Mr.Franco

I have been going back and forth looking up info. and I can't seem to get a clear answer. I know that after market solid torque arms are better for straight line racing/performance, but how about for road racing?

My thoughts are that you'd want the flex that the stock arm gives for rear axle oscillation, but use the relocation crossmember so that it doesn't put stress on the tail-shaft of the transmission...thoughts!?

leeperryracing

You're overthinking this, the aftermarket pieces are superior in every way to the stock, flexy stamped steel ones. Get one that moves the mount off of the tranny tailshaft when/if you buy.

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

The transmission tunnel frame rails are basically made of tin foil and the crossmember mounting holes arent exactly strong either. I am hesitant to put anything carrying a lot of stress onto the crossmember these days. Much less of a concern with a T5, but with a4th gen trans that pushes the trans mount back 2 inches, the amount of torque placed on the crossmember mounting holes is high enough already.

I dont doubt that a crossmember mounted TA performs better, but I do have doubts about its long term repercussions on the structural integrity of the crossmember mount area. I'd probably rather go with something like the jegster that foregoes the idea of mounting on the crossmember completely. Or the shorter UMI arms that have their own crossmember built off of the subframe connectors. Short arms have problems, too, though. Namely instability under braking.

Mr.Franco

Actually, I don't think I'm over thinking it at all. The F-Body has a solid axle and the torque arm is located at the center of the differential and runs down the center of the body. As the rear end/suspension oscillates, the stock torque arm can flex to allow the suspension to absorb the road. A solid/rigid torque arm would minimize suspension travel and the stress of the torsion would be put at mounting points of the solid torque arm (rear diff pumpkin & mounting point at trans cross-member).

I believe the original purpose of the solid torque arm was intended for a drag strip set up in order to help plant the rear tires/eliminate wheel hop (along with solid trailing/control arms). Based on my assumptions, this would decrease the efficiency of the suspension on windy roads.

Mr.Franco

I agree with adding a stronger crossmember with the torque arm relocation bracket. I think it's a better way to go. My question is regarding the use of a solid torque arm for hard cornering/road racing. I'm not sure if it would improve handling (might even add unwanted oversteer), so with that in mind, money could be saved or invested into parts that directly improve handling (tires???).

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

False, they are heavier than stock. So not superior in EVERY way.

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

It's not the crossmember I'm worried about. It's the weak frame rails it's mounted to.

I've heard Dean say that aftermarket torque arms are a big improvement for handling, and if he thinks so, I'm inclined to agree. I would imagine getting some sort of articulating joint instead of stamped metal clamped into a rubber sandwich helps.

leeperryracing

Iron heads are also heavier than aluminum heads....whats your point??

MoJoe

iTrader: (5)

You want suspension components to be as stiff / rigid / non-flexy as possible. Flexing suspension components is almost always bad. Bushings and bearings are the designed components to provide suspension movement to follow the road.

Unless you are talking Top Fuel cars, where the chassis is the suspension, no one, at least in the third gen world is going to solid mount any of the suspension... rear axle, front spindles.

Yes, the torque arm IS solidly mounted to the rear axle. BUT, the front end has a rubber bushing between the arm and the trans mount. The compliance in the rubber will allow the arm to pivot, which allows up/down and side-to-side motion at the axle. Also, the arm can slide in and out of the bushing to allow the minor changes in wheelbase length as the rear end moves.
All aftermarket arms will provide SOME sort of bushing or bearing or pivot assembly to allow movement.

Notice how Spohn's standard arm has a urethane bushing that allows the arm side slide back and forth, like stock:



Spohn's heavy duty arm has a pivot AND bearing.

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

Good luck getting ANY sort of decent exhaust around that behemoth.

paul_huryk

Global West makes a torque arm for handling (road race and autocross) for the 3rd gens, featuring a shorter arm length than stock and different mounting points. While I have one - never installed it, but have heard excellent reviews from people who have gone that route.

Alice89

iTrader: (6)

Hi Paul, When do you plan to install the GW piece?
I'm torn between the GW Tracklink & the Jegster tunnel mount arm. I would really like to hear a review on the tracklink.

http://www.jegs.com/i/Global+West/459/TSC-22/10002/-1

^^^^This is the one you have right?

Ghettobird52

ROFLMAO

IROCtheThird

iTrader: (15)

Im honestly going with the S&W piece that mounts to their SFC's which I really like. I'm going to replace the poly LCA style bushing at the front with a roto-joint. Its 10 inches shorter than stock. The UMI is about 14 inches shorter than stock and I assume the BMR Trak Pak is about the same. I hear alot about the braking issue with the shorter arm but usually its just people talking theory but Im going to test it out and if I get issues I'll try higher rear spring rates. I have 200#/in in there right now with Koni yellows.

IROCtheThird

iTrader: (15)

TQ Arm:
SFC's:

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

Does anyone know if that traclink is autocross legal for CP? CP is basically anything goes, but there are some things that get their panties in a bunch... I seem to remember torque arms being one of them.

Not sure if it will work with my crossmember anyway without some serious modification, though.

92rs85berlintta

iTrader: (1)

I personally didn't notice a difference with my spohn tq arm and x-member. The mount is stronger, but as far as performance, it didn't really change for me.

