantastic, the gearing of the car and the flowing flat nature of the track suits the car. Places like Road Atlanta we suck. to many stops and starts with hills everywhere does not suit a 2650 pound car. We keep going back trying different things however.
I have spent a lot of time making this car work, not that much money ( hell the front sway bar set up was $250.00 total) and I take offense that I am accused of being illegal. If you see our new car next year at the track come by and I will give you a tour of every aspect of the car, top to bottom. When I say I have no secrets I mean it.

Post update I will mount the rear sway bar contol under the trunk!

[trueblue]

Always remember:

If it doesn't say you can, then you can't.
[/b]


Silly me! I always get that backwards! :D

[Andy Bettencourt]

Ron,

I think the beef is that a guy comes on and asks for help/ideas/suggestions - and a few of the items you posted are not legal by the GCR. You can run your program how you want but suggesting items that don't jive with the rules of our class is what prompts the posts.

Be fast and be safe.

[Ron]

Andy, please let me know what you think I have done is illegal?

[Andy Bettencourt]

Andy, please let me know what you think I have done is illegal?

[/b]

Adjustable upper spring perches welded directly to the K member.
Adjustment welded to the lower control arm.
Machining the front spindles so the shocks will fit
And the consideration for a cocpit adjustable rear bar was even a thought?

I see no provision for these changes in the GCR. YMMV.

[Ron]

I'll post the rules again and please discuss how what we did illegal, stating what and how I broke a rule. Please don't hide behind the IIDSYCDIYC or what ever. Sometimes you must interpret rules. I'm really not trying to twist them to fit my needs. I read these rules below and thats how we came up with what I did for the adjustable spring seats.

Spring seat ride height
location may be altered from stock. Spacers,
including threaded units with adjustable spring seats,
may be used with coil springs.

It says I can do it. It makes no specific mention of how to mount it. In fact I beleive the old rules said something about them or coil overs not being welded but it looks as though that verbage was dropped. The rules do state that there shall be no reinforcement of any suspension component. That was not my intent or do I beleive we have accomplished that in any of our changes. I still don't get how you can veiw what I have done as illegal.

What is a little confusing is that in one section of the rules it says we can cange the spring seat ride height location and another part of the rule states that they must be installed in the original location using the the original system of attachment. And then again in the same rule it states that spacers including threaded units with adjustable spring seats my be used with coil springs. Is this what has you questioning what I have done.

And as for the grinding of the spindles I will stand firm on that in that the small amount of material removed is insignificant and should be a nonissue. We can agree to disagree on that one.

And I stated that I have changed the rear sway bar to meet the rules, I missed that one.

[Greg Amy]

Sometimes you must interpret rules.[/b]

Hoo, boy. I'm sitting this one out.

GregA, RETIRED rules nerd.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I'll post the rules again and please discuss how what we did illegal, stating what and how I broke a rule. Please don't hide behind the IIDSYCDIYC or what ever. Sometimes you must interpret rules. I'm really not trying to twist them to fit my needs. I read these rules below and thats how we came up with what I did for the adjustable spring seats.

Spring seat ride height
location may be altered from stock. Spacers,
including threaded units with adjustable spring seats,
may be used with coil springs.

It says I can do it. It makes no specific mention of how to mount it. In fact I beleive the old rules said something about them or coil overs not being welded but it looks as though that verbage was dropped. The rules do state that there shall be no reinforcement of any suspension component. That was not my intent or do I beleive we have accomplished that in any of our changes. I still don't get how you can veiw what I have done as illegal.

What is a little confusing is that in one section of the rules it says we can cange the spring seat ride height location and another part of the rule states that they must be installed in the original location using the the original system of attachment. And then again in the same rule it states that spacers including threaded units with adjustable spring seats my be used with coil springs. Is this what has you questioning what I have done.

And as for the grinding of the spindles I will stand firm on that in that the small amount of material removed is insignificant and should be a nonissue. We can agree to disagree on that one.

