Rear UCAs and Panhard Bar - Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 38 Old 07-11-2011, 08:14 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: winston salem
Posts: 1,382
Rear UCAs and Panhard Bar

About every 5-6 weekends I have to replace one or both diff side bushings and annually the UCAs. Does this sound normal? It seems to me that with a PHB there should be less stress on the UCAs.


2003 Azure mach1 5 speed with IUP
Maximum Motorsports R&T Box with Torque Arm
2012 Candy Red Metalic Premium Brembo GT w/373
HPDE Instructor
j rick kirby is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 38 Old 07-11-2011, 11:24 AM
MFE
Super Moderator
 
MFE's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (9)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 27,649
It's not less stress on the UCA's when you still have both of them attached, because the roll center they define is much different than the roll center defined by the panhard bar, and the panhard bar's roll center wins every time. That's forcing the UCA's outside their limits, and it's why the PM3L (Poor Man's 3-Link) was invented. Put new bushings in ONE of the UCA's and remove the other one. The remaining one is no longer trying to define a roll center but it is free to control axle windup like intended.

MFE is offline  
post #3 of 38 Old 07-11-2011, 11:53 AM
Registered User
 
kreg90's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 201
Garage
...this might be a stupid question, but, if you install a panhard bar must at least one uca be removed always in every situation? My car came with both uca's and a panhard bar installed as a dealer option or sorts.. no ones ever mentioned removing the control arms..
kreg90 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 38 Old 07-11-2011, 12:41 PM
MFE
Super Moderator
 
MFE's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (9)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 27,649
Lots of people drive them around that way just fine, but if you start wailing them around corners on sticky tires, you're going to run into this.
MFE is offline  
post #5 of 38 Old 07-11-2011, 01:13 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ
Posts: 136
Is a PM3L setup "safe" to run on street tires without reinforcing the chassis mounting point for the UCA you leave in place? Seems kind of iffy from what I've read...

2004 Mach 1
Maximum Motorsports TA/PHB, Coilovers, SFCs, Bilsteins, etc
RcodeStang is offline  
post #6 of 38 Old 07-11-2011, 08:51 PM
Registered User
 
qtrracer's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (34)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 5,353
Been running a PM3L on the street now for more than a year. Mine has rod-ends on both ends (i.e., no rubber bushings), so there is not the typical bind found with a stock arm. As of now, the upper boxes are fine. I suppose the stress with some sticky rubber and more power to the ground the upper torque box might be an issue, but as of now the only thing I need to watch are the rod-ends. By the way, this is a great way to determine whether a T/A or true 3-link is for you. The suspension works so much better that I'll not go back to the stock 4-link.
qtrracer is offline  
post #7 of 38 Old 07-11-2011, 10:41 PM
Registered User
 
markfhp's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 506
Quote:
Originally Posted by MFE View Post
It's not less stress on the UCA's when you still have both of them attached, because the roll center they define is much different than the roll center defined by the panhard bar, and the panhard bar's roll center wins every time. That's forcing the UCA's outside their limits, and it's why the PM3L (Poor Man's 3-Link) was invented. Put new bushings in ONE of the UCA's and remove the other one. The remaining one is no longer trying to define a roll center but it is free to control axle windup like intended.
Here we go again. We had this who discussion a few months back.

https://forums.corral.net/forums/road...r-end-fox.html

If I may quote Jack Hidley (skip to the last paragraph if you're short on time):

Quote:
There are two different issues here that are being mixed up.

One is the location of the roll center in the suspension, any bind that results from that and the resulting load and subsequent destruction of the UCA bushings.

Two are the loads seen by the bushings from the cornering forces and the link stiffness.

The stock Mustang 4-link suspension has a fairly high roll center. When you add an MM PHB to it, you end up with a new roll center that is much closer to the ground. Properly speaking there is only one roll center now, even though the PHB has defined a new roll center that is in a different vertical location than the original 4-link roll center. There are not two roll centers.

Since the PHB has moved the roll center from the original location to a new lower location, the bushings in the control arms are now forced to deform more to allow this new motion. This is only true when there are no cornering loads and the axle is rolled in the chassis. This definitely does cause an increase in roll stiffness compared to the 5-link case where the UCAs are more parallel and have their angle adjusted to put the roll center of the 4-link in the same location as that of the PHB.

