End-All Bushing Discussion? - Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 15 Old 03-16-2016, 05:12 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
B0jangles's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: California
Posts: 334
Garage
End-All Bushing Discussion?

Hey all. Did some searching, did some of my own research, and wanted to get input on all of the options in the same place. If this goes well I'll post a breakdown of all the info we put together.

I've got the list broken up by bushing material. I'm interested mostly in the front suspension, because my rear is somewhat sorted, but all info and experience is welcome. IRS guys jump in too.

I have access to a lathe as well, so tips on how to cut the harder bushings from people with experience would be awesome.

Rubber:
Is there any location other than the rear upper control arm where Rubber bushings benefit performance?

Are there ways to help with rubber bushing bind in the front contol arm without replacing them or going coilover?

Polyeurethane:
These are the most common, probably the biggest knowledge base to draw from

What's the best fit for these? Interference fit on outside, free rotation around crush tube?

Are there big differences in stiffness, durability, noise between manufacturers?

Do poly bushings help with the bind and ride harshness from the stock front spring placement? Do they make a lot of noise with stock front spring location?

Delrin:
A little pricy, but are they worth the expense?

Do they make a lot of noise?

Will they turn my steering wheel into a vibrator?

How is their durability?

Do they improve ride quality and bind with stock spring location?

UHMW:
This one's a little different, but I see it a lot for BMWs and other imports

How's the durability?

Less vibration than Delrin?

Anyone used them in a Mustang?

Huge thanks for any help from you guys

B0jangles is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 15 Old 03-18-2016, 11:15 PM
Registered User
 
Stew_Magoo's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (16)
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Bayview, Wis
Posts: 837
Subbing for some good tech, and the little, if any, help I can offer.

I'm building a IRS foxbody. Rear has Drop Engineering Delrin subframe bushings, Prothane control arm bushings. Front has MM k-member and arms. I will be making my own Delrin bushings for the front.


1993 Mustang LX Coupe H/C/I 306/T5/IRS
1997 Lincoln Mark VIII
Stew_Magoo is offline  
post #3 of 15 Old 03-19-2016, 04:27 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
B0jangles's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: California
Posts: 334
Garage
Have you had a chance to drive it with the delrin in the rear? And have you driven a stock bushed IRS car before? How do they compare?
B0jangles is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 15 Old 03-19-2016, 05:49 PM
Registered User
 
Stew_Magoo's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (16)
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Bayview, Wis
Posts: 837
Car is being built from the ground up, pretty much. I bought the car as a 4cyl auto, drove it home and started stripping it the next day.

1993 Mustang LX Coupe H/C/I 306/T5/IRS
1997 Lincoln Mark VIII
Stew_Magoo is offline  
post #5 of 15 Old 03-25-2016, 02:43 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 262
I can't see much of a performance difference between UHMW and delrin. UHMW has better impact, cheaper and lower coefficient of friction but in a retained bushing application that is greasable via a zerk, I don't think it matters much.

I have Delrin control arm bushings. The car does transmit road noise but I can also attribute that to the 400lb coilovers, solid CC plates, alum rack bushings and U-joint steering shaft. But its not obnoxious........

04 Mustang GT- MM Max Grip box- Autocross car
CJK440 is offline  
post #6 of 15 Old 03-25-2016, 02:52 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
B0jangles's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: California
Posts: 334
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJK440 View Post
I can't see much of a performance difference between UHMW and delrin. UHMW has better impact, cheaper and lower coefficient of friction but in a retained bushing application that is greasable via a zerk, I don't think it matters much.

I have Delrin control arm bushings. The car does transmit road noise but I can also attribute that to the 400lb coilovers, solid CC plates, alum rack bushings and U-joint steering shaft. But its not obnoxious........
Haha sounds like my front end if I had money.

Did you install all of that at once? I'm curious what the noise difference is just switching to coilover.

How's the Delrin been? They last a while? Any weird squeaks?
B0jangles is offline  
post #7 of 15 Old 03-27-2016, 03:25 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
B0jangles's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: California
Posts: 334
Garage
Anyone have experience with bushing failures?
B0jangles is offline  
post #8 of 15 Old 04-05-2016, 10:38 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 262
Quote:
Originally Posted by B0jangles View Post
Haha sounds like my front end if I had money.

Did you install all of that at once? I'm curious what the noise difference is just switching to coilover.

How's the Delrin been? They last a while? Any weird squeaks?
I bought the car will all that in place already so cant comment on the before. No squeeks and no wear I can tell. I assume properly greased delrin riding on a smooth crush tube will last a very long time.

