WELDED CONTROL ARMS ???? - Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 7 Old 09-27-2008, 11:33 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
cesna150's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (29)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: jackson mi
Posts: 1,192
WELDED CONTROL ARMS ????

i was wondering what are the benefits of aftermarket upper and lower control arms as opposed to modified stockers. was thinking of boxing in with plates and machining some solid aluminum bushings to replace the worn out rubber ones. has any one done this with any success? i know it would be easier to just buy new ones but my new house and wife say otherwise. i was thinking its the stiffness that creates the improvement or do they change the pinion angle?


1993 notch 302 and c4
quicktime turbo system
9.986 @ 136.84
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"393 stroker and pt88 inthe works"
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
cesna150 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 7 Old 09-27-2008, 10:13 PM
Registered User
 
Bronz's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 155
Yup, I boxed my stock control arms because I too am on a tight budget. My current set up is not real fast, (high 11s on motor with 1.6 60ft times, a bit faster on spray). 60ft times dropped a bit when I did it but I suspect that it was due to the addition of poly bushings, rather than the boxing which I did at the same time. AFAIK boxing is a preventative measure, rather than a performance related one. Boxing stock arms does not change the pinion angle. I bought a set of aftermarket ones recently and I actually just put them in tonight. The aftermarket ones were about a quarter inch different from bolt to bolt then the stockers. I assume this may change the pinion angle a bit, but this car is not fast enough to be concerned about it. The aftermarket stuff seemed to weigh about the same as the boxed stockers.

So all in all boxing is good for strength, but does nothing for ET (@ least not much). However if you are going solid or poly, then ET may change. The setup I put in tonight has solid lowers and poly uppers and I doubt it will make a big difference.

Also as a side note, and I can’t tell you this form my personal experience, but I was told that if you are going solid, go with solids on either the uppers or the lowers, but not both. I always doubt the reliability of hearsay (even thou I heard this from a guy making 5.50 8th mile passes in a street car!) so if you are planning on going solid all the way around, I’d do some research and get the real scoop.

Bronz is offline  
post #3 of 7 Old 09-27-2008, 11:14 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
cesna150's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (29)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: jackson mi
Posts: 1,192
ive never heard about the poly solid issue. i wonder if this was because of road noise or saftey ? did you check your pinion angle before and after the swap?

1993 notch 302 and c4
quicktime turbo system
9.986 @ 136.84
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"393 stroker and pt88 inthe works"
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
cesna150 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 7 Old 09-28-2008, 12:07 AM
Registered User
 
Bronz's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 155
Honestly, I’ve never heard that either before I was told it at the track Tuesday. Maybe it has something to do with binding, or maybe it’s just total BS… I really don’t know and since it didn’t apply to me, I kinda disregarded it. I only passed it along because maybe it’s true, and when you get a warning like that, it’s probably better to do the research and be positive. But, unfortunately I can’t really say much about it. I’ll ask the guy about it on Tuesday. As for my pinion angle, I checked it w/ the good ‘ole calibrated eye, which basically means it was not too funky before or after. I did not measure because the stuff I put in was not adjustable, so I sorta figured I was stuck with whatever it was gonna be regardless of what it measured. Also like I said, it looked ok and the car is not really fast enough to worry about a degree or two of pinion angle. If I was running low 10s, then I’d care a whole lot more.
Bronz is offline  
post #5 of 7 Old 09-28-2008, 12:18 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
cesna150's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (29)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: jackson mi
Posts: 1,192
cool thanks

1993 notch 302 and c4
quicktime turbo system
9.986 @ 136.84
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"393 stroker and pt88 inthe works"
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
cesna150 is offline  
post #6 of 7 Old 09-28-2008, 09:12 AM
Registered User
 
KEVIN$'s Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (8)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Lincoln NE
Posts: 3,891
Because the UCA's are angled inward you do not want to use solid aluminum bushings on the UCA's. This will create a mechanical bind and the suspension will bind up. You will need poly/rubber/spherical bushing in these. The LCA's will be fine, tho.

KS


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Kevin Slaby
2002 GT 2V 902hp/820tq through the muffs.
http://baselinesuspensions.com/Projects/balrog.htm
KEVIN$ is offline  
post #7 of 7 Old 10-04-2008, 08:18 AM
Registered User
 
Mattstang65's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (7)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Williamstown, WV
Posts: 1,666
Yeah, don't confuse the term "solid" bushings with the "spherical" bushings. Both eliminate "deflection", but the sphericals still allow articulation and don't bind up. I run sphericals on both ends of the uppers and lowers, you can tell/feel a difference. Be sure your upper and lower torque boxes are in good shape and I'd suggest reinforceing them. They are a weak link.

91 notch, 408W, 10.5 comp, Jay Allen cam, Crane linkbars, Scorpion rockers, vic jr intake/heads, Canton pan, Mac longtubes, C4, UPR adj. uppers/lowers, Strange struts/shocks, subframe connectors, wild rides 6pt, Team Z k-member/anti-roll bar, MSD ignition.
Mattstang65 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome