I need to drop my fuel tank to replace the fuel pump, so it seems a perfectly logical time to change out the last of my rear suspension... I autocross the car, but also still drive it on the road, to and from work and what not. I also just recently dropped a 470 hp 383 in it, hence the need for the fuel pump!

I considered a lowering and leveling kit for my adjustable UMI roto panhard bar, but the more im reading, it sounds if ypu want proper balance, and the same feel / respins when turning left and right, the Watts Link is the way to go. Im a buy once cry once kind of guy, where i think it really makes a difference.

I've read up on the listing for the UMI, BMR, and Fays2 kits. I have been unable to find any discussion of direct differences between each kit... the fays2 kit seems to sit higher, not sure if that is better or not. The Umi goes between the passenger side panhard bar mounts, and the BMR mounts further backward, away from the axle mounting behind the back tab of the factory panhard bar mount. I know there is a lot of discussion of weight differences, but I have a hard time believing that will make that noticeable of a difference. I like the fine adjustability of the UMI, where the BMR seems a bit coarser. Lastly, the Fays2 seems to be the cheapest with the BMR in the middle, and the UMI costing the most. I would love to hear others thoughts, or better yet, personal experiences with each!

https://www.bmrsuspension.com/?page=...642&superpro=0



https://www.umiperformance.com/2080-...dy-watts-link/




http://www.fays2.net/fays2_watts_link_21_.html



82-02 Camaro Trans-am Firebird Bolt In Watts Link | Midwest Chassis Inc.

 

I'd like to hear someone who has used the BMR Watts link. Looks "complicated" with three bolts/nuts on the center to adjust whereas Fays2 and UMI each only use one. Although in my experience, once you find an ideal setting, you're likely not going to be tweaking it much.

I've had the Fays2 for 11 years with no issues. Although I didn't autocross for about six years during that time. I didn't do the initial install but have had it off and on at least once since then, and it was pretty easy. I think it was the only game in town when I got it, so I can't tell you why I picked it over the others.

Pat

 

How is the clearance between the linkage and your diff cover with the Fays2? Are you running a stamped steel one, or a cast aluminum one that sticks out a bit further? Factory 10 bolt or something different? I see the other two seem to offset the main bar further to the rear...

 

I've had the Fays2 for about ten years or so now. Haven't had any issues at all. Makes driving on the streets a little nicer. As for clearance with the cover, it's fairly tight, but nothing hits or makes any contact. I have the stock 10-bolt, but with an LPW cover.

 

I have a stock 10-bolt and cover. It's close but no issues.

Pat

 

I've got one of the Trick Flow aluminum covers, so it's about the same shape as the LPW cover.

I did just find another option Midwest Chassis. I'll add it to the OP.

 

I have neither, however the fays is the better design IMHO. Cleaner, simpler and less bulk/weight added to the axle.

 

3rd Gen Guy on YouTube and @McLovin1181 here on the forum uses the Fay's2 Suspension Watts Link. He races his Camaro.

Jim Fay makes bolt in Watts Link rear suspensions. He doesn't make 400 other things too, just Watts Links and GM A-body sway bar brackets and Mustang trailer tie down brackets. He might be pretty good at it.

Watts Link install. - Third Generation F-Body Message Boards

3rd Gen Guy - YouTube

 

I didn't realize @McLovin1181 was the same person from that you tube channel. I have watched hours and hours of his videos. I actually just watched those install and review videos on the Fays2 watts link yesterday, before I saw your post about it. He posted the install video about 2 years ago, if he had any update on his thoughts of that or any of the currently offered watts links, I would love to hear from him here!

I agree the Fays2 looks the simplest and seems to hug the chassis a bit better doesn't stick out as far. I also like that it comes with bushings to allow you to use the rod axle mounts on axles with either 2.75" (Stock 10 bolt) or 3" axle tubes. One negative I read, actually in a for sale posting was that someone was selling a Fays2 to buy the MWC one I just added, saying when going to larger exhaust, he found he had to go to that one for exhaust tube clearance. I'm currently running a 3" Magnaflow cat back, but the new engine I built is so darn loud, that I think I am going to have to build a new exhaust system with a secondary intermediate muffler in it, and turn downs at the exit instead of angle cut straight tips... If I do this though, I'll probably go with a 3.5" tubing size for the new cat back and I'm a bit worried that may not fit over the Fays2 design... Anyone have experience with how large of exhaust you can fit over that watts link setup?

 

Fays2 owner for 15 years now, and zero problems. This is on a C Prepared Firebird with a 9" diff. We run slicks, so we have put it through its paces. Those UMI and BMR units look HEAVY, more than necessary, IMHO. While they shouldn't be made out of aluminum, they don't have to support the weight of a motorhome, either. The Fays2 is well built, and still on the original heim ends.

 

Thats very positive feedback. Are ypu running an exhaust that goes over the rear axle? If so, how big is that tube? Any clearance issues?

