I am trying to determine if I can do away with the torque arm. What I want to do is run an intermediate bar between my subframe connectors kind of like the ladder bar crossmember sold in summit, only upside down with the hoop upside down. Then I want to run a bar about 34" long with spherical rod ends pn each end with a bracket welded to the top of the diff. This way I can adjust pinion angle. Has anyone tried this or knows of someone who has. Any advice would be greatly appreicated.

 

south side set up...did it nice and tight...it deletes the torque arm with a ladder bar type set up and frame connectors...great traction

 

I believe they stopped manufacturing that kit a few years ago.

 

We welded a threaded tube to the torque arm put in a 3/4" rod end and made an adjustable type shackle on the trans crossmember it worked very well :no broken parts ,60ft times around 1.45 and 10.00 ets@135mph.

 

so this setup works. What I want to do is run one bar parralel to the driveshaft but above it, with heim joints on each end. I have thought of using a wishbone style but I want to try this one first.

 

So you still want to run a torque arm, just a much shorter one? Where are you going to weld it to the diff?

 

What he's describing is a 3-link with a long 3rd link. The single link is in the center of the rear end with heims on either end.

This works great, and in theory is the same setup as the new mustangs only you want to run a very long 3rd link. The problem is you can't just guess at this, the angle of the 3rd link is crucial to traction. Do some searching on instant centers and anti-squat and you'll see what I'm talking about. Don't mess with a wishbone setup, you already have a panhard bar for lateral location.

Adjusting your pinion angle with this kind of setup is like buying a super computer to play solitare on. There are cheaper easier ways of doing what you want to do. If you take the time to do your research you'll see all the other benifits of a 3 link that would make this project very worth while.

 

when you say longer, how long are you talking. I think somewhere between 30"-36" will so it. I am going to weld it directly to the top of the diff. housing. I know this is going to be much more then an easier way to adjust pinion angle and lighter but those are factors in my decision. My only concern is I might over power it and bend it. If not whats the chances I could bind my suspension. I like the idea but I will have to play with it some.

 

Ohhhhh, you’re NOT planning on having the link pivot on BOTH ends. That won’t work, having the bar solidly mounted on the rear end and just pivot on the chassis end will cause it to bind big time, it will also snap the tube pretty easily since your loading it in a bending moment. You have to have some sort of provision to allow the “torque arm” to slide forward and backwards on the chassis end if you do indeed want to do a torque arm. Also you need to triangulate the torque arm, a tube is not very strong in bending, it is strong in tension and compression, which if you triangulate the arm with tubing it will load the tube in tension and compression and it will be very strong. Think of making a very long triangle with a point at the cross member, and then one at the top and bottom of your rear end. I would design some kind of triangulation into the open area of this larger triangle.

A 3-link has the single upper link pivot on both ends of the tube. This allows the rear end to rotate slightly when the suspension articulates. The new mustang upper link is around 9” long, so yeah your link would be a wee bit longer than that. Long links are a good thing, but you still need to have the proper geometry in order to make the whole shebang work correctly. Suspension design isn’t something you can just guess at, a couple of degrees here and there can make the difference between a well handling car and a one that will kill you in a heart beat. The way you are wanting to do it will bind up and kill you when it snap oversteers. Like I mentioned you need to do a LOT of research on instant centers and anti-squat and how to calculate each with a 3-link and a torque arm.

If all you are after is a way to adjust your pinion angle, then copy one of the several adj. torque arms that are on the market. Pay special attention to the way it attaches to the cross member. This is the most important aspect of the torque arm. If you restrict the movement of the torque arm in roll or more importantly fore/aft movement you’ll cause bind, which is what leads to snap oversteer. You’ll notice the stock arm is allowed to push in and out of the mount, twist is allowed just by the flimsy design of the torque arm. Don’t think GM was off their rocker to make it flimsy, they were smart about it. It really only flexes in twist, it’s pretty strong in bending.

I just noticed that in post #5 you said heims on EACH end, but in post #8 you said solidly mounted to the rear end......which is it? It makes a huge difference.

 

A torque arm style(solid mounted to rear) must have a provision to slide at the front mount. A 3-link system would have to be able to pivot at both ends. - The length of the arm and the mount points(height) would be crucial in a 3 link. Specifically the mount points. Every 1/16 of height would change your IC, the shorter the arm, the greater/faster the change. If your IC isn't in the right spot, you'll never buy traction, and it could create very bad handling under braking or other conditions.