And I stated that I have changed the rear sway bar to meet the rules, I missed that one. [/b]

Ron,

I don't want to get into a pissing match. IIDSYCTYC is nothing to hide behind. It's part of the rules:

"<span style="color:#231f20">Other than those specifically allowed by these rules, no component or part normally found on a stock example of a given vehicle may be disabled, altered, or removed for the purpose of obtaining any competitive advantage."</span>

And this info is worth what you paid for it - nothing. It&#39;s MY interpretation.

</span></span>

[Ron]

I&#39;m not changing the K-member or the control arm. I&#39;m modifying the spring seat, that&#39;s it.
Read the rule and see they do talk about the spring seat. How would you mount an adjustable spring seat? The rules say I can do it, how else can you read this? If I completly rebuilt the K member to fit the spring than yes, but all we touched was the original seat!

That is what I mean by interpret the rules. It&#39;s like a brake duct, there is no description of how it should only cool the rotor or the caliper, or how you can attach the brake duct. One must read into the rule to realize that the duct is going somewhere on the brakes and the rest is left up to the builder. Does it then mean I can&#39;t use a tie wrap to clamp it to the car because it does not say.

And you can change the LCA, change bushing material and even spot weld them in. I realize that that is different than the spring seat but you see the point that ther is some degree of modification there. I&#39;m not using that rule to wend on my spring seat it&#39;s just that there is some expectation of a change.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I&#39;m not changing the K-member or the control arm. I&#39;m modifying the spring seat, that&#39;s it.
Read the rule and see they do talk about the spring seat. How would you mount an adjustable spring seat? The rules say I can do it, how else can you read this? If I completly rebuilt the K member to fit the spring than yes, but all we touched was the original seat!

That is what I mean by interpret the rules. It&#39;s like a brake duct, there is no description of how it should only cool the rotor or the caliper, or how you can attach the brake duct. One must read into the rule to realize that the duct is going somewhere on the brakes and the rest is left up to the builder. Does it then mean I can&#39;t use a tie wrap to clamp it to the car because it does not say.

And you can change the LCA, change bushing material and even spot weld them in. I realize that that is different than the spring seat but you see the point that ther is some degree of modification there. I&#39;m not using that rule to wend on my spring seat it&#39;s just that there is some expectation of a change. [/b]

Ron,

If you weld to the K-member or LCA, you are altering it. Alternate methods of attachement are not called out for this allowance...and SPECIFICALLY called out as illegal in the quoted part of the GCR I bolded.

You are right about the LCA and bushings - all called out as legal by the GCR and Fast Tracks. Before the clarification, it was NOT legal to spot weld alternate bushing material in place. Hence the expense of some of the designs out there.

Brake ducts can be ADDED. It&#39;s different than REPLACED. You have to read each word to understand what you can do. When something is allowed to be replaced, it doesn&#39;t then give you any freedom to get something done - it allows you to remove, and replace in the same manner.

And I would never say you were cheating. A cheater is someone who knowingly does something they know is illegal. You have an interpretation of the rules, and so do I. These rules are written in such a way as to sound like this: You can&#39;t do ANYTHING unless it says you can. Some people read it like this: I can do ANYTHING unless it tells me I can&#39;t. And that ain&#39;t the way the SCCA works...maybe NASCAR, but not the SCCA.

[lateapex911]

Ron, the rules alow the spring seat height to be changed, and allows the use of adjustable collars to do so. However, it&#39;s not "Hiding" behind the IISYCTYC basis of the rules to say that the welding of them is clearly not kosher.

The rules draw lines in the sand. Sometimes those lines are arbitrary, or seem arbitrary to those reading them.

To you, the welding is insignificant, but the rules have to have a finite limit, and in this case, it doesn&#39;t allow for any means of attachment. Essentially, what you have done may, or may not reinforce the part it has been welded to. By not permitting the welding, the need to determine the effect is eliminated.

I think if you ask any number of people familiar with the rule book and it&#39;s basic premis, you&#39;ll find that nobody would see the welds as appropriate.

That&#39;s not to say I would protest you for them, or that anyone would either, but by the rules, I feel strongly they would fail a protest.

The same thing is true about the machining operation. The rule doesn&#39;t say, "No machining unless you think it&#39;s not too much"....That sounds sarcastic, but you can see that the rules need to be clear whenever they can. So again, by allowing no modifications, the need to determine the effect is eliminated.