04 Mustang GT- MM Max Grip box- Autocross car
CJK440 is offline  
post #9 of 15 Old 04-09-2016, 09:59 PM
Registered User
 
qtrracer's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (34)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 5,348
The stock rubber bushings are bonded to the metal shell and crush sleeve. The end of the bushing is serrated (teeth). This means that once the bushing is torqued properly in place, the serrated teeth bite into the arm/chassis as the case may be, preventing any rotation. Since the rubber is bonded to the shell and sleeve, the only movement is the rubber twisting around the crush sleeve. This is where the bind is. The twisting can only go so far and then it stops - or binds. Whatever compliance you had to that point ends.

Typically, the poly substitutes do not have any of the above attributes. Thus in theory they shouldn't bind at all. That is generally true up front. But in the rear, especially the uppers, there must be twisting and "growing" because of the two jobs the uppers perform: lateral axle control and axle rotational control. In order to do these two jobs Ford designed compliant rubber bushings to allow the arms to twist and grow through the bushings as the axle articulates. Replace these bushings with poly, and you increase the bind, not reduce it.
qtrracer is offline  
post #10 of 15 Old 04-10-2016, 02:36 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
B0jangles's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: California
Posts: 334
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by qtrracer View Post
The stock rubber bushings are bonded to the metal shell and crush sleeve. The end of the bushing is serrated (teeth). This means that once the bushing is torqued properly in place, the serrated teeth bite into the arm/chassis as the case may be, preventing any rotation. Since the rubber is bonded to the shell and sleeve, the only movement is the rubber twisting around the crush sleeve. This is where the bind is. The twisting can only go so far and then it stops - or binds. Whatever compliance you had to that point ends.

Typically, the poly substitutes do not have any of the above attributes. Thus in theory they shouldn't bind at all. That is generally true up front. But in the rear, especially the uppers, there must be twisting and "growing" because of the two jobs the uppers perform: lateral axle control and axle rotational control. In order to do these two jobs Ford designed compliant rubber bushings to allow the arms to twist and grow through the bushings as the axle articulates. Replace these bushings with poly, and you increase the bind, not reduce it.
Yeah that was my understanding of the rear bushings. With the fronts, can you put a skinny washer inbetween the rough face and k member to free it up a little?

And Hlhow different are the cobra "hydro" bushings? Previous owner claims my car has cobra control arms up front

B0jangles is offline  
post #11 of 15 Old 04-14-2016, 02:41 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
B0jangles's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: California
Posts: 334
Garage
Realized I started the thread saying I did my homework and didn't post any real info
Terms:
NVH-
Auto-industry term for Noise, Vibration, and Harshness. Important to consider for a daily-driver and street-driven cars in general. Less so at the track

Crush tube-
metal cylinder at the center of every bushing. It runs from one end to the other. Control arm bolts go through them. Typically a little longer than the actual bushing so the bushing face doesn't contact the frame.

Rubber-
The basic stuff. Typically bonded to crush tube. Real soft. Contact with oils and other petroleum contaminants can degrade and break down the material

Polyeurethane-
Soft skateboard wheels, "rubber" floors, used all over the place. Stiffer than rubber, and greasable. When I talked to prothane, they recommended marine grease as a cheap go-to for lubrication, because its waterproof, tacky, and cheap.

HDPE-
Harder than Polyeurethane, softer than Delrin. Polular for euro cars, don't know a lot about it

Delrin-
A self-lubricating polymer. Very hard. I don't know much about this one

Front Suspension:
Stock Layout
>Lower Control Arm (LCA) supports the weight of the car. Large loads on the bushings.
-stock GT rubber bushings are bonded to crush tube and control arm, and the ends are fixed. These bushings add spring rate because any suspension travel is twisting the rubber between the crush tube and control arm. The weight of the car pushing on the bushing doesn't help

-some models, at least 96-98 cobras (tell me what I'm missing) had updated bushings Ford termed "Hydro" bushings. These aren't fixed the same way standard bushings are, and ride a little better but still aren't great

-poly bushings are usually a tight fit at the outside diameter, and rotate smoothly at the crush tube. The surface speeds of the crush tube during suspension travel are much lower than the outside, so its easier to lubricate well, experiences less friction, and lasts longer. They reduce bind, and are stiffer than rubber so they have less play and hold alignment better during cornering. The stiffer eurethane also transmits more noise (NVH) through the suspension and to the cabin

-HDPE

-Delrin transmits much more NVH than the other options, but holds alignments and performs better

-when replacing front bushings, it's a good idea to check what you have before buying. I'll update this space with how-to info when I find it