- Unless you really know what you're doing with suspension design and tuning, stick with the tq arm. An adjustable pinion would still be a plus, but can easily be done while maintaining a sliding link.

 

It will be able to pivot at both ends. There will be a bracket on the top of the diff. housing, similar to a shock mount where a heim joint will sit inside with a bolt through it. In the other end there is a crossmember with a similar bracket on it where a heim joint will go. I understand that a torque needs to slide back and forth, but if that is the case then how does BMR's track pak work. The front of the toraue arm in the kit just has a nylon bushings that bolts to the new crossmember. I also understand that suspension is a dangerous thing if you not know how to make it work. That is why I am researching the idea and laying it down on paper over and over again. Thanks

 

You'll notice in the picture that both the crossmember and the torque arm have bushings and the little brackets with two holes in it hook the two together. This lets it swing forward and backwards.

If you want some hardcore tech, head over to Corner-Carvers.com and search for 3-link info. You'll get way more info than you ever dreamed of, even one of the original ram charges (of 60's drag racing fame) puts in his 2 cents since he was one of the first to ever use this design. Don't bother signing up because you won't have much to add, and newbieness is frowned upon over there. I've been there for over a year and only have 30 post's. If you do want to sign up, READ THE RULES and abide by them.

 

so it mounts solid to the rearend but it swings on the crossmember. I think with a little more strength mine will work. I think instead of the heim joint on the rearend side I might just connect it to the rearend in the stock location.

 

Then your jumping right back over to a torque arm, and you'll have to hinge it on the crossmember side. Either do it like that setup or do some kind of rod and bushing setup like most of the other torque arm designs do it.

Like I said before, your playing with fire unless you understand what your messing with. Go do some reading and figure out the geometry side of things FIRST then design the torque arm or 3-link from there. There is nothing wrong with copying a well engineered design for your own use, and I'm telling you without a doubt that without research your only going to make it worse. I would lay out exactly how and why this all works, but it would take a week and about 5 pages of typing. The information you need is out there, just start digging. You might want to look into Carrol Smiths "tune to win" book, very handy book that would explain alot for you.

 

BMmonteSS is all over this one. - If you solid mount the link, it has to have a slider. If you want to do away with the slider, then it has to pivot at both ends. To put your tabs on top the diff you'll have to build a "bridge" structure up and across the diff housing(from axle tube to axle tube), as the housing is cast and simply welding to it will not be strong enough.
If you go with the 3-link, the mount height of the ends - thus the angle of the bar, and the theoretical point of intersect with the lca's(IC), will decide how the car will handle. If they're not within reason of the proper IC of the car it can make the car handle very poorly, even causing major handling issues. - I'm not saying this to detour you, just making sure you understand what you're doing before you act upon it. A poorly set-up suspension can easily lead to a crash. - do A LOT of research before taking this plunge, for the sake of yourself and others on the road.
If you stick with the tq arm style(solid mount at the diff) you must have a slider or pivot of some type at the front mount point or the suspension will bind during travel. Bind makes for ill handling and leads to broken parts. As BMmonteSS said, the BMR arm has poly or spherical(optional either way), mounts on the arm and the crossmember, which are tied together via two small plates - the plates act as a pivot, thus it can move front to back. The ta arm system is more forgiving in the sense that as long as it does not bind(improper slider, etc) it won't cause any drastic improper actions. - Length and mount height do change how the system works, but IC is not dependent upon it, thus there is much less chance for failure and/or improper reaction.

I personally like the tq arm system, but I am not trying to sway your decision either way. I'm just trying to make sure you realize the effects(and possible effects) of what you're talking about doing.

 

OOOOOR... You can look into this kit.



Its made by G-Force Suspension, Inc.

I talked to a few people and the kit will work without the coil overs and all that other jazz. Its designed for a 4th gen...but if all you are using is the rear ladder bar set up, it should work.

If you look around on the site under suspension systems for f-bodies, you will see just the ladder bars. The list for $450. Which isnt much more than some torque arm set ups. And plus you are getting aftermarket controls arms..

Im doing alittle research to see if its worth it on a daily driver that will see light drag duty and light auto x duty. Basically Im trying to see how versitile the kit will be. One of my main reasons for liking the kit is to ditch the torque arm and be able to make a trans crossmember to handle some nice exhaust. And give more room for that exhaust in the tunnel.

