Ford Mustang Forums banner

1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hey Everyone,

I wanted to share a project I’ve been working on…

My Warhorse Racing YouTube channel is all about getting more horses on autocross courses.

I’ve autocrossed Mustangs and instructed novices for several years. I was looking for a YouTube channel that offers honest, real world, race-tested reviews of performance parts and provides autocrossing tips for people who love Mustangs (especially 79-04 Mustangs!). I couldn’t find one… so I created one.

The videos showcase mods made to my 1992 GT, IRS-swapped 2000 GT, and the “Mustang ST”, my IRS-swapped 2004 V6 CAM-C project car. I review chassis bracing components, bolt-on power parts, weight-reduction mods, brake upgrades, front suspension, SRA and IRS improvements.

Every part I installed on these cars was put to the test during many autocross events. In the crowded CAM PAX class in my two local autocross clubs, these cars took 1st and 2nd in season points in 2016, and 2nd and 3rd in 2017 and 2018.

If I can do that, anyone can.

I’m NOT sponsored by any company. I’m NOT trying to sell anything. I DON’T make money off this channel. I created it to inspire people to autocross their Mustangs and help them make informed decisions about what they need and don’t need to make their cars faster on course.
If you’ve ever thought about autocrossing your 79-04 Mustang, please check out the channel. I’ll be posting more tips and reviews as I improve the cars and my driving in 2019!

Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,548 Posts
I just subscribed to both channels. I want to try a road course and/or auto cross at some point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
Definitely interested. Good work guys!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
191 Posts
Interesting youtube channel. I like that you are succinct and just get to the facts.

I do have a question regarding your choice of lower chassis brace. Why did you choose Stifflers vs Maximum Motorsports or QA-1 or any other?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Thanks for checking out my channel. I try to make it as informative as possible.

I went with the Stiffler's Lower Chassis Brace for 2 reasons:

1. When I discovered the Stifflers brace didn't work on my 2000 GT convertible (it hit the factory convertible chassis brace), Brian at Stifflers actually made a custom brace that would work with the factory brace in place. I will always reward that kind of great customer service with loyalty.

2. I have been really impressed with the Stifflers products I've used on my autocross cars. They are strong and light. And you can really feel the difference after you install them.

MM and QA1 are both known for making quality parts. While I recommend the Stifflers LCB, I think any 4-point brace will improve your car's ability to attack the cones.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
662 Posts
I was going to use a set of MM subframe connectors for my new (to me) '95, but I really like the added strength of the Stiffler's FIT solution, and will be going that route.

Thanks for the videos, I think you have put a lot of thought, and research into the modifications you have made. Your results bear witness to that fact, well done!

Obviously you are a staunch advocate for the IRS in these cars, have you had much experience with them in solid rear axle form? Do you think they are capable of considerably better performance with IRS?

Jay
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
I've used the FIT System in 2 cars (one is a convertible). It will make the car much stiffer than ordinary subframe connectors. In my opinion, the FIT System is perfect for autocross cars.

Thanks for the compliment! I'm really happy people are watching. I want to get as many of these cars out on autocross courses as possible! I've got some cool stuff coming up and I will post more videos soon.

My 1992 GT is a solid-axle car. My 2000 GT was a solid-axle car for 4 seasons. I won two local championships in those cars (2015, 2016). But, modern cars eligible to run in CAM-C are incredibly capable from the factory. And they are all IRS cars. It got harder to keep up with them in a solid-axle car.

I was able to autocross my 2000 GT with the SRA and a few weeks later with the IRS. I can tell you the car is MUCH better with the IRS. It's more composed in slaloms and sweepers, and you can get on the throttle earlier.

But, that doesn't mean autocrossing a solid-axle car is a waste of time. I know (and have been beaten by) people driving some really fast SRA cars. And the aftermarket has some great stuff for the SRA these days. Yes, I prefer an IRS, but I know plenty of people who prefer the SRA.