Now, I&#39;ve seen guys lose protests for silly stuff, and I felt bad that somebody would actually protest them over it. Protests like those are not about the car though...they&#39;re usually about somethig bigger, like a championship. Still, when i see protests like that (protests over non performance enhancing things, like a turn signal/marker lens that is MIA, or whatever) I lose all respect for the protester.

Of course, we all decide which side of the rules we fall, and I generally try to read the rule and exploit what the rule allows, using the words the rulesmakers chose. In each case I can defend my actions, but until it goes to appeal, I&#39;ll never really know if my reading is truly accurate. But when it comes to black and white things, which I feel this is, I try to errr on the side of caution. I keep spare marker lenses...;)

[lateapex911]

I&#39;m not changing the K-member or the control arm. I&#39;m modifying the spring seat, that&#39;s it.
Read the rule and see they do talk about the spring seat. How would you mount an adjustable spring seat? The rules say I can do it, how else can you read this? If I completly rebuilt the K member to fit the spring than yes, but all we touched was the original seat!
[/b]

Ron, here you say you&#39;re not changing the K member, but then you say all you touched was the original seat. Ist the seat part of the K member? Does the K member come from the factory with the mods you preformed? No, it doesn&#39;t. So in some way you have changed it. On my car, the adjustable seat is captured, both front and rear, and isn&#39;t attached in anyway.



That is what I mean by interpret the rules. It&#39;s like a brake duct, there is no description of how it should only cool the rotor or the caliper, or how you can attach the brake duct. One must read into the rule to realize that the duct is going somewhere on the brakes and the rest is left up to the builder. Does it then mean I can&#39;t use a tie wrap to clamp it to the car because it does not say.
[/b]

When mounting brake ducts to the brake assembly, I mounted my attachment tabs to the strut, as the stut has been called out as free in the rulebook.



And you can change the LCA, change bushing material and even spot weld them in. I realize that that is different than the spring seat but you see the point that ther is some degree of modification there. I&#39;m not using that rule to wend on my spring seat it&#39;s just that there is some expectation of a change.
[/b]

Right, and that allowable change has been called out and defined. It says "You can", and by "this much".


Again, I&#39;m not trying to be a jerk about this, but when we race we need to understand the premise that we race under....your mods might not be performance enhancing in anyway, but the rulebook is clear on them, I think. I certainly don&#39;t think that you&#39;ve chosen to cross the line and are looking for advantages where there aren&#39;t any, and I doubt I&#39;d ever even consider a protest over such issues, but it&#39;s still important for you to know what is and what isn&#39;t allowable. Knowledge is power, LOL
Also, I&#39;d hate for you to have somebody seek some cheap points with a protest, and you thinking you&#39;re fine. Of course, that&#39;s hopefully hypothetical, and it will never happen.

[trueblue]

I am a little confused. I can put adjustable spring seats in but I can&#39;t alter anything? How are you expected to install them? If you install adjustable perches on any car that did not come with them from the factory you have just modified the car.

If you look at the install I think any semi educated person would agree that the adjustable perches in no way enhance the performance of the K-Member or the LCA.

[Ron]

Then just tell mw how I am allowed to use an adjustable spring perch but not weld it in. With that another mustang is running 2 1/2 in springs instead of 5 inch. I think the rules allow that but how am I to make new seats. Please rules nerds tell me how to do it and not break the rules. Oh, i would like to use adjustable perches. It must be legal but how?

The rule says " seat may be altered from stock" what does that mean? when I spoke of welding the seat that is what rule I looked at. I changed the seat by welding in an adjustable perch. Did I not follow the letter of the rule. Why is welding them in the problem If I cut the seat in some way would that be illegal? what does alter mean to you, painted?

[Andy Bettencourt]

I am a little confused. I can put adjustable spring seats in but I can&#39;t alter anything? How are you expected to install them? If you install adjustable perches on any car that did not come with them from the factory you have just modified the car.

If you look at the install I think any semi educated person would agree that the adjustable perches in no way enhance the performance of the K-Member or the LCA.