Just an idea.

Justin

 

That has got to be the worst suspension design......since.....well I don't know maybe the leaf spring. No offence but that setup is horrible in every aspect.

First it's not a 4-link, since the upper links don't pivot on their own they only keep the rear end from rotating. This setup is more like an ultra short ladder bar setup, and ladder bars are horrible for handling when their long. I don't even know how to start to calculate the IC of this abortion. That company scares the shight out of me, If these people are making money I might start up my own company. I'll see if i can get some time tomarrow to go over how bad of an idea a setup like this is....it could take a while.

 

Hey...Im not suspension genius. The idea behind it seemed sound. And there are a handful of people that are at 400+ftlbs of torque with no issues. Most people say that it hooks great and is much quieter and smoother than an adjustable tubular torque arm.

Actually...if you do have reasons for why the set up is horrible, Ide like to hear them. I know that sounds like Im being a smart *** but it was an honest request. Like I said, Im not a suspension genious. So any good info would be awsome.

In the offroad world, there is a similar set up for jeep long arm suspension. Referred to usually as y-link radius arms. I know its not the same thing...but its what it reminded me of.



In a well built jeep or any rig, 4-low produces some serious torque. Especially if you are running a 4:1 transfer case or double transfer cases. While they are usually used on the front...I have seen people adapt these to the rear as well. On the newer wranglers usually...

I wish I would have paid attention in geometry in high school and college. haha.

Again...Im not starting any crap, and I dont want this to turn into a bashing of the company... Lets keep it to constructive input and civil suspension conversation

Justin

 

they're horrible, mostly because they're WAY to short. That set-up is basically an overly short ladder bar. Ladder bars are crap for daily driving simply because they make the car handle horrible while cornering. Ladder bars have one pivot, mounted at a fixed point. They won't allow body roll(twist). The 4x4 type set-ups are either mounted on large bushings or mounted with a double joint to compensate for this, plus they're long which allows the bars to twist some, plus allows for decent geometry and travel. The system you pictured is basically a pipe that ties to the lca from above the diff, thus keeping the axle from twisting w/o the tq arm. You have just effectively moved your IC to the front of the lca, in a car that is already nose heavy, and you no longer have any adjustment in the suspension other than pinion angle(lca relocates won't work with the upper link unless you change the length/mount point of the upper link). So you now have a non-adjustable suspension that has no leverage to hook the car, and it now tries to twist the lca mounts out of the body when going around corners. - It may work for a car on slicks, but it'll never work well. What are these peoples' 60ft's on these? Probably less than my 1.66, and I'm on 17" street tires.

BMmonteSS - I could knock about 10-20 sets of those out a day, you got a name for the company? I'm thinking PP engineering(as in **** Poor). Man the money I could make if I was in to ripping people off......

- I also wanted to note that their claims of the tq arm system being "noisy and un-smooth" are nuts. That only happens when the components aren't greased/installed properly. - As for the trans x-member, look into the BMR and other good aftermarket tq arms. They'll allow you to change the x-member how ever you like(although there is no performance gain in dual exh)

 

G-force suspension is the way to go my friend just got it on his car and it is remarkable,the car rides a little bit smoother and launches like a SOB its worth the cash(imo),i know my next suspension mod for sure!

 

I am with BMmonte on this, those arms are way to short. if you wanted to to that route, something like a truck-arm suspension would be better. you are going to have some crazy IC migration with a setup like that. that is my biggest concer. at rest you could get the IC to a descent spot, if you had the adjustabiltiy built in to really get it set right. but as soon as you start using the suspension (read: movement), your IC will be all over the place.

BM -- do you have hte same username on C-C?

 

brutalform is right- the kit is no longer manufactured. It would be the hot-tip if you could find someone who has a kit laying around his basement. <cough> like me <cough>

PM me if you're interested.

 

We used the same setup on 2 different cars they both bolted solid to the rear (1 12 bolt 1 ford 9") and mounted to the cross member with a 3/4" rod end and a single bolt through an adjustable shackle no slider like the stock one it never bound up, never broke ,bent or anything.we ran these cars on the street and at the track no problems at all and as I posted before 10.00 ets with 1.45 60ft times.The pics BMmonteSS posted is similar to what we made.Why dont you just buy something like that its a proven part.Also as others have said it not a good idea to make your own suspension parts it could easily lead to a crash.

