While working on a buddies mustang i noticed that his rear sway bar was directly bolted to the bottoms of the lower control arms ( its a hotchkis setup). Would this be better or worse than our 3rdgen setups with the rear swaybar attached to the body and rear? The only thing i could think about was to keep the rear tires even around a turn. Anyone know??

 

Ultimately they function the same way.
The stang design uses two fasteners on each LCA to fix the swaybar ends (non flexable) to and make them follow the movement of the LCA and rely on torsional resistance to resist roll.
The F body bar also relies on torsional resistance of the bar but has flexible mounts on the axle and flexible mounted endlinks that attach to the body.
The stang setup is lighter and simpler, the F body setup is designed like most front sway bars and offers more roll resistance (given the same diameter bar) due to more mouning points, and offers easy adjustability for preload, but is a little heavier and more complex (more parts).

 

Bars mounted to the LCA's in any manner put the LCA's in bending as the car rolls in a turn, this is in addition to whatever tension or compression results from braking or acceleration respectively and a slightly heavier gauge metal may be required for the LCA's.

The bar mounting method for G-bodies is somewhat similar to the Mustang, except that most G-body bars mount through the sides of the LCA's. On the plus side of the books for the G-body design is that bars mounted through the sides of the LCA's provides some resistance against the sides of the LCA's buckling under heavy acceleration loads.

Norm

 

thanks for the info guys