 

Looks like he's being modest ha ha.
I believe he's a multiple time national champion as well.

Anyways I've been pretty happy with my Fays Watts link.
Autocrossing & road racing aside, even on the street; watts links have better ride quality than a pan-hard bar.
I'd stay far away from UMI or BMR for anyone interested.

 

Thanks for the feedback. The Fays2 is looking more and more like the smart choice at this point. Only thing I still want to verify, is that a 3.5' over the axle exhaust tube will fit...

Also, on a 9" rear end, did ypu have to modify the link arm mounts, or without the aluminum spacers does it fit that size rear end tube? I plan to run my 10 bolt till it self destructs, but after that the 9" sounds like the way to go... I just want to future proof my plan.

I think it's really cool to be getting setup tips from you guys, with all you've achieved! I've only been at autox for about 3 yrs, and only when I'm lucky do I podium in my CAM-T class, usually out of only 3 or 4 people...lol!

 

That BMR unit looks wild and overly complicated. I would think something like this simplicity would be your friend

 

The Fays2 Watts link works with the stock 2.5in axle tubes and 3in tubes on aftermarket axles.
As far as exhaust routing, I don't know since I don't run my exhaust out the back of the car.

 

So I effectively decided on the Fays2 set up only to find the price just went up from $795 to $975! So over a grand shipped... Making me reconsider the MWC a bit more, and I think that one ships free...

Anyone have any feedback or experience with the MWC offering???

4th gen guys seem to like it!

https://ls1tech.com/forums/suspensio...ispreloading=1

 

Since it's a prepared car, we have no need to put that much pipe under it, so we don't. The picture above was taken before our LS swap. It had a 305 in it at the time. It had shortys and an exhaust that exited the right side of the car with a long-dead glass pack 'muffler' that stopped. about mid-door. The car wouldn't pass sound with that exhaust. We redid the whole thing with the LS. The muffler is under the rear passenger seat well. Since we no longer take 4 passengers in the car, the seat well was cut out and replaced by a flat piece of steel. That gave us space for a bigger muffler. The turn down is just ahead of the passenger side axle tube.

The entire exhaust is due for a rebuild to a hopefully better system. It'll still run in the same space, but be a different muffler and mandrel-bent tubing all welded up.

 

Us? No. Multi-time Regional champion, but not National. My co-driver has won a couple of Divisionals in CPL. We've made it once to Nationals, when they were in Topeka. The plan then was to NOT finish DFL, and we succeeded. With retirement, we hope to be able to travel to events again, and maybe make another Nationals, or two.

We now do it mostly for the fun of driving now. Not chasing the pointy-end of the class, and we're fine doing that. We actually mostly compete between ourselves to see who is faster than who at any given event. The car is pretty dependable, easy, and mostly-fun to drive.

 

So, I found a line on one of the Fays2 setups still being offered at the old price! But, I just also got some unfortunate feedback, that my 3.5" exhaust with the Fays2 "would be extremely tight. The kick back of the Fays frame limits pipe size and even 3” stuff is snug."

Starting to look like unless I go for the far more complex UMI or BMR offerings, the MWC may be my best bet.

 

Well that bites!! Oval pipe? The scope creep of the project is probably not worth that.

 

This is installed on a 3rd gen Camaro straight off MWC website. I would just give them a quick call and ask them if it will work for your setup

 

Yea, I'm confident the MWC would fit 3.5" pipe.

In the end price does still come into play though, not only excluding options, but bringing others into play...

I've been able to find some sources that appear to have an outlier for pricing, based on coupon codes and shipping costs.

Total shipped prices to me outside Chicago:
Fays2 - Not going to fit my exhaust without modifications.
MWC - $832
BMR - $764
UMI - $857

The concept of the additional axle brackets on the UMI is growing on me, and given the price I found, it's only $25 more than the MWC. I like that they are height adjustable, but the rods always stay on the same plane, instead of changing the forward sweeping angle like the simpler kits where the arm rotates about the axle tube....

 

If it were me personally I'd go with Midwest Chassis. They know their **** and fitment will be bar none.

That being said I'm bias towards MWC. I bought a QP 9 inch rear end and I've never seen such horrible fitment. I sold that off and bought a MWC 9 inch and was amazed at how it just went back in the car like I was bolting a factory 10 bolt rear end back in the car

 

That's interesting. I have literally zero familiarity with MWC, this is the first part I'm ever considering from them. Their website descriptions aren't great, but that does not necessarily mean everything... I've also heard theirs does not come with any instructions which may also not be a huge deal since I'm pretty sure I understand how these go on, but I just want to make sure I get all the fine tuning correct.

I've basically narrowed it down to MWC or UMI, so I have posted a poll to put some actual numbers down of which I should go with given my 3.5" exhaust and my road/autox application.

 

One vote so far huh? There have to be more opinions out there...

