Looking for feedback on running the umi torque arm that relocates to the trans mount with the shackle on the street. I got one to run on my '87 but there was no way of running long tubes with it. The new car will get shorties with a y pipe so exhaust isn't an issue. I read in the past that binding could be a problem. This is a strictly street car for my kid and tbh if she's launching it it'll be coming back to me.

 

I just noticed that it's been over two weeks since you posted this and no one has responded. I've researched these "shackle" torque arms and what I'm reading online leads me to expect noise from the front shackle. There will almost certainly be some clunking going on that you (or her) will be able to hear. I'm planning to stay away from the shackle type of torque arm.

 

i'm using the BMR Trak Pak (this one) on my car which i assume is similar to the UMI product. the main reason i used this type of torque arm setup is because i'm running a 4L80E tranny and needed to get the arm mount off the tranny tailshaft. i have the cross bar that the shackles connect to welded between my subframe connectors. i haven't noticed any odd noises since installation and not sure how to tell if it's binding. seems to be working fine and solved my tranny swap / torque arm mount issue.

 

Ya, that's how it mounts to the cross member. We're still a ways out before getting into it but it's good to see someone running a similar setup without issues.

 

I have a shackle style on my setup. It's fine. I've had it for years. I drive like an *** in the car and have no issues w that design. That area on these cars is really busy. My car has a magnum f in it and the shackle is a much tighter fit than stock trans setup. I fee like it's really important that there is clearance for the shackle to move freely as the suspension cycles. There are different joints available for these. I have a poly joint there. It's the only poly joint left in my rear suspension. I've thought about swapping to a roto joint here as well but why mess w success at this point.

 

Do you have a crossmember in mind?

 

It's a crossmember and torque arm kit.
https://www.umiperformance.com/2216-...-arm-700r4-t5/
I didn't realize it was $500 now.

 

While there are some that report little trouble with the shackle type TA Mount, there are many that complain about noise and binding issues. Perhaps that's a case of the squeaky wheel so to speak. That said, I elected to avoid that possibility and went with something with fewer moving parts.
UMI offers this arm with a sliding busing. Similar to an OEM style but it allows for greater articulation.

https://www.umiperformance.com/2205-...rm-adjustable/

​​​​​Although designed to work with a transmission mounted support, Holley makes a crossmember that provides an alternative means of attaching the TA.
​​​https://www.holley.com/products/engi...ts/71222005HKR

And added benefit is that the crossmember has excellent provisions for the exhaust should long tubes ever enter the picture.
That's my setup now although it's yet to reassembled (yet again). I've got my modified OEM crossmember is play at the moment with a reworked exhaust planned later.

 

That setup should work fine. The spohn verson I have has a rod end setup on the shackle end of the torque arm. That way you can fine tune things a little better and change to heim/roto joints. It also adds one more thing to loosen up though.

 

I have the round end one with the Holley crossmember on my car. I had to get it in order to clear long tubes and the blackheart exhaust. With the UMI there was no way. That's how I have this setup unused. The exhaust situation is not a big deal on her car because if anything it'll be shorties with a y-pipe and stock style cat back.

 

One thing I like about about the UMI crossmember is the built in drive shaft loop. You mention how crowded it is in that area and it certainly is. With my current exhaust, the Y-merge is right there and a loop is all but impossible. Sometimes it's difficult passing tech when I show up slicks for racing.
Something else that'll need to be addressed.
As for the Holley crossmember, I'm always interested in pictures of the exhaust routing with one of these. Plenty of room but the devil is in the details.

 

Never had any issues or binding with cross member mounted torque arms. The key is not to overtorque/tighten the mounting bolts on the moving parts….they need to move lol put some grease on the bushing and parts and its good to go

 

 

Thanks! Is that 3".

 

Are there zerk fittings similar to that on a tubular rear control arm?

 

3" collectors and 2.5" system.

I don't remember if the shackle end has zerk fittings or not.

 

I used the UMI #2261 crossmember and their #2205 torque arm.

Cleared the long tubes better than UMI's other crossmember (which was a non-starter). #2205 is also a slider-style, so avoids potential issues with the shackle. And crossmember was only $270.

 

I didn't see that crossmember when I posted the link to their shackle style version. It looks to have the same provision for the TA bushing similar to the Holley also posted.
Looks to be plenty of options.

 

The main detractor of the UMI and BMR "Trak Pak" style mid-length arms is the ground clearance absolutely sucks. Your undercarriage will hit the road occasionally, and you will frequently sled into parking lots. It's not street friendly equipment. ​​​I got rid of mine because I felt it was only a matter of time until I hit something immovable....

 

yes my spohn one with poly bushings had a grease fitting

my midwest one has a rod end

 

It does. You can use the slider style torque arm which I think is superior.

UMI technically says it's for a 4l60E swap, and wouldn't commit to whether it will work on a 700R4. But it did.

 

What exactly is going to be too low that the body would scrape? I've got no issues with ground clearance in my car with the sliding end kind and that's with 1.5" drop springs. This style torque arm doesn't hang any lower than the stock one. Now, I'm not keen on how thick the trans mount is but the car will not be lowered. In fact it's getting new Moog springs all around.

 

I used the first one listed because I did a TKO 600 swap in mine and needed the whole crossmember also. It works good . No binding or noise however I did install grease fittings on the bushings and use dielectric grease on them.

 

Don't worry, you don't have the type of arm I'm talking about.

 

Oh, yeah I've seen those. I can certainly see how that would be problematic on the street.

 

This reminds me of the 502 TA I had on the street for a while. With the big block and being lowered the first incident was an expansion joint on a highway bridge. It met the oil pan and sliced a nice little groove into it ending in a pin hole that let all of that nice new Mobil 1 out onto the pavement. Then, not having learned, on a road that was under construction, I failed to notice the slightly raised manhole cover. It smacked the bell housing (TKO 500) in a mighty way. How it didn't destroy anything was a matter of luck . The car went back to stock ride height after that. Then was parked for twenty years.