Now look at the two cases (4-link and 5-link) when cornering loads are applied.

In the 4-link case, nearly 100% of the cornering loads are resisted by the UCA bushings. Due to the direction the RLCA bushings are loaded in, they have very little stiffness. The direction the UCA bushings are loaded in gives them some stiffness. The percentage of the load that any component absorbs in a mechanical system is in direct relation to the stiffness percentage that component has in the system. If you removed the UCAs completely and applied a cornering load, the bushings in the left and right RLCAs would resist the load equally (50%) since they have exactly the same stiffness as each other. With the UCAs in place, they provide 90%+ of the stiffness, so they see 90%+ of the load. This is why they are destroyed so quickly when the car is cornered hard. In a case where there is 1,000lbs of cornering load, the UCA bushings are going to see 900lbs of it.

In the 5-link case things are very different. When the same cornering load is applied, the PHB sees almost all of the load since it has 100x the stiffness that the UCA bushings do. For every 1,000lbs of cornering load, the UCAs might see 10lbs of load from the cornering force. Even if they see an extra 100lbs of load from the added bind, their total load is still only 110lbs. Much less than in the 4-link case.

In our experience, adding a PHB greatly increases the life of the UCA bushings, because of this.
__________________
Jack Hidley
Maximum Motorsports Tech Support

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 #8 of 38 Old 07-12-2011, 12:11 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: El Granada, California
Posts: 135
That changing rate seems excessive to me. My 97 Cobra is probably similar in weight to your Mach. I've had to change the UCA bushings twice over 5 years and about 80 HPDE days. Most of that time was PHB and 4-Link.

1997 Pacific Green Cobra
100+ HPDE track days
Full MM setup
13.484 / 103.575 / 1.959
SnakePilot is offline  
post #9 of 38 Old 07-12-2011, 07:55 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: winston salem
Posts: 1,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakePilot View Post
That changing rate seems excessive to me. My 97 Cobra is probably similar in weight to your Mach. I've had to change the UCA bushings twice over 5 years and about 80 HPDE days. Most of that time was PHB and 4-Link.
Yeah I don't get it.According to J Hidley the PHB should increase the life of the UCA bushings.I tried to call MM yesterday but couldn't get thru so I will try again today.

2003 Azure mach1 5 speed with IUP
Maximum Motorsports R&T Box with Torque Arm
2012 Candy Red Metalic Premium Brembo GT w/373
HPDE Instructor
j rick kirby is offline  
post #10 of 38 Old 07-12-2011, 09:49 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Earth
Posts: 1,688
He's talking about a five link there.

Quote:
In the 5-link case things are very different. When the same cornering load is applied, the PHB sees almost all of the load since it has 100x the stiffness that the UCA bushings do. For every 1,000lbs of cornering load, the UCAs might see 10lbs of load from the cornering force. Even if they see an extra 100lbs of load from the added bind, their total load is still only 110lbs. Much less than in the 4-link case.
In our experience, adding a PHB greatly increases the life of the UCA bushings, because of this.
In a stock system;

Quote:
With the UCAs in place, they provide 90%+ of the stiffness, so they see 90%+ of the load. This is why they are destroyed so quickly when the car is cornered hard. In a case where there is 1,000lbs of cornering load, the UCA bushings are going to see 900lbs of it.
Read the whole thing until you understand it.



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

Last edited by terryr; 07-12-2011 at 09:51 PM.
terryr is offline  
post #11 of 38 Old 07-13-2011, 07:28 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: winston salem
Posts: 1,382
I spoke to MM yesterday and they said that a lot of the CMC guys change bushings every weekend,of course they don't have a PHB. They said for what I am doing changing diff bushings every 5-6 events and CAs every 10-12 sounds about right.

Which brings up another point. Acc to MM FRPP no longer sells UCAs and MM only has a few left and they are going to gouge us for $190. Now what do we do?

