Ford Mustang Forums banner

1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello,
I have been fabricating parts for my toyota truck for a couple years doing axle swaps, welding link-ends, cages, trusses, bending tube...etc etc..

All the suspension upgrades I bought for my track/ street cars , I bought before I knew how to weld. but now I need an upgrade to the mustang.

Can anyone point me in the direction of some good books on fabricating mustang suspension , or just blue prints? Im looking to make a TA/PHB 3 link

I have made a pan-hard bar for the truck, but that took a lot of trial and error. I'm trying to cut down on the error part. As I am sure suspension geometry is a little more critical at 100mph than 5 mph,

One more question, In the past I have used a application/calculator to figure out roll center, squat#'s, instant center..etc Is there a program for mustangs anyone can recommend

thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Discussion Starter #2

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,614 Posts
As mentioned above, read corner carvers, and find/buy a copy of Mathis' Mustang Performance Handbook 2. In it, he has schematics for various things a fabricator can make for a fox mustang (panhard bars, torque arms, control arms, etc.).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,363 Posts
Mustang Performance 2 is a great resource if you want to fab up those kinds of parts. Not all of the info in that book has stood the test of time but it is still a good resource.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
thanks for all the replies so far,

I just ordered Mustang Performance 2, and have been searching and reading Corner Carvers..

From what I have read already and knowing my capabilities, I think I will buy the torque arm from MM, and make my own PHB assembly .. I dont think I want to try and reproduce the Urethane Pivot Bolt Assembly where the TA plugs into the TA-cross member, I will end up spending more than the MM part in T&E (trial and error, much like R&D only more expensive )

About the geometry calculator, I found a couple for cars. damn they are expensive! what would you recommend?

http://performancetrends.com/Suspension Programs Comparison Table.htm

http://www.mitchellsoftware.com/prod01.htm

and several more listed here
http://www.halfbakery.com/idea/Suspension_20Setup_20Calculator


What up with Corner Carvers.com? It appears they don't like mustang people much. I registered and read a bunch of articles, There is TONS of good information on there, just have to sort thru the BS. I found a high jack-ass (angry gray-beards) to information ratio. Even with some good questions/threads, people cant wait to flame them with some drivel about searching correctly and bloody tampons and graduate school, then about 10 posts down, someone will answer the question.
Coming from Pirate4x4.com, they have a rep for being angry ol'men and flaming stupid questions, but CC was a bit ridiculous.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,430 Posts
Plenty of C-C members have Mustangs. They encourage members to search, search and search. They'd rather you resurrect an old thread with similar info than start a new one. It's nice to keep all the info together too
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,614 Posts
Corner Carvers is corner carvers. There are tons of mustang people over there. My impression is that the non-mustang people get pissed when someone creates a new topic about something related to mustangs but fails to mention that in the topic title.

As far as suspension calculators, I don't have any experience with any real ones, but Bill Shope's online free ones seem to be handy.
http://www.racetec.cc/shope/

I would hold off on buying the MM TA until you have seen the TA designs in MPH2. IIRC, Mathis' design is more similar to the easier to fab Griggs' TA.

Re: fabbing a PHB, imo, fabbing up a Griggs' style unit should be simple. It's mostly square tubing with some angle iron on it on the driver's side down from the frame cross braced over to the passenger side frame rail. Only thing you'd have to buy is the axle-mount for the bar, I'd bet (and the book may have designs for that as well). At one time, I owned both a Griggs' standard duty PHB and a heavy duty PHB and they are really fairly simple pieces of equipment. If you go this route, remember to design a piece that is adjustable on both ends for maximum rear roll center height adjustability.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,363 Posts
I did find this thread from CC, with a bunch of info... funny though it was at the end of a flame-fest..

http://corner-carvers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43991&highlight=Pan+hard


any info about the calculators ?

thanks
Yeah but that thread ended well. That guy got a little hazing, but in the end, he ended up getting a little education that he will apply to his other projects. CC is a different place and not a run of the mill forum. There is good info there, as long as you search and pose questions in a thread that is relevant to what you are discussing you are good to go. 99.9% of the time, especially when dealing with the Mustang Chassis, the question you need answered has already been presented and possibly answered.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,902 Posts
What up with Corner Carvers.com? It appears they don't like mustang people much. I registered and read a bunch of articles, There is TONS of good information on there, just have to sort thru the BS. I found a high jack-ass (angry gray-beards) to information ratio.
I think the site was actually started by some Mustang racers (not sure though). But yes, while the signal-to-noise ratio is higher there than most sites, the dick-to-decent ratio is also very high. There are a few reasonable people though (Robert King, who also posts here is one). But a lot of them just seem to want to show off how big their johnson is, never mind that by being such A-holes, they're reducing the S/N ratio they claim to value so highly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,493 Posts
But a lot of them just seem to want to show off how big their johnson is
This is generally the case with most car forums i've been on/searched on. It seems to be quite inevitable and has made me just make my own decisions....and don't regret anything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
I've never had the need to join C-C becuase the 99.5% of the time, the information is already there, as they'd tell you. My search-fu is strong. Wade through the BS and dumbasses and you'll be rewarded with a wealth of information.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,722 Posts
My advice:
build the T-Arm
Build the panhard bar
build the subframe connectors
by the k-member & arms

You'll probably have to buy some smaller die's than you currently have (atleast I had to). Offroad stuff is alot larger that car stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,133 Posts
I think the site was actually started by some Mustang racers (not sure though).
As I understand it (I wasn't around at the beginning,) it was started by folks who got tired of the juvenile crap and horrible tech that was flying around at least two prominent Mustang forums who shall remain unnamed.