The coolest part about these cars is that you can build them to suit your driving style. I hope my videos are showing people that you can be competitive in any 79-04 Mustang.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,145 Posts
Warhorse,

Whenever you make a comparison of a SRA to an IRS, I think it would help everyone who reads the comments if you described whether each one is fixed or not. In stock form the SRA is over constrained and the IRS has too much bushing compliance. In both cases, this severely handicaps each systems performance. Without knowing if one or the other was fixed, readers can't really evaluate your comments about them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Jack,

That’s a very good point. Thank you.

My 1992 GT and 2000 GT solid-axles were modified with Steeda Upper and Lower Control Arms, the Steeda Adjustable Rear Sway Bar, Tokico Illumina Adjustable Shocks, and 23mm factory rear sway bars. Neither car used coil-overs.

This was the SRA setup from the “Budget Autocross” videos I posted (I didn’t use the BMR spherical diff housing bushings, but I would put them on a solid-axle car if I autocrossed one today). These mods added adjustability and helped mitigate “quadra-bind”. They completely changed the handling characteristics of the car. They made it much more predictable. And they were relatively inexpensive.

I use Full Tilt Boogie Racing upgrades on my IRS cars. The IRS mods work to eliminate the slop inherent in the factory parts. There are a lot of bushings in the IRS suspension that are designed for comfort, not performance. That’s what leads to wheel hop and a general feeling of “vagueness” in the rear end. The FTBR mods take care of both issues by removing the weak links in the IRS.

As an instructor, I have autocrossed lots of stock SRA and IRS 79-04 cars. The common denominator between the two suspensions is that, in stock form, it’s difficult to know exactly when you can get on the throttle. Hesitation costs you time on course; so does a lack of confidence in your inputs (throttle and steering). Modifying the SRA and IRS allows you to know exactly what the rear end is doing.

Having said all of that, I don’t want to give readers the impression that they shouldn’t bother autocrossing a stock SRA or IRS car. Driving a car with flaws will often teach you more than driving a fully-prepped car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
662 Posts
The reason I am asking about the potential of the rear suspension is that I'm currently trying to decide how to outfit my (new to me) '95. This car is destined for daily driver duty, as well as possible open track, and/or autocross fun times.

I already have a road course specific '95 with a serious 363, and the full MM catalog, PHB, and Torque arm SRA. As Jack pointed out, that is a completely different animal than a stock quadrabind. I will either go that route or a fully upgraded IRS on the new car, but in order to avoid upgrading the wrong style of axle, I need to make a decision first.

If there is little to no ultimate performance difference between the two, the SRA would be my choice due to weight, strength, simplicity, availability, and maintenance concerns. All that being said, I think the coolness factor of an IRS is off the charts, and I know there are elements (such as hitting a berm on the road course) where the IRS would remain significantly more composed. Decisions, decisions.


Jay
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Jay,

My experience is solely based in autocross, so I won’t comment on what suspension will be better on track.

Based on years of driving and riding along in Mustangs with all sorts of suspension mods from every aftermarket company out there, and looking under the cars I compete against, my humble opinion is that a prepped IRS is better than a prepped SRA. The most common elements at an autocross are slaloms and sweepers. Composure in those elements is critical, and it impacts how hard you can attack. The limit is further out with a good IRS setup. I had to push well past my comfort zone to find the limit after switching to IRS cars. But, once you recognize that the limit is further out, and the car is more composed and capable, it’s easy to take advantage of the improved handling. Essentially, the car gets better and encourages you to get better.

It’s a testament to the great aftermarket companies we have supporting these cars that your decision isn’t an easy one to make. But, I wouldn’t decide on anything until you’ve had a chance to drive a prepped IRS car in a performance setting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
662 Posts
I would like to take this opportunity to again thank you for your videos, and specifically taking the time to share your wealth of knowledge with this community. I have little doubt that there are many individuals frequenting these boards (or not) whom also have a vast amount of knowledge concerning many topics relevant here, many not sharing their wisdom for a variety of reasons. I treasure those that do!

I will take your advice to heart and try to find a ride in a well prepped IRS car if the opportunity presents itself.

Jay
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
Top