[/b]
Maybe we are talking about the same thing here. On most strut cars, you have a threaded shock body with an adjustable spring pearch. The lower pearch spins and raises and lowers the ride height. Because the units are all called out in the GCR as legal to replace, you can do so. You can NOT, change mounting points or method of attachment. When it is said that the adjustable pearch is welded to the K-member, if that is different than stock, it is simply not legal. To go one step further as Jake eluded to, how much welding would be acceptable until someone considered it &#39;strengthening&#39; of some other part? Just an example...

Maybe a picture of what we are talking about is in order. I must be missing the need to weld here...

[Ron]

Let me track down my camera and I&#39;ll get on that.

[lateapex911]

Remeber, the spring seat HEIGHT is free...if you use adjustable collars. It doesn&#39;t allow modifications to the stock part. On my car the rears are 5", and the adjustable collar is merely loose, but held captive when the car is loaded. If it&#39;s a concern that the car will become unloaded, and the spring/collar assembely will shift, it is easy to limit suspension travel. Some guys use the shocks for that purpose, as shocks are essentially free.

[billf]

Andy, and others....

I might be able to shed a little light on the problem, having raced one of these ODD configurations for a few years.

Mustangs of the III variety use a strut suspension...not the typical McPherson variety. The strut is actually only the shock unit, with the spring separate. The spring resides on the lower arm, and is resisted by a separate section of the "K" member...(a sub frame) that has upper spring mounts. In service the spring actually just sits there, held by the cups of the upper and lower mounts.

This is another case of a vehicle which varies in design such that it cannot use products that are actually written for in the rules...Koni shocks are not made for this car, and in reality, cannot be modified to fit. Other hardware such as the adjustable springs perches that are made for McPherson style struts, are not able to be used here.

Good racing,

Bill :024:

[dick elliott]

Thank you Billf!!! At last someone posted that has seen the under side of a Mustang. You rule book pros really should "look before you leap" don&#39;t you think.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Yes Bill, thanks.

Dick - not a big leap from machining spindles and cockpit adjustable sway bars to assume we are talking about someting fishy here. A response like Bill&#39;s would have been great a day ago.

I will still wait for the picture to help us all understand. I found this one on the web.

http://www.maximummotorsports.com/store/images/front_susp/COP-2.jpg


So why aren&#39;t we using &#39;regular&#39; coilover conversions? A quick trip through the Interweb finds stuff like this:

http://www.maximummotorsports.com/

Bolt on front and rear coliover kits for Koni&#39;s - no mods required to anything no specifically mentioned in the GCR. They sell the shocks - will revalve them for you and they sell the appropriate upper camber/caster plates as well.

[dick elliott]

Doesn&#39;t the rule book require the spring to be in stock location reguardless of diameter?

[lateapex911]

Thank you Billf!!! At last someone posted that has seen the under side of a Mustang. You rule book pros really should "look before you leap" don&#39;t you think.
[/b]


I&#39;ll await pictures for final judgement, but I really don&#39;t think there&#39;s been any "leaping" here.

The rulebook doesn&#39;t say, "Do this in this certain way, unless your choice of car makes it a pain in the ass, or impossible, in which case you can do something close that you think is OK", does it? If there is no way to capture the adjusters that is satisfactoy to Ron, then he must choose to modify the part by welding to it, come up with anohter solution such as shims or spacers, or go without.

Sometimes certain cars can&#39;t use the same bits and parts that other cars can. My car doesn&#39;t get to have any rear camber, for example, that others dial in to their hearts content. Thats one of the things I needed to consider when i made my choice.

And I think I understand that the front suspension uses springs that are NOT concentric with the strut/damper, correct? In that case, I think Andys example is a non starter, if I understand things correctly.

[Andy Bettencourt]

It&#39;s grey...and needs to be clarified. Let&#39;s open this baby up again when we see the pics.

[mustanghammer]

Andy, and others....

I might be able to shed a little light on the problem, having raced one of these ODD configurations for a few years.

Mustangs of the III variety use a strut suspension...not the typical McPherson variety. The strut is actually only the shock unit, with the spring separate. The spring resides on the lower arm, and is resisted by a separate section of the "K" member...(a sub frame) that has upper spring mounts. In service the spring actually just sits there, held by the cups of the upper and lower mounts.