But yes, while the signal-to-noise ratio is higher there than most sites, the dick-to-decent ratio is also very high. There are a few reasonable people though (Robert King, who also posts here is one).
Not the term I would have chosen.

(My insult-fu is weak, so I usually just stay out of those furballs.)


But a lot of them just seem to want to show off how big their johnson is, never mind that by being such A-holes, they're reducing the S/N ratio they claim to value so highly.
Part of it is that, certainly, and part of it is to cull out the weak (think fraternity hazing.) And sometimes it's because we're bored.

Seriously.

When it comes to Corner-Carvers its best to think of the forum as the graduate school of cars. the long-standing members have seen it all and done quite a bit of it. You want to do X to your Mustang? There's probably 20 who've done exactly the same thing in as many different ways as possible.

We tend to give the same pat answers to the same questions because we know what works (and why) and what doesn't (and why it doesn't). Sure there may be other solutions, but they don't get recommended because they either don't work as well, or are more expensive, or both.

You ask two doctors how to remove an appendix and you're going to get the same answer for the same reason.

CC doesn't like repeating itself (one of the major reasons it exists -- the founders got tired of telling folks which dampers to buy or how to install all clutch.) So a major sin is starting a new thread instead of recycling one. The theory is that in looking for an appropriate thread the poster will educate himself and hopefully answer his own question.

It's not perfect, though. I frequently miss finding the appropriate thread and get smacked for it. No big deal -- digital smacking is surprisingly painless with the right attitude. Act like an adult and leave the ego at home and anyone will do well at CC. Act like a Big Shot who doesn't obey the rules and you'd catch a lot of grief and will eventually be shown the door.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,133 Posts
You were the first one to come to mind when he mentioned fabbing your own stuff.

I need to dig it up, but somewhere over on Corner Carvers I have posted my own solution to the torque Arm forward mount. it is different from the Griggs and the MM approaches, and IMHO better (albeit more expensive.)

Ideally, the front mount of a Torque Arm allows the front of the arm to plunge fore and aft (the rear axle actually can move a bit forward and rearward bexause the LCA's move in an arc as the suspension cycles.) It should allow for twist when the body rolls or one wheel hits a bump. it should allow for side-to-side movement to accommodate any rear-steer. If should allow the front of the arm to move in any way possible EXCEPT up and down.

Griggs accomplished this by bolting the nose of the arm between to big urethane bushings, which work well enough. I don't like the design since it doesn't handle fore-aft movement as well as I like.

MM handle this with essentially a longitudinal tube clamped in a urethane bushing. This doesn't allow lateral movement. it's not THAT big a deal, but still...

My design uses a vertically-mounted control arm about 6" long with big rod ends at each end. The top end is bolted to a cross member welded to the chassis. The bottom end is bolted to the nose of the torque arm. this arrangement allows the nose of the torque arm to move in any direction except vertically.

For a mass-produced part, it's probably too expensive for the minor advantages it provides. However, if you are making your own, it's about as cheap as any other approach and much easier to fabricate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Discussion Starter #18 (Edited)
Thanks for the great replies,

Robert, I like what you are talking about with the torque Arm forward mount, Do you have any pics I can search for on CC.com ? What is your screen name ?
And I see what you are saying about the site and repeat questions. It is a great resource, some of the posts took me a little of guard. Now if someone would just register my account someday :)

Darius, that is a great website, I like your pics, we have done a lot of the same work already, About your TA, Do most folks design it to bolt to the Diff cover? I ask this since, MM eliminates that by including two struts that connect to the axle tubes. Im guessing this is to improve ground clearance and ease of diff service. I read that you also take yours on the street, So I assume it has not been a problem for you. is there a versions 2.0 yet ?

Aurdraco- Thanks for the advise, depending on the designs I see, I may build my own TA, especially with some help regarding the torque Arm forward mount. I already have full length subframe connectors,, I will hold off on the k-member until I get my tax refund.....in 2015,

A little history, I auto-crossed a 87 bmw 325is, from 2000-2003. I installed, but bought all the upgrades for that car. It was the most well balanced car I have driven... in 2000 I bought my 91 Lx hatchback from my brother w/ 55k miles, It now has 70k miles. My goal is to do some autocross events, but mainly I just want it to handle predictably on street&track.. Eventually I will use this experience and get a rolling chassis, and start from scratch for a track only car.

Ed, thanks for the PM, it is appreciated.

I will try to keep you all updated as I progress.. currently an auburn diff is on the bench to replace my worn out ford LSD, Now is all this new info, I has some serious reading to do ..

thanks
Geoff
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top