SlickTrackGod

Any time anything flexes under the car under any load it is not trasfering load consistantly from the chassis to the ground OR also from the ground to the chassis. What? Yes, the one point overlooked here- braking zone. A solid mounted tqarm that does not flex in the bushing nor the arm itself will render a much more consistant brake pedal feel.

If you do not notice the difference between a solid mounted aftermarket one and a stock one then you still have many inferior links in your suspension and chassis platform that are masking results.

The torque arm is definately an improvement for a road race car because it will allow throttle and brake modulations to set the chassis attitude responsively into-through-and out of a corner with proper pedal work. Those that just slam the gas and slam the brake pedal need not apply and would greatly benefit from some tq absorbtion flex of the stock unit. In other words, by a good solid mounted aftermarket arm that does not flex and learn to work the pedals and feel the chassis...in the end you will be a far better driver and faster lap times.

The GW unit is nice, I have driven with a few of them. I have never set up a car with one though I have tinkersed a little with grey gooses car with shock valving and swaybar changes on a track day I was with him at. I like the feel of his car and had no brake hop issues when we put my racing slicks onto it. We put a Jegs unit into Black Mamba's car and it does have a little knocking issue on the slide mechanism. Had to turn the rear bias dwn slightly due to wheel hop (Val has a bias ****) but the bias adjustment is very sensitive compoared to the stock unit. He is on KYB's and just some average lowered sport springs and I gaurantee the car will wheelhop if I put the racing tires onto it. We need to up his rear spring rate slightly and he needs to install some better shocks he finally bought (soon on my list- Ive been very busy). I put a jegs relocator on Vals car, and Jerry built a panhard relocator from scratch for Mikes cars so both have altered roll axis in the rear and are both fairly equivilant in ride height- Valentin's (Black Mamba) slightly higher in the nose. Bth brake packages are close, Mikes are 1LEs and Vals are the Baer brake 1le package. We have not yet put Val's car on the track since the Jegs addition a few months ago, but I when he runs track/vs street we drop the panhard one notch for the track heat to keep his rearend from loosening up in corners with greasy street tires. Mikes car stays consistant street or track but Mike (grey goose) I feel because of the slightly shorter GW tq arm helps prevent the GW rear race springs from unloading (jacking effect ) under hard braking, yet is not too short to yank the wheels upward to induce wheelhop. Vals car is very touchy under lateral heavy braking unless we drop the panhard one notch, but then his steering gets heavy and I have to use the brake pedal a little mor eto get the car to initiate rotation. Again though, this testing was donw with the Jegs unit just around the neighborhood, not on a track yet so I still need to get accurate testing but expect Ill need to raise his rear spring rate slightly and leave that panhard down one more notch(plus get his beter shock in there finally).

Yes, aftermarket tq arms are definately worth it. I had the Spohn unit which was very heavy though, but I also massively increased the rod end on it to take the punishment I was giving it- I thrashed the rodend that came with it(As I am very hard on everything- Im the guy that breaks stuff others don't, mainly becasue I drive the wheels off stuff to their potential and then some...may be arrogant, but true). To offset the weight of the Spohn tqarm, I went to the carbon fiber driveshaft, drilled axles, lightweight gears, lightweight rear willwood brakes- and to be honest if I had known about the GW unit when I bought the Spohn unit yeas ago I would have opted for the GW unit now that I now the cars better almost two decades later- bought mine in something like 1999 or 2000 mainly off of things I read on this forum when I first was researching parts options for this car and building it for the first time (never before tinkered with a 3rd gen)

The GW unit would be my choice today. Jegs is a cheaper alternative, but is a little noisey and a little too short- but Id rather have it then the stock log one as long as you are doing proper spring rate trial and error to get then balance and roll axis dialed.

So again, to answer the question of "is a aftermarket tq arm woth it for road racing or autox type applications? absolutely yes especially under braking modulation consistancy.

SlickTrackGod

Here's pics of my old tq arm with the massive rodend I put into there. It's twice the size of the stock Spohn unit.

And as for an exhaust not fitting- that happens to be a custom 34" long 3.5" round stainless steel bullet muffler I had custom built from StainlessWorks and I welded into the I-pipe position up inside my trans tunnel next to the Spohn tq arm. There goes that myth. I also had a massive 4" round carbon fiber driveshaft up[ inside there- and trust me you don't want that rubbing on anything...and nothing ever did. So lets reveiw- Spohn massive tqarm+3.5" exhaust + 4" driveshaft all tuked up inside the trans tunnel on a car that sat VERY low at 24 3/4" front fender lip and 25 7/8" rear fender lip.


Also food for thought on you raod race guys- This was a V6 car I extensively built that was very light weight on the nose- you will also see I reduced rear polar weight taking off the typical heavy *** rear exhaust setup everyone runs hanging out back behind the wheelbase. makes a dramtic difference just loosing that 40+ lbs off the rear in transitioning weight.

I also added a pic of my motor bay.

Alice89

iTrader: (6)

Thanks for the review; I'll go ahead and get the GW traclink.

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

Can you get some pictures of how it attaches to the crossmember? I have an unusual crossmember for exhaust clearance +LT reasons, so Im not sure how well it could be modified to work with something like that.