This is another case of a vehicle which varies in design such that it cannot use products that are actually written for in the rules...Koni shocks are not made for this car, and in reality, cannot be modified to fit. Other hardware such as the adjustable springs perches that are made for McPherson style struts, are not able to be used here.

Good racing,

Bill :024:
[/b]

What do you mean .....Koni shocks are not made for this car......? They are made for the V8 Mustangs in multiple flavors and can be custom vlaved. You can also run rod end circle track shock on a mustang and stay well within the IT rules. All you do is add a stud to a double shear UB Machine shock mount and run the stud through the factory shock mount on the body.

For what it is worth I ran adjustable spring spacers on my Solo II FOX Mustang for years. They were not welded or tacked into place in the front or rear. Unlike Ron I mounted the rear adjustable spacer on top of the spring not on the arm because I didn&#39;t want to add the weight to the arm. Anyway I never had an issue when them coming out.

Now, that said I think you should be able to tack them in place because it would make them easier to adjust I would request a clarification and get this added to the book.

[trueblue]

Yes Bill, thanks.

Dick - not a big leap from machining spindles and cockpit adjustable sway bars to assume we are talking about someting fishy here. A response like Bill&#39;s would have been great a day ago.

I will still wait for the picture to help us all understand. I found this one on the web.

http://www.maximummotorsports.com/store/images/front_susp/COP-2.jpg
So why aren&#39;t we using &#39;regular&#39; coilover conversions? A quick trip through the Interweb finds stuff like this:

http://www.maximummotorsports.com/

Bolt on front and rear coliover kits for Koni&#39;s - no mods required to anything no specifically mentioned in the GCR. They sell the shocks - will revalve them for you and they sell the appropriate upper camber/caster plates as well.
[/b]

We cannot use these because of the rule that states the shocks must stay in the stock location. I wish we could use them! If we did I believe it would be called cheating.

I will take some pictures of my set up tomorrow. I only have adjustable perches on the rear at this time.

[trueblue]

What do you mean .....Koni shocks are not made for this car......? They are made for the V8 Mustangs in multiple flavors and can be custom vlaved. You can also run rod end circle track shock on a mustang and stay well within the IT rules. All you do is add a stud to a double shear UB Machine shock mount and run the stud through the factory shock mount on the body.

For what it is worth I ran adjustable spring spacers on my Solo II FOX Mustang for years. They were not welded or tacked into place in the front or rear. Unlike Ron I mounted the rear adjustable spacer on top of the spring not on the arm because I didn&#39;t want to add the weight to the arm. Anyway I never had an issue when them coming out.

Now, that said I think you should be able to tack them in place because it would make them easier to adjust I would request a clarification and get this added to the book.
[/b]

Sure, there are V8 shocks available but it requires slight grinding on the spindles for them to fit. The early V8 cars face this same issue. If you have an early V8 you must shave the spindle in order to install the shocks that are made now ~or~ install the newer V8 spindles which is what everyone does outside of the SCCA to include circle track racers. Bottom line is if you want competitive performance shocks for the Mustang you will need to remove a small amount of material to install them. If Ron had not said anything No One would have known any better.

I agree. I think the rules need to clarify.

[joeg]

[quote]
We cannot use these because of the rule that states the shocks must stay in the stock location. I wish we could use them! If we did I believe it would be called cheating.

Actually you probably can use them. Fab a base that fits in the OEM spring cup onto which fits the collar. If everything is thought out, it works. If you are woried about the "sturdiness" of the adjustable collar, it can be slipped over a piece of very stout steel tubing or made from scratch on a lathe from stout steel tubing.

[dick elliott]

We cannot use these because of the rule that states the shocks must stay in the stock location. I wish we could use them! If we did I believe it would be called cheating.

I will take some pictures of my set up tomorrow. I only have adjustable perches on the rear at this time.
[/b]
Doesn,t the rule book also say the spring must stay in the stock location?