 

take a look at this.. i think i might get one. JEGS High Performance - Jegster Camaro/Firebird Torque Arm

 

I wonder why South Side no longer makes that kit? If it was a good set up, you think they would continue to make it. I would think the price of the kit, and the fact it was a real PITA to install, is why it did not sell real well. I remember when it first came out, probably in the early to mid 90s, it was a big kit, that required alot of welding.

The frame connectors that came with it were not a great fit to the car. I was told you had alot of fabbing to do, to get it to fit correctly. You had to add gussets to it, that were not supplied in the kit. Also, once the pinion angle was set, that was it, as it was all welded together.

When it first came out, the price was pretty affordable, but then, the price of the kit tripled in price. Then after some of the affordable adjustable arms came out, it was just not a good option anymore.

Also, factor in the weight the kit added to the car. I would not doubt if it added a hundred pounds or more.

 

FB 383, do you know how much it weighs?

 

I have the SouthSide setup on my car bought it back in the 90's since then they have gone out of buisness Lakewood bought them out but they seem to only make lift bars now for leaf spring cars and mustangs.

 

Probably because they no longer exist. SSM went out of business about 3-4 years ago.
I have the frame connectors on my car, they fit fine. The only 'fabbing' that needed to be done was one of my rockers was bent up from some clueless body man who jacked the car up on the rocker.

 

I did not know they went out of business. I remember that they stopped making the kit before going out. Jegs, and Summit still carried their products, but not the C/FB kit.

Its been a while since I thumbed through a catalog.

 

how could this system ride better? The only thing it does is eliminate the tq arm and kill adjustability. The tq arm doesn't hurt ride quality if it's installed properly, so saying it's smoother is just like saying a chip on a 85 ccc car made it faster. Your IC is now at the back of the car, non adjustable, and changes rapidly during suspension cycle. The entire design is horrible. Think of this, ever see any really trick drag cars running ladder bars. Not that they don't work, but you'll never see it in todays pro classes because of lack of adjustability. The IC is basically non-adjustable after install. You can change the bars leverage and response by changing the front mount height, but the IC remains basicallythe same, towards the back of the car(the front mount). With a 4-link you can change the bars to infinite postions, which allows for infinite adjustment of IC. This allows you to hook the tires with infinte different power motors, gearing, trans, different weight ratios(front/rear), etc.
The G-force system is basically non-adjustable, only allowing for pinion angle changes. It's the same as lader bars, only overly short and no front mount adjustment. Yes, it may hook harder vs a factory component worn-out tq arm suspension, but vs any decent set-up....its crap.

- Think of this, if thats system rides better, handles better and hooks better, then why would GM have gone through the trouble of designing and producing the tq arm?

as for the ssm lift bars, they're ok. Yes, the system works, but all it is is a ladder bar set-up that requires slightly less work to install, but also has no adjustability. It would also act just like regular ladder bars in the fact that any body roll around corners would be translate to the bars' twisting the body/rear end housing. - It's been said before, ladder bars work good for drag racing, they're not designed for anything else.

 

Brutalform is right once the ssm bars are welded in thats it no adjustability.Shagwell is right its not a better ride but it does work for the drags, not that it wouldnt work on a street car but there is better stuff out there to use. Im redoing my firebird now and putting the motor back in its stock location(it was previous lowered 3") which means to reset my pinion angle I need to cut and reweld the SSM bars.This is not going to be a 20 min job!!!

 

a shackle, as in like a spring shackle? If so, then yes, you had a pivot/slider, so it was fine. If not, then if it was solid mounted to the diff(as in no allowed movement in any direction, welded solid) then it was creating a bind. It either has to have a pivot/slider system or it has to be allowed to pivot at both ends(ie: rod-ends on each end), or it will bind. - Depending on material used and how the vehicle is used could be the difference between breaking it or not.

 

Your right Shagwell it has to move free or it will bind our "shackle" WAS a leaf spring shackle welded to the trans x-member it made the torque arm adjustable as far as up and down to change pinion angle but it didnt allow the t/a to slide back and forth like the stock setup.

Getting back to 355gta just buy a proven setup forget all the guesswork. Just my opinion after doing all the work already.