Downside to a torque arm - Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 13 Old 03-20-2009, 09:33 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SoCal
Posts: 150
Downside to a torque arm

I've been doing quite a bit of research (using the search button, too) around here as I'm new to the Mustang world. Coming from the F-body camp it's like learning a new language lol. My Camaro had mild suspension work and was a great street car that saw on-and-off HPDE events.
I picked up a no-option '92 SSP Notchback and want to ditch the current drag setup for a more Auto-X friendly combo.
I now have a better understanding of the Fox and camber, coilovers, different control arms, panhard, K-member etc. My question is, ultimately if there aren't too many downsides to a TA I'd like to aim in that direction. Other than a few people complaining about more cabin noise and a few others bending them at the strip are there any other problems? A few people have told me "you'll break stuff, keep the 4-link," but give no reason.

The car will be a once-a-week street car and see HPDE and AutoX stuff at least once a month. Probably see the strip and handful of times as well.

Thanks all!

Nice to meet you!

3cRider is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 13 Old 03-20-2009, 10:16 PM
MFE
Super Moderator
 
MFE's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (9)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 27,649
Remember who the short-bus riders are who told you to stick with the 4-link because you'll break stuff with the torque arm, and keep your distance, they're draining the intelligence out of the immediate area.

Downsides to the torque arm include a lot of weight, mostly unsprung, and some potential exhaust clearance issues to resolve. They also make it a little harder to do driveshaft and exhaust work, and with the wrong setup or technique they can wheelhop under braking. The setup is sensitive to pinion angle, and of course it requires a lateral location device like a panhard bar or watts link.

None of these alone or in combination outweighs the benefits, IMHO.

MFE is offline  
post #3 of 13 Old 03-21-2009, 10:52 AM
Registered User
 
Glenn's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Cocoa, Florida
Posts: 3,627
I've had the MM TA on my car for about 5 years now and I would never go back to the stock setup. Rear wheel traction is dramatically improved, ride is not compromised and the extra NVH is not an issue unless you want a luxury ride. In that case forget the Mustang anyway. For AX and OT the TA setup rocks.
Glenn is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 13 Old 03-21-2009, 01:18 PM
Registered User
 
BULLITT1992's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (12)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Ocean Springs, MS
Posts: 3,363
I don't have a TA but I think that it is a very good and time tested solution. The only real downside that I could think of is that if you are looking to develop a competitive car in Solo2 for Street Prepared or even Street Modified, the common Torque Arm setups from Griggs and MM aren't SCCA legal. Torque arms themselves are legal but the cannot be attached to the car using a cross member that attaches to the sub frame connectors.

2001 Mustang Bullitt #01992
BULLITT1992 is offline  
post #5 of 13 Old 03-21-2009, 01:55 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SoCal
Posts: 150
Thanks all for the responses, I had done quite a bit of searching and I was pretty sure there weren't many downsides to a TA. As for breaking stuff, the only area where I could even imagine there would be higher loads on the chassis would be the forward pivot that attaches to the cross-member brace/subframe connectors.

Thanks again, I think a TA is where I'll eventually end-up. As soon as the wrenches start flying I'll be sure to document the build in here.
3cRider is offline  
post #6 of 13 Old 03-21-2009, 02:33 PM
Registered User
 
BULLITT1992's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (12)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Ocean Springs, MS
Posts: 3,363
Good stuff. Let us know how everything works out.

2001 Mustang Bullitt #01992
BULLITT1992 is offline  
post #7 of 13 Old 03-23-2009, 05:27 AM
Registered User
 
cgrant26's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by BULLITT1992 View Post
I don't have a TA but I think that it is a very good and time tested solution. The only real downside that I could think of is that if you are looking to develop a competitive car in Solo2 for Street Prepared or even Street Modified, the common Torque Arm setups from Griggs and MM aren't SCCA legal. Torque arms themselves are legal but the cannot be attached to the car using a cross member that attaches to the sub frame connectors.
The Roush Bondurant cars may have the solution for that. Instead of tieing to the subframe connectors, the cross member attaches to the frame where the rocker panels bolt to. I'm not sure how the tech inspectors would treat that, but it's something to think about since that rail is not really part of the subframe. Either way, that silly rule needs to go away.
cgrant26 is offline  
post #8 of 13 Old 03-23-2009, 06:57 AM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
FWIW, i've been drag racing mine on ET Drags for some time and haven't had an issue. It's a nitrous car so it really takes the full hit off the line.

I think you'll be OK.
2k2GT is offline  
post #9 of 13 Old 03-23-2009, 08:18 PM
Registered User
 
BULLITT1992's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (12)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Ocean Springs, MS
Posts: 3,363
I also disagree with the SCCA rule. If I were going to install a TA, it would be one from MM. MM's attaches to the sfc's so its not solo2 legal.

2001 Mustang Bullitt #01992

Last edited by BULLITT1992; 03-23-2009 at 10:04 PM.
BULLITT1992 is offline  
post #10 of 13 Old 03-23-2009, 08:34 PM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
SCCA rules are awesome.

2k2GT is offline  
post #11 of 13 Old 04-03-2009, 11:12 AM
Registered User
 
kenbell89lx's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Formerly Mize Blown89lxForest Lake, MN
Posts: 319
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2k2GT View Post
FWIW, i've been drag racing mine on ET Drags for some time and haven't had an issue. It's a nitrous car so it really takes the full hit off the line.

I think you'll be OK.
Do you daily drive your car? how much traction improvement did you see? I am thinking about this system. Any idea on how much weight it adds?

Thanks.

1989 LX hatch, AD Performance 331 Stroker, AFR 185ported, Kennebell 2200, Flowzilla, Flowtech Custom Cam, 60 lb inj, 90 mm TB, TKO 600, GT-40 ported lower, 1 3/4 LT header etc..
kenbell89lx is offline  
post #12 of 13 Old 04-03-2009, 12:00 PM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
While I don't daily drive my car, it is by all means capable. I just choose to drive my Explorer for the comfort and convenience of having another vehicle to drive when working on the Mustang. Plus, I like a 4x4 I drive the car 2+ hours one way to autocross and 2+ back home. It rides great(for 30 and 35 series stiff walled tires) and still gets 22+mpg.

The corner exit traction was much improved and it seems to cover up the "####ty 5spd drag racer" skill I have. The improvement was certainly noticeable, I can't really compare 60ft times equally between no arm and with arm as I ran different tires before the arm.

As for weight, I have no clue. I'm sure MM or a search here could give you more accurate numbers than my guess.
2k2GT is offline  
post #13 of 13 Old 04-03-2009, 12:03 PM
Registered User
 
tigerdrvr's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Alamo, CA
Posts: 488
I'd say the benefits far, far outweigh any downsides, given what we are working with. The only thing that I've ever heard as a complaint was increase in throttle on push, but that has been in cars where the front end wasn't modified to keep pace with the rear...
tigerdrvr 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



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
available soon: x pipe and cat back for a fox with a torque arm pkstang Exhaust Parts 4 03-21-2009 10:01 AM
ARP head studs torque specs?? ProChargedStang8705 GT & SOHC 9 03-19-2009 07:58 PM
WTB: 10" Torque Converter for TH400 87Saleen209 Drivetrain Parts 0 03-17-2009 09:31 AM
Torque spec for sway bar? fastsvo Road Racing/Auto X 2 03-16-2009 01:18 PM
Rocker arm Noise how much is too Much? Video.. 91svtcoupe General Mustang Tech 3 03-16-2009 12:16 PM

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