[trueblue]

Doesn,t the rule book also say the spring must stay in the stock location?
[/b]

Typo! Yes, I meant springs. I typed this out after traveling for 18hrs. My fingers were faster than my brain. Sorry for the confusion.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I wonder what the E36 BMW guys do for the rear. They have a similar set-up.

Check this picture: http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9ibyiFPxUxF.U0B...s/RearSus-4.jpg (http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9ibyiFPxUxF.U0Bfg2jzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN 0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=12jauo6j5/EXP=1162745551/**http%3a//www.eecis.udel.edu/%7exuan/auto/DIY-images/RearSus-4.jpg)

This may very well be a situation where the rules don&#39;t allow this type of suspension the leway others have.

[dj10]

I wonder what the E36 BMW guys do for the rear. They have a similar set-up.

Check this picture: http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9ibyiFPxUxF.U0B...s/RearSus-4.jpg (http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9ibyiFPxUxF.U0Bfg2jzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN 0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=12jauo6j5/EXP=1162745551/**http%3a//www.eecis.udel.edu/%7exuan/auto/DIY-images/RearSus-4.jpg)

This may very well be a situation where the rules don&#39;t allow this type of suspension the leway others have. [/b]



The Bmw guys change the springs according to the height & diameter they need and use a adjustable spring seat which is no way do we, change the spring position or modified any OEM part to do so. We do not grind or weld anything. If you have to, it would be illegal.

Dan

[mustanghammer]

Sure, there are V8 shocks available but it requires slight grinding on the spindles for them to fit. The early V8 cars face this same issue. If you have an early V8 you must shave the spindle in order to install the shocks that are made now ~or~ install the newer V8 spindles which is what everyone does outside of the SCCA to include circle track racers. Bottom line is if you want competitive performance shocks for the Mustang you will need to remove a small amount of material to install them. If Ron had not said anything No One would have known any better.

I agree. I think the rules need to clarify.
[/b]

I was talking about the rear shocks and not the front struts.

I seem to remember needing a spacer to fit a Koni strut on my 85 GT spindle. This went away when I updated to an 88 5.0 spindle. I guess I wasn&#39;t aware of difference between the 4cyl cars and the v8&#39;s.

I&#39;m sure this has been researched but what about struts specific to the SVO or the 83-84 4cyl turbo GT?

For what is worth the hot ticket is a FOX strut on an SN95 car. Apparently you can lower the car more. An A Sedan deal.

[trueblue]

I was talking about the rear shocks and not the front struts.

I seem to remember needing a spacer to fit a Koni strut on my 85 GT spindle. This went away when I updated to an 88 5.0 spindle. I guess I wasn&#39;t aware of difference between the 4cyl cars and the v8&#39;s.

I&#39;m sure this has been researched but what about struts specific to the SVO or the 83-84 4cyl turbo GT?

For what is worth the hot ticket is a FOX strut on an SN95 car. Apparently you can lower the car more. An A Sedan deal.
[/b]

A spacer was needed several years ago. The majority of the cars then had the thicker spindle. The opposite is true now.

The SVO is thinner the old turbo would have the same issue we have today.

We cannot use a SN95 part. Would be great if we could.

I will get a picture up tomorrow of my set up. Didn&#39;t have time today.

[trueblue]

Here is a picture of the kit I installed on my LCA. Here is a slightly blurred picture of the installed adjustable perch. It adjust from the botom with a 1/2" ratchet. I have this one adjusted all the way down.

[lateapex911]

James, were the original parts drilled to install those?

[tom_sprecher]

The actual method of attachment in this case and in many others is not specified in the GCR and would have to be open as as long as it is not blantantly performing another function, a quality to be determined by a tech inspector. I think you have to use your best judgement here. Otherwise, please give me the section that covers location and attachment of these allowed items.

1. Aftermarket ignition system - does it have to fit inside the distributor like the stock system did?
2. Exhaust system - does it have to mount to the body in the stock locations?
3. Oil catch can - where and how is this mounted since there was no OEM unit?
4. Engine stay rod - same thing.
5. Alternate fan - same thing.
6. Brake proportioning valve in the driver&#39;s compartment - did I miss that when stripping my shell?
7. What about wheels with a different offset that stock? I could not find that within the limitations.
8. Does the two-way radio have to mount in the same location and method the OEM radio did?
9. Hood pins - where and how?
10. Dead pedal - same.
11. Fuel cell - do I have to use the straps that held the OEM tank in?