Coilover front suspension

>LCA no longer supports the weight of the car. Suspension loads are now going to the front strut towers, and the coil spring is around the strut. This is how a standard MacPherson suspension is set up. Ford didn't have this in mind when designing the chassis, so if you want to re-engineer the car, make sure to install appropriate Caster Camber plates. I wouldn't cheap out, and more money will get you more alignment options (by more money, I mean going straight to a quality product). Mine were ~200 and alignment shops haven't said a word about them

-standard/hydro bushings do a lot better without the weight of the car, and it's possible to go to a more agressive spring rate while still improving the ride quality of the car

-polyeurethane bushings experience less bind without the weight of the car too, but transmit more NVH than rubber

-HDPE

-Delrin is noisier, but has a performance advantage

I'll post more and update when I find some time. Holler if I'm leading people astray
B0jangles is offline  
post #12 of 15 Old 04-15-2016, 01:47 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
B0jangles's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: California
Posts: 334
Garage
Since rear suspension has been a little unadressed, here's one I found on corner carvers. A Mr. Jack Hidley posted it, but I believe it was originally a response from another MM guy. Long read but real data on different rear suspension bushings, suspension layouts, and the binding they have in body roll. Cornering loads weren't involved in these tests, which is where the 4 link gets extra weird:

The Post:

I'm reposting this just so it is easier to read.

While bind is only one of many parameters determining the handling characteristics of a suspension system, it is useful information, and has been a subject of great debate on these message boards. As part of the research we did in developing our rear suspension system, MM has actually done quite a bit of roll-bind testing. I can offer some hard numbers for everyone to consider. I will define ?bind? to be any resistance to wheel movement in a roll situation that is not from the spring or sway bar.

Let me say that this information is not intended to be negative toward any particular system, but should be used to gain understanding of the way cars with different setups feel/handle. This information can help everyone to optimize whatever setup they may have.

Of the tests we have done, following are the tests relating to the rear suspension systems most often discussed. All tests are with the sway bar disconnected, cycling one wheel through 3? bump/droop as if in a roll situation. The results are organized in order from least bind to the most bind.

1) 4 Link - LCA with spherical bearings or rod ends at both ends / Stock UCA?s
6lb/in Linear
This shows the stock upper arms introduce 6 lb/in of wheel rate.

2) 4 Link ? MM LCA 3 piece poly, spherical bearing / Stock UCAs
9lb/in Linear
This shows an additional 3 lb/in resistance from our 3 piece urethane compared to a rod end.

3) MMTA/PB ? LCA with spherical bearings or rod ends at both ends
10lb/in Linear
Here we removes the 6lb/in from the UCAs, but adds 10lb/in due to lateral deflection of the TA during roll (see above post).

4) 4 Link ? Stock LCA / Stock UCAs
11lb/in Linear
This shows that the stock LCA adds 5 lb/in of wheel rate, which is actually more than our LCA of case 2.

5) MMTA/PB ? MM LCA 3 piece poly, spherical bearing
13lb/in Linear
Again illustrating an additional 3lb/in additional resistance of our 3 piece urethane compared to the rod ends in case 3.

6) 4 Link ? LCA with 3 Piece Urethane at both ends / Stock UCAs
26lb/in Linear
Case 6 shows that the 3 piece poly (or any LCA) works best with a spherical bearing at one end. 17lb/in is added over case 2. Note that the effect of adding a 3 piece urethane at only one end adds 3lb/in. Add it at BOTH ends and the increase is 17lb/in? NOT 6 lb/in as one might expect.

7) 4 Link - LCA with delrin, spherical bearing / Stock UCAs
30lb/in Linear
This shows that delrin does not allow necessary angular deflection resulting in an additional 21lb/in over case 2.

8) 4 Link With PB - Stock LCA / Stock UCA
In the first 1? travel 47lb/in
Between 2-3? of travel 30lb/in Decreasing Rate
In case 8 & 9 the Panhard bar defining a new lower roll center is forcing control arms to travel a new path of higher resistance.

9) 4 Link With PB ? MM LCA / Stock UCA
In the first 1? travel 50lb/in
Between 2-3? of travel 30lb/in Decreasing Rate

10) 4 Link ? Stock LCA / UCA with rod end at chassis, stock rubber at axle
In the first 1? travel 63lb/in
Between 1-2? travel 39lb/in
Between 2-3? travel 20lb/in Decreasing Rate
Case 10 represents trying to locate the axle with a stiffer bushing configuration on the upper control arms. Since the upper arms need to have an effective length change, the rod end in this case actually creates MORE bind.

