Fox mustang shouldas... - Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 12 Old 03-01-2011, 08:46 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
5tang's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 15
Fox mustang shouldas...

Through searching the forums ive noticed that when it comes to "modestly upgrading" a stocker suspension, say for spirited driving or maybe an amateur event, there are many opinions on where to start. so, what are the 3 aspects of the fox mustang suspension that should have been "better" from the factory to improve overall handling/agressive driving? let the opinions and knowledge flow.

5tang is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 12 Old 03-01-2011, 09:09 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: At the apex, blocking your pass.
Posts: 2,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5tang View Post
Through searching the forums ive noticed that when it comes to "modestly upgrading" a stocker suspension, say for spirited driving or maybe an amateur event, there are many opinions on where to start.
Yep. This is one question -- where to start?

Quote:
so, what are the 3 aspects of the fox mustang suspension that should have been "better" from the factory to improve overall handling/agressive driving?
This is another question entirely.

The top three problems with the Fox's suspension are 1) Lack of chassis stiffness, 2) Lack of dynamic camber gain up front, and 3) poor rear suspension geometry.


-- Robert King
NASA AI #42, Texas
Instructor, NASA Texas Region
Instructor, TWS Perf. Driving School
gt40mkII is offline  
post #3 of 12 Old 03-01-2011, 11:07 PM
Registered User
 
aurdraco's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (9)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,614
Robert nailed it, but I would add 3.5, poor weight distribution. However, is this is the hardest to fix, I'd stick with his three and then deal with the weight issues later.
aurdraco is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 12 Old 03-01-2011, 11:20 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,430
Everything

1993 GT 310rwhp / 351rwtq
AFR FTI EDEL Combo. MM, T-56 3.73, Brembo, 275s on 03 Cobras all around
Stanger_Matt is offline  
post #5 of 12 Old 03-02-2011, 12:35 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
5tang's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanger_Matt View Post
Everything
i said 3 things!!
5tang is offline  
post #6 of 12 Old 03-02-2011, 08:42 AM
Registered User
 
prez1967's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 1,087
Quote:
Originally Posted by gt40mkII View Post

The top three problems with the Fox's suspension are 1) Lack of chassis stiffness, 2) Lack of dynamic camber gain up front, and 3) poor rear suspension geometry.
Thats it... making a Fox fun to drive/competetive all starts and ends with addressing these three areas.

Just look at any decent suspension company with their Kits and you'll see that there are three main Kits that are aimed at each of these concerns.

1993 Mustang GT
Maximum Motorsports, Brembo, Recaro, Etc.
prez1967 is offline  
post #7 of 12 Old 03-02-2011, 11:18 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 62
I raced a fox in a Solo II class (C Prepared) that has a rule set that allowed me to fix all of the suspension issues. My problem with the fox mustang was how high the engine set in the chassis and how far forward it was. But if you look at all of the Mustangs they ever made and compared them to the F body this was always an issue. At least the fox has a short wheel base and that makes up for a few things

Later, when I worked with a friend on an A Sedan fox mustang some of the suspension issues became more of a problem. We were able to fix most of them as the rules matured. In the end, the car was too narrow to take avantage of the wheels and tires effectively. But in reality the biggest problem was areo-they are bricks compared to an F Body or an SN95/S197.

I sold My CP car 8 yrs ago and had not driven a fox mustang until just recently when I bought an 85 GT to play with. Now when I drive it I don't worry too much about what it isn't. I focus on what it is......

85 Mustang GT
83 RX7 Super Touring U #17
SCCA Club Racer
mustanghammer is offline  
post #8 of 12 Old 03-04-2011, 04:02 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
5tang's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 15
so, with various braces and subframe connecters the stiffness can improve. with caster/camber plates the camber can improve. what would "good" rear suspension geometry be and how to improve that?
5tang is offline  
post #9 of 12 Old 03-04-2011, 07:25 PM
Registered User
 
markfhp's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 506
The three problem aspects of a Fox are:
It's a Ford Fairmont with a "5.0" badge on the side.
It's been manufactured since 1979 (that's 32 years ago, but hey, who's counting?)
It wasn't even that great a handling car even in 1979.

Enjoy it for what it is.

http://home.comcast.net/~markhohmeister
1993 ex-Florida Highway Patrol. Black. A few mods.
Dixie Region, Solo II daily driver since 2001.
markfhp is offline  
post #10 of 12 Old 03-05-2011, 01:44 PM
Registered User
 
91TwighlightGT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 2,059
Quote:
Originally Posted by mustanghammer View Post
I raced a fox in a Solo II class (C Prepared) that has a rule set that allowed me to fix all of the suspension issues. My problem with the fox mustang was how high the engine set in the chassis and how far forward it was. But if you look at all of the Mustangs they ever made and compared them to the F body this was always an issue. At least the fox has a short wheel base and that makes up for a few things

Later, when I worked with a friend on an A Sedan fox mustang some of the suspension issues became more of a problem. We were able to fix most of them as the rules matured. In the end, the car was too narrow to take avantage of the wheels and tires effectively. But in reality the biggest problem was areo-they are bricks compared to an F Body or an SN95/S197.

I sold My CP car 8 yrs ago and had not driven a fox mustang until just recently when I bought an 85 GT to play with. Now when I drive it I don't worry too much about what it isn't. I focus on what it is......

I am having a hard time with this. All the drag numbers I've seen indicate that these cars are all pretty much the same (not very good) and I would think that downforce would be more dependent on the splitter and wing fabrication than the production body.

I could be wrong about the S197 drag numbers, I've never looked, but the F-body and SN-95 weren't anything to write home about.

91TwighlightGT is offline  
post #11 of 12 Old 03-05-2011, 07:17 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
5tang's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by markfhp View Post
Enjoy it for what it is.
i couldnt agree more. although we also enjoy mods too.
5tang is offline  
post #12 of 12 Old 03-07-2011, 12:25 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by 91TwighlightGT View Post
I am having a hard time with this. All the drag numbers I've seen indicate that these cars are all pretty much the same (not very good) and I would think that downforce would be more dependent on the splitter and wing fabrication than the production body.

I could be wrong about the S197 drag numbers, I've never looked, but the F-body and SN-95 weren't anything to write home about.
SCCA American Sedan race cars don't have splitters and wings. They are only allowed to use OE rear spoliers/wings or nothing at all. In the front they can have an air dam but nothing that extends beyond the leading edge of the bumper. All of the the cars have to retain OE window trim pieces as well.

When you look at little details on Fox - flat roof, recessed window trim, etc it just isn't as slippery as a newer car.

85 Mustang GT
83 RX7 Super Touring U #17
SCCA Club Racer
mustanghammer 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
Junkyard Horsepower SUMMARY! slo5oh 5.0/5.8 Engine Tech 231 01-30-2015 11:35 PM
For Sale Fox Body Mustang Black Vinyl Seats outlawxs Interior Parts 1 03-01-2011 05:15 PM
For Sale 1989 Ford Mustang LX 5.0 Totally Restored/Fully Built For Sale in Alpharetta, GA BOSSGT Mustangs For Sale/Wanted, 1987-1993 13 01-26-2011 11:46 AM

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