Without getting anal you would have to allow some leeway in the location and method of attachment for these items and probably some others I missed. Or maybe I&#39;m missing something.

[billf]

Hi all...here I am again.

V8 engined cars are quite different. The 4 cyl cars had the smallest brakes in the series on unique struts (which determine the size of the brakes), and the Turbo was engineered around the V8 configuration...even with tubular lower control arms which set it apart from any other mustang..

These parts, although on "Mustangs" are not the same Mustangs that are raced in ITB. Many performance parts are built for V8s, but since the struts, brakes and calipers are different, they are not able to be fitted onto the 4 cyl model. Shocks can be modified to fit the 4 cyl strut, but is is difficult... one must cut original shock welds, build new ears, and re weld the parts together. Reengineering them, so to speak.

Conversions for "spring shock units" for this car convert the shocks to fit adjustable collars and spring perches. Not legal in IT since it moves the location of the spring. Using the spring and collars in the original spring location is nearly impossible since the springs are not long enough to accomodate the shock. attachment is another issue, here.

Incidentally, the springs on a mustang are VERY LARGE diameter since they have so much spring pressure loss due to their location mid way on the lower arm. When (if legal) the spring is moved to the shock location, a large savings of weight can be had, since the springs are SOO much smaller.

Good racing.

Bill :024:

[trueblue]

James, were the original parts drilled to install those?
[/b]

Yes. I had to drill two holes for the perch.

[Ron]

I found my camera so let me get at it. I had a big party for my wife (40th Bday) so my entire weekend was lost. On the plus side it should give me some more "free" time to work on the new car.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I found my camera so let me get at it. I had a big party for my wife (40th Bday) so my entire weekend was lost. On the plus side it should give me some more "free" time to work on the new car. [/b]

I call that the "Bank of Goodwill" - many deposits in the offseason - and many withdrawls during the year!!!

[Ron]

OK one of my 3 daughters used the camera during the party and it has been put! Not put away just put some where so give me some time.

[trueblue]

"put" Now that amused me.

I could take pictures of my front springs but I do not have any adjustable perches there.......yet.

[Ron]

All right pictures taken, Now I don&#39;t know how to post them

[trueblue]

All right pictures taken, Now I don&#39;t know how to post them
[/b]

The pictures will be in a file on your computer somewhere (my pictures?)

When you post a reply, scroll down to "file attachments" Click browse. Find the pictures you want to post and click "add this attachment"

[Ron]

I followed your instructons

[trueblue]

Here are the photo&#39;s

[Ron]

Thanks Jim for posting the pictures. I hope everyone understands that the shocks and spings on both the front and the back are independent of each other. There is no magic to what we did, nothing is stronger by the welding in a performance gain in any way.

[dickita15]

so do i understand right, you basicly cut off the old spring perch and weld the new one in the same location.

[Ron]

Even easier than that. The spring perch that I bought was welded right on to the existing perch area. The only cutting was on the pices that were purchased, we trimmed the welded side down about 2 inches as it was to long.

[tderonne]

I&#39;m going to take a stab at this.

The spring spacer rule is:

Spacers, including threaded units with adjustable spring seats, may be used with coil springs.

In other words, the door is open to add any spring spacer, with any attachment method.

The bushing rule comes to mind. Any bushing material is allowed. Before we were specifically allowed to tack weld them to the control arm, the control arms had to remain untouched. All the rule allowed was a different material. Same could be said about the spring, we get any spring, so long as it&#39;s in the same place etc. The spacer allowance is an additional allowance. There was no such additional allowance for the bushings before.

A decent case for welding in spacers? Did I make sense?

[trueblue]

Makes sense to me. Of course I am the guy that needs to install the things. All I know is that what we are doing offers no additional structural support.

[trueblue]

Ok. Everything is on the table as far as I can see. What is the general consensus to the legality of our adjustable perches?

[trueblue]

Where did everybody go? :blink:

[Eagle7]

Where did everybody go? :blink:
[/b]
To the AARC?