11) 4 Link ? LCA with urethane at both ends / Stock UCA?s
67lb/in Linear
Case 11 is similar to case 6, but shows that a standard poly/poly control arm does not allow much angular change.


Keep in mind that the above information is with no cornering force on the axle. Therefore, there is a huge gap in this information if you are trying to correlate this data to how these systems would feel in use. I would say that the Torque-arm in case 3 & 5 outperforms any other case shown, although it does not have the least amount of bind in this test. We have begun to build a fixture that loads the axle laterally, as if in a corner, to THEN see how the bind behaves. Any system with a Panhard bar should have no significant increase in bind over what is already shown here. This predictability that a PB provides is why we recommend it on a 4 link (with the correct control arms) for people on a budget, or Solo II Street Prepared cars (not allowed to remove uppers). True, you are inducing bind in this situation, but that bind should not significantly change as you load the suspension laterally. When driving the car, the effective added spring rate (from bind) balances well with the new lower RC, and the improved stability and predictability. YES this is a compromise, but I feel it beats trying to locate the axle laterally with stiffer bushings. Obviously, if the pocket book or rulebook permits, the best thing to do is add a Torque-arm and remove the upper control arms. All this binding is also why you are able to add at least 50lb/in wheel rate to the rear when you add a Torque-Arm and remove the UCAs.

Jon- the barrel shaped bushing was designed to maximize contact area and minimize resistance to angular motion. When cycling the suspension in straight bump and droop, its effect is immeasurable.

Ehren VanSchmus
MM Design Engineer
B0jangles is offline  
post #13 of 15 Old 05-04-2016, 12:47 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tunkhannock PA
Posts: 99
FWIW, there isn't a single rubber bushing on my 66's front suspension. It's all aftermarket tubular with rod ends. Even the spring perches are sealed bearing. Let me tell you, it's the best thing I did! The car just glides down the road, right over bumps and pot holes. Despite going up in spring rate, the car rides softer. No noise, no harshness. I only notice them if I really, really pay attention. It similar to low profile tires. Outside of that, with the older cheap Monroe shocks, it road like a Lincoln.

Steering response is nice and tight, great road feed back. No need for R&P.

Tom

I cut it 3 times...and it's still too short!
Huskinhano is offline  
post #14 of 15 Old 05-04-2016, 01:59 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
B0jangles's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: California
Posts: 334
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huskinhano View Post
FWIW, there isn't a single rubber bushing on my 66's front suspension. It's all aftermarket tubular with rod ends. Even the spring perches are sealed bearing. Let me tell you, it's the best thing I did! The car just glides down the road, right over bumps and pot holes. Despite going up in spring rate, the car rides softer. No noise, no harshness. I only notice them if I really, really pay attention. It similar to low profile tires. Outside of that, with the older cheap Monroe shocks, it road like a Lincoln.

Steering response is nice and tight, great road feed back. No need for R&P.
Thats awesome, I'm very jealous. I put in poly rack bushings and I'm a little bit disappointed. Might go solid down the road

Those cars didn't have much sound deadening to start with, but you didn't get any more vibrations through the floor or the cabin? Sounds like a quality piece of kit
B0jangles is offline  
post #15 of 15 Old 05-05-2016, 07:32 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tunkhannock PA
Posts: 99
No noise or vibration. Non of the horror stories you hear. I'll bet if I gave you a ride in the car, you'd never know.

I'm definitely not rich. I more or less have tunnel vision on my , nothing else gets upgraded. Crappy paint, crappy intinterior, a stock AM radio that doesn't work. The suspension was more or less financed by literally picking pennies off the floor, saving my loose pocket change and selling a lot of scrap steel. The parts are from Street or Track LLC They are high quality parts and work great.

Tom

I cut it 3 times...and it's still too short!
Huskinhano 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
Converting to adjustable end links on stock front swaybar ReplicaR Road Racing/Auto X 42 11-18-2016 06:44 PM
For Sale Ford 2.3t Top End Package -- 12.10 @ 114.6 mph -- 400 RWHP 96mustang460cid 2.3L Engine Parts 5 09-12-2013 07:19 AM
For Sale Prothane Bushing Set for 99-04 Cobra 5.0 Mustang Man Suspension 2 06-16-2013 03:41 PM
Bad bushing on a-arm cause vibration? Beatdown GT & SOHC 6 02-25-2013 06:56 PM
For Sale 1994 8.8 Rear End with 4.10 gears 99FiveOh Drivetrain Parts 4 09-01-2011 04:26 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