2003 Azure mach1 5 speed with IUP
Maximum Motorsports R&T Box with Torque Arm
2012 Candy Red Metalic Premium Brembo GT w/373
HPDE Instructor
j rick kirby is offline  
post #12 of 38 Old 07-13-2011, 07:40 AM
Registered User
 
huesmann's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: DC burbs, MD side
Posts: 6,894
Spend a lot more time replacing bushings?
huesmann is online now  
post #13 of 38 Old 07-13-2011, 08:13 AM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by huesmann View Post
Spend a lot more time replacing bushings?
I suppose its their indirect way of saying "Upgrade yo' ##### if you're gonna over-use it!"
2k2GT is offline  
post #14 of 38 Old 07-13-2011, 08:54 AM
Registered User
 
onesillynotch's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Rockland, NY
Posts: 2,007
i guess the obvious answer would be to get a TA

1988 Notch...2.5T
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

5 lug cobra brakes, full MM CO, MM PH, MM TA, MM FLSFC, SN95 A-Arms.
onesillynotch is offline  
post #15 of 38 Old 07-13-2011, 12:50 PM
Registered User
 
aurdraco's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (9)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by j rick kirby View Post
I spoke to MM yesterday and they said that a lot of the CMC guys change bushings every weekend,of course they don't have a PHB.
CMC cars can run a PHB; I doubt there are that many guys a) not running PHBs, and b) changing out UCA bushings every weekend. In Texas, the CMC guys run pseudo-PM3Ls (both UCAs are there, but one is essentially removed by having soft foam rubber bushings).
aurdraco is offline  
post #16 of 38 Old 07-13-2011, 05:09 PM
Registered User
 
That89GTGuy's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 49
Blog Entries: 9
Here is my experience with the whole 2 uppers and a PHB/going to PM3L thing:

With both uppers and a PHB, the ride was awful, and very stiff. The rear felt far too stiff for the car, much more so than when I did not have the PHB. Even on smooth highway the rear would buck around anytime the axle needed to move around. It felt like it wanted to oversteer more than before, but I never was able to autox/track it.

When I removed the drivers side upper, the ride was instantly better. It rode much better than before, no bucking or nonsense. HOWEVER, I have had issues with crazy pinion angles causing the drivers side shock to hit the disc brake hose bracket screw (I have converted to Thunderbird rear discs). No failures, but lots of noise, and it's eroding the shock body (rubs back and forth as the PHB moves the axle), and probably crazy pinion angles on hard acceleration and braking. My diff side bushing is very, very old (possibly 22 year old original... I hope not), so I will be replacing that soon and seeing if it helps, along with a lower profile screw.

Another note. If you go to the PM3L, you will probably want to get some torque arm springs. The rear will be way too soft without them.

My opinion is it's way better, but the annoying pinion issues I've been having make me want to say otherwise. Before I noticed that issue, I was happy as a clam. Sounds like a good number of people use it with no issues though, so it's a crap shoot.

TL, DR : It's a free mod, so it's worth a shot.

1989 Mustang GT: 5.0, 5spd --- Sold. SVO brakes, MM suspension bits, 331ci, X pipe.

2012 Mustang V6PP 6spd MT --- Daily Driver, D Stock auto crosser, maybe track days some time...
That89GTGuy is offline  
post #17 of 38 Old 07-14-2011, 01:58 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,430
Put a tip jar in your car when you take students out. Then get a Torque Arm and enjoy the traction

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 #18 of 38 Old 07-14-2011, 08:07 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: winston salem
Posts: 1,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanger_Matt View Post
Put a tip jar in your car when you take students out. Then get a Torque Arm and enjoy the traction
That's a great idea,thanks Matt!

2003 Azure mach1 5 speed with IUP
Maximum Motorsports R&T Box with Torque Arm
2012 Candy Red Metalic Premium Brembo GT w/373
HPDE Instructor
j rick kirby is offline  
post #19 of 38 Old 07-14-2011, 03:17 PM
Registered User
 
dpspeed's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Winston-Salem, NC
Posts: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by qtrracer View Post
Been running a PM3L on the street now for more than a year. Mine has rod-ends on both ends (i.e., no rubber bushings), so there is not the typical bind found with a stock arm.
So would it be best IF you were going to do a PM3L to use a rod-ed UCA like these adjustable UCAs?

Do you think these help control the pinion angle and reduce the issues That89GTGuy is having?

96 Maximum Motorsports Cobra + AST 4200s
DD 10 VW GTI DSG | OZ Superturismo GT
dpspeed is offline  
post #20 of 38 Old 07-15-2011, 11:31 AM
Registered User
 
qtrracer's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (34)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 5,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpspeed View Post
So would it be best IF you were going to do a PM3L to use a rod-ed UCA like these adjustable UCAs?