[trueblue]

To the AARC?
[/b]


Wish I could be there

[trueblue]

Beep Beep Beep ____________________________________________ flat line.

I guess this subject is dead? Would have liked some more thoughts on this before I install the front adjustable perches.

[Rabbit07]

You can use the same pieces that Ron used, but put the adjuster in the lower arm pocket and don&#39;t weld it. If you grind down the edges, it will fit nicely in the arm and pivot a bit as the arm travels. I have done this on a few Mustangs. If I can get a photo of my car I&#39;ll post it. On the rears you can use a similar adjuster and just have it lay over the rear arm not welded to it. Not that I think that what Ron did was wrong, but the way my is done prevents others from saying that I am cheating.

[lateapex911]

Sorry I missed the updates here when i was at the ARRC. Chris is right, that&#39;s how I did it on my car. The adjuster is loose, but is held under tension. IF it is a concern that it could come out at full droop, then a limiter on the shocks will fix that.

[trueblue]

You can use the same pieces that Ron used, but put the adjuster in the lower arm pocket and don&#39;t weld it. If you grind down the edges, it will fit nicely in the arm and pivot a bit as the arm travels. I have done this on a few Mustangs. If I can get a photo of my car I&#39;ll post it. On the rears you can use a similar adjuster and just have it lay over the rear arm not welded to it. Not that I think that what Ron did was wrong, but the way my is done prevents others from saying that I am cheating.
[/b]

I would like to see a picture of this. What are you grinding on? It has been said earlier that grinding on anything is cheating. Are you talking about grinding on the adjuster?

Who can I take my car to that has an official say as to the legality of these mods?

[Rabbit07]

Yes, the grinding is done on the adjuster.

I just got the car out of storage and have it at work. When I get it up on a hoist I&#39;ll take some photos and post them.

[Rabbit07]

Here are some pics:[attachmentid=707][attachmentid=708][attachmentid=709]

These are 5" springs on this car

[manny]

just one question for all of you mustang guys, what spring rates are you useing in the front and rears?

[trueblue]

These are 5" springs on this car
[/b]

It appears that you would not be able to adjust these at the track very easily if you wanted to. I agree that there is no way these could be deemed illegal.

[Rabbit07]

Adjusting the rears is very easy. If you need to effect a handling change you can accomplish that by either; adjusting the rear height, adjusting the panhard bar, or changing out the rear bar. I have seen very little need to adjust the front once you have your base ride height.

There are 750&#39;s upfront and 275&#39;s in the rear.

[Ron]

We run 950 fronts. 400 rears no rear sway bar and an average bar on the front.

[trueblue]

just one question for all of you mustang guys, what spring rates are you useing in the front and rears?
[/b]

The rates will vary greatly depending on your set up.

The bushings in the rear create a natural bind which increases the spring rate with compression. This forces you to use a lower spring rate in the rear. If you replaced the bushings with bearings you would use a higher spring rate.

I run 750 front 250 rear. A large front sway-bar and no rear swaybar. I wish it was a little firmer up front.

[manny]

thanks guys. at the present time i&#39;m running 900 fronts and 325 rears. heavy bars front and back . the reason for asking is because i feel i have some under steer issues.

[Rabbit07]

Are you still using the stock rear suspension parts? The best thing for Mustangs is to upgrade to the Steeda 5-Link or equivalent. To the letter of the rule, you must leave the upper arms in place. Bushing material is open, so some soft foam will render them useless. The traction bars take their place and all is in harmony :D

From there I would reccomend using lower spring rate up front and see what happens. If your ride height is too low you end up with the front roll center too low which makes things worse.

[trueblue]

I have stock suspension with the exception of a pan-hard bar. The 5 link is on the list. It&#39;s a money thing.

[13GT3]

What length are the springs? My first Mustang had 10" front and rear.

[billf]

A question to any one who has "deactivated" the rear upper arms:

Without the binding of the rear upperarm bushings, what spring rates did you get to use front and back?

Especially, the back?

Bill (benchracer)f :024:

[Rabbit07]

The springs on my car are 9" . My car has the five link rear and I run 750&#39;s and 275&#39;s