Do you think these help control the pinion angle and reduce the issues That89GTGuy is having?
The stock arm will still deflect quite a bit with those big, soft rubber bushings. Hince, why the rubber bushings need replacement often and/or permit pinion issues and side movement. Mine may deflect too but if so it's pretty small.

In another thread, I beleive the consenus was not to run a PM3L like those in the link. FWIW, mine is not like the one in the link. Rather, it has a solid machined steel bushing at the axle with a .75" bolt through a rod end. At the chassis end, another rod end using the stock bolt and poly spacers between the ears rather than the set-up in the link. There is a steel tube between the two which is treaded to accept the rod ends. One rod end uses right hand and the other left hand threads. If you are familiar with the Mathis P2 book, the design is identical to his adjustable uppers (on page 111 I believe) except for the poly spacers.

As a result of this design, I do not have the pinion problem or side to side rubbing discussed above. I do have a bit of cabin noise due to the transfer of differential noises throught the steel bushings and arm, but not as much as might be expected. Ride comfort, suspension articulation, forward traction are so much better, there is no way I'm going back. The down-side is some cabin noise and potential upper torque box failure due to the extra loads. This potential failure point wold probably be resolved with reinforcement pieces. I have not done that because I do not intend to continue running this set-up. I plan on a true 3-link similar to the s197 cars or the now discontinued EvO Motorsports 3-link. Or I may just do a T/A.

The point is, the PM3L, however it is configured, is so much better than the stock four link, even with a PHB added, that it is worth trying just to see how a non-binding rear suspension feels. Be aware that if class limits are an issue, you may not be able to run just one arm or even one designed like mine.
qtrracer is offline  
post #21 of 38 Old 07-15-2011, 02:12 PM
Registered User
 
dpspeed's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Winston-Salem, NC
Posts: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by qtrracer View Post
The stock arm will still deflect quite a bit with those big, soft rubber bushings. Hince, why the rubber bushings need replacement often and/or permit pinion issues and side movement. Mine may deflect too but if so it's pretty small.

In another thread, I beleive the consenus was not to run a PM3L like those in the link. FWIW, mine is not like the one in the link. Rather, it has a solid machined steel bushing at the axle with a .75" bolt through a rod end. At the chassis end, another rod end using the stock bolt and poly spacers between the ears rather than the set-up in the link. There is a steel tube between the two which is treaded to accept the rod ends. One rod end uses right hand and the other left hand threads. If you are familiar with the Mathis P2 book, the design is identical to his adjustable uppers (on page 111 I believe) except for the poly spacers.


Thanks for the response. Where did you get your UCA? Was everything custom? I'm thinking I might have someone weld up the torque box and see how it goes. Did you up the spring rate in the rear to compensate?

I'm autocrossing in Street Mod and I think that suspension free as long as it mounts in the original location. I need to make sure I can use a solid bushing though...

96 Maximum Motorsports Cobra + AST 4200s
DD 10 VW GTI DSG | OZ Superturismo GT
dpspeed is offline  
post #22 of 38 Old 07-15-2011, 03:39 PM
Registered User
 
qtrracer's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (34)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 5,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpspeed View Post
Thanks for the response. Where did you get your UCA? Was everything custom?
Another member on here and C-C.com made the arm custom for his set-up. I believe he went with a T/A. Since it so closely resembles the Mathis design, I assume that is where the insperation came from. At the time he was selling it, I was thinking of buying an EvO Tri-link and wanted to try a psuedo version and decide whether I liked it and potential cabin noise. Right after I purchased the arm, EvO discontinued operations. I put the thing on anyway and love the result.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dpspeed View Post
I'm thinking I might have someone weld up the torque box and see how it goes. Did you up the spring rate in the rear to compensate?
Reinforcing the torque box would be a good idea especially if you are running R-comps and/or have a lot of RWHP. Yes, I upgraded my springs to the H&R Super Race (260-300 progressive) conventionals. Because I'm running Bilstein HDs, I selected these springs due to the Bil's damping design. These springs nearly exceed that design but since this was an experimant, I didn't want to buy new shocks too. And yes, you will need higher rate springs; there is no binding with this all rod-end PM3L and hence no added wheel rate. To compensate for the lower spring rate, I purchased an adjustible MM sta-bar which at the softest setting matches the 94-95 GT rear bar. I'm still sorting it out. I needed tires badly so I couldn't get the rear to stick at the limit. I finally picked-up some Hankook EVO V12s to try. On the street, these tires are impressive for the price. Going out Sunday and putting them to the test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dpspeed View Post
I'm autocrossing in Street Mod and I think that suspension free as long as it mounts in the original location. I need to make sure I can use a solid bushing though...
I should be in SM but I'm running ESP (illegal) at the fun/novice level so noone cares. FWIW, I believe the EvO tri-link was considered a "traction device" similar to the T/A, so the solid bushings passed tech. I'd argue that because a PHB is allowed, a PM3L is a traction device (controls rotation) and hence the same since it no longer controls lateral movement. If so, solid bushings should be permitted using the same theory as the Tri-link.
qtrracer is offline  
post #23 of 38 Old 07-15-2011, 07:55 PM
Registered User
 
markfhp's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 506
Quote:
Originally Posted by That89GTGuy View Post
Here is my experience with the whole 2 uppers and a PHB/going to PM3L thing:

With both uppers and a PHB, the ride was awful, and very stiff. The rear felt far too stiff for the car, much more so than when I did not have the PHB. Even on smooth highway the rear would buck around anytime the axle needed to move around. ...
Maybe I'm just lucky, but ...
To me, a MM panhard bar was the second-best mod I've ever done (shifter is No. 1) for making the car pleasant to drive, especially on the street.
Just feels much more solid and predictable.
I've had the PHB now for more than 5 years and about 25,000 miles of autocrossing and daily driving. Just recently, I finally replaced the ORIGINAL upper control arms.
Knock on wood, maybe it'll be another 145,000 miles before I replace them again.

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 #24 of 38 Old 07-16-2011, 10:24 AM
Registered User
 
qtrracer's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (34)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 5,353
I too ran the MM PHB with the FRPP UCAs for well over two years, both on the street and many autocross driving schools (20-30 runs a school). If you believe the PHB was the second best upgrade to your car from a comfort and handling perspective, then you are in for a treat if you just removed the D/S upper and went with a PM3L. Until I switched to the PM3L, I had no idea how much better the car rides and handles without the bind and uppers fighting with the PHB. Of course, I do have the rod-ended PM3L and the MM sta-bar, so YMMV.
qtrracer is offline  
post #25 of 38 Old 07-17-2011, 06:15 PM
Registered User
 
That89GTGuy's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 49
Blog Entries: 9
As an update if anyone was interested, after replacing the upper diff side control arm bushing and getting a lower profile screw, the shock still hits the bracket for the brake softline. For reference, my upper control arm is an FRPP arm. I'll be cutting the bracket portion that it's hitting in all likelyhood in the next week or so, and see what happens from there.

1989 Mustang GT: 5.0, 5spd --- Sold. SVO brakes, MM suspension bits, 331ci, X pipe.

2012 Mustang V6PP 6spd MT --- Daily Driver, D Stock auto crosser, maybe track days some time...

Last edited by That89GTGuy; 07-17-2011 at 06:17 PM. Reason: Specifics
That89GTGuy is offline  
post #27 of 38 Old 07-18-2011, 07:59 AM
Registered User
 
qtrracer's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (34)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 5,353
On the axle end, I'd be a little concerned with adiquate room to fully articulate. With my set-up, I can see where the rod-end begins to hit the .75" bolt head. I need more spacers to improve the clearance at those angles. The Jonny Joint/Summit Machine design at the axle, one would have to run an axle end mount on the PM3L similar to the one dpspeed linked above. I don't think that would allow enough clearance for the angles needed.
qtrracer is offline  
post #28 of 38 Old 07-18-2011, 02:09 PM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
Those joints are used in extreme articulation occurrences. I can only see an actual WORKING rear suspension "working" within a MAXIMUM of 4 or so inches up/down/left/right. I could be completely wrong on this and if I am by all means correct my information.

I'm using them on the chassis side upper and lower control arms on my jeep.

2k2GT is offline  
post #29 of 38 Old 07-19-2011, 04:52 PM
Registered User
 
qtrracer's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (34)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 5,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2k2GT View Post
Those joints are used in extreme articulation occurrences. I can only see an actual WORKING rear suspension "working" within a MAXIMUM of 4 or so inches up/down/left/right. I could be completely wrong on this and if I am by all means correct my information.

I'm using them on the chassis side upper and lower control arms on my jeep.
I have no idea how long your Jeep's arms are, but on the Mustang the PM3L is pretty short so the joint limits and clearances are used up fast. Moreoever, on my PM3L the alignment is not "square" since the axle end is mounted to the outboard side of the axle ear which puts the rodend at an slight angle as it runs up to the chassis mount at static ride height (yes, the poly bushings were designed to account for this but it's not perfect). Hence, my comments. If the arm's ears are designed with a fairly wide opening (unlike those in the Strano Parts link), then there may be enough clearance. One could go ahead and try the Jonny Joint/Summit Machine pieces, but would have to monitor them carefuly to make certain they do not cause the arm's ears to contact the axle's ears. But just using the bushings alone without all of these other considerations would be folly IMHO.

Last edited by qtrracer; 07-19-2011 at 04:56 PM.
qtrracer is offline  
post #30 of 38 Old 07-19-2011, 05:00 PM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
I understand your point(s), they make sense. I guess until someone gets bored enough and tries something with that joint, we're stuck at just some what if's and might be's.

And FWIW, the Jeep's arms are the same if not maybe an inch or so longer than a Mustang LCA.
2k2GT is offline  
post #31 of 38 Old 07-28-2011, 05:35 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Hoschton, GA
Posts: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpspeed View Post
Thanks for the response. Where did you get your UCA? Was everything custom? I'm thinking I might have someone weld up the torque box and see how it goes. Did you up the spring rate in the rear to compensate?

I'm autocrossing in Street Mod and I think that suspension free as long as it mounts in the original location. I need to make sure I can use a solid bushing though...
FYI-

The custom upper control arm he's using looks an awful like the UPR drag race uca...

79-04 Mustang Radius Rod Upper Control Arm Kit

I'm thinking of just buying those and using just 1 in the PM3L setup... Going to need new TA springs and shocks though... hummm

2008 Bullitt - On Deck for Track Duty

1997 Cobra - SOLD
jymontoya is offline  
post #32 of 38 Old 07-28-2011, 08:10 PM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
I'm certainly no safety nazi, but I don't think I like that single shear design on the axle side of those control arms. Especially if there is only ONE upper control arm.
2k2GT is offline  
post #33 of 38 Old 07-29-2011, 03:17 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Hoschton, GA
Posts: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2k2GT View Post
I'm certainly no safety nazi, but I don't think I like that single shear design on the axle side of those control arms. Especially if there is only ONE upper control arm.
No no no. That's just the picture. It's installed with 1 of those solid metal spacer pieces on each side of the axle pickup point. Not sure why they chose to show the picture that way, perhaps its just because it ships that way?

2008 Bullitt - On Deck for Track Duty

1997 Cobra - SOLD
jymontoya is offline  
post #34 of 38 Old 07-29-2011, 04:23 PM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by jymontoya View Post
No no no. That's just the picture. It's installed with 1 of those solid metal spacer pieces on each side of the axle pickup point. Not sure why they chose to show the picture that way, perhaps its just because it ships that way?
There's no other way it could mount on the axle side, other than how the picture is showing.

Notice how the chassis attachment point has off set spacers to account for the arm being pushed off center of the axle side mount.

I could be wrong, but I don't see how it could be double shear on the axle side with a heim joint. It's a metal "loop" on the axle, not a "U" bracket.
2k2GT is offline  
post #35 of 38 Old 07-29-2011, 07:48 PM
Registered User
 
qtrracer's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (34)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 5,353
Yes it's single shear. That is why mine is designed with a .75" (I believe grade 8) through bolt. While it may look like those arms, it is considerably beefier on the axle side. See Mathis PH2, page 101.
qtrracer 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
For Sale Ford Mustang Rear Upper Control Arms, Solid Axle, 1979-04 d brune Suspension 1 03-22-2011 05:48 PM
MM or Steeda LCA's / UCA's?? bcbickers GT & SOHC 33 01-05-2002 08:47 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