I got my new 3.5" exhaust mostly installed last night. It does not leave much room for the panhard upper support bar... I'm pretty sure either of the two I've narrowed my choices down to should give much more room... I may be leaning toward the simplicity of the MWC...

 

Call Midwest Chassis and you'll have your definitive answer

 

I’ve looked at the MWC watts myself. I voted for it so I can possibly see your feedback on it! I too am running a 3.5” over-axle exhaust so fitment is a concern for me. However I already have lowered my PHB. Used the Founders chassis side bracket, fabricated my axle side bracket and lowered the upper PHB for exhaust clearance.

 

Response from MWC regarding my 3.5" exhaust and their watts link:

Under our install pictures on our website, we have photos of how the watts link looks and fits. Everything shook fit fine or an worst need very minimal modification. https://midwestchassis.com/p/install-pictures

Best pics I saw on their site:

 

Looks like you got your answer. That's easily over 3.5" just looking at that pic

 

Yup, can't see any way it wouldn't fit my exhaust.

For that reason, I PLACED MY ORDER for a MWC Watts Link earlier this evening!

I'll continue sharing my experience here once it arrives and as I get it installed and dialed in..

I'm running the koni yellow shocks, factory 91 z28 sway bars (the front is a 36mm, back is 24mm?) and the UMI lowering coil springs. (Front rate of 600 lb/in,
Rear rate of 200 lb/in) Anny suggestions of where I should try starting with the propeller? I'm thinking one or two holes above the middle...

 

Awesome! This is from a guy on LS1TECH.

"Confirmation that the MWC Watt's link is designed that the 4th hole is the stock height setting.

Half nuts torque 40 ft/lb
Full nuts torque 80 ft/lbs

Set bars as equal length.

Keep brackets loose until finalized.

Length of bar dictated by space you have for positioning your bracket, make the other match accordingly in length.

Try to set them parallel to the axle tubes as much as possible. Make final tweaks to sphere positioning once most of it is bolted down as the brackets clamping down may alter the angle slightly requiring adjustment of spherical joints relative to each other."

 

I'm late seeing this thread, but I have the Hawks 3.5" exhaust installed with my Fays2 Watts link.\

Works great & no issues with fitment.

 

Interesting, that's not what I heard from other sources. Any chances you could share a few pictures of the fitment?

 

Not much to see.... it fits between the heatshield & the Watts link mount.
I put the slightest flat spot in the pipe, just to be sure there was no contact.

Is there much clearance... no.
Does it rattle... no.

 

I have had a fays2 setup on my 2001 z28 for 15 years or so. Love the performance of it and I did autocrossing and road racing for years with it and upgraded 18x10.5s all around.

Just purchased a 1987 iroc with my dad and considering the same, but with no plans to race the 3rd gen.

Only complaint is the noise from the rod ends. Jim Sent out a set of orings to help with the noise, which they did initially. But the rubber orings degraded quickly and fell off. Anyone come up with a better solution for the noise?

Thanks
Tony

 

I have ran the UMI watts for two years and seen no issues with it or any improvements in handling over a properly setup panhard bar. I haven't seen any data showing faster lap times or slalom times yet.
Now have I seen fast lap times from cars equipped with a watts? I sure have but have also seen panhard and torque arm cars crush watts link and quadralink cars. The back half of the car isn't the place to spend the big dollars at for autocross.

 

what do you consider to be a properly set up panhard bar? Lowered, leveled and properly centered? There’s not a lot going on with them, seems simple enough, but that simplicity could also make it easy to overlook a key detail.

 

Silver chicken that’s a great question. Really it just comes down to the back half of the car has minimal to do with with low speed cornering like in autox. Now if you seen a $100,000 autox car build then you know the front half has the best you can buy and so does the rear lol.

I have lap times faster then a lot of thirdgens and I have been beat by some basic builds and high dollar builds but every one that has been faster then myself has had more front grip then I did.

If you have been lucky enough to run against this kid he will gladly show you what a high dollar thirdgen can do. But on the same hand I have seen a full build will all UMI and Viking parts go neck and neck with the speed tech car super impressive cause the speed tech camaro is basically on a full C7 front suspension and full independent rear.

 

As I mentioned I decided to go with the MWC, and it came yesterday. It's a licely made kit. Welds look good, design looks good, simple too, which may be a good thing. I was a little surprised they included no installation or tuning instructions... maybe I'm one of the few guys that actually use them... I hope to get some time tomorrow to start installation, but as I said, I'm putting in a new fuel pump at the same time, so it may take a little longer...

Some pics of details I hadn't been able to find posted online before (apologies for the messy bench):

 

Well that fuel pump replacement sucked... turns out you really need to drop the rear end WAY down. I kept going a bit at a time and bench pressing an eighth full gas tank trying to maneuver it out for a half hour with no success... In the end I needed to disconnect the panhard bar, sway bar, shocks, drive shaft, remove the springs, then lower the rear as far as the torque arm bushing would allow, and it was just enough room to wiggle it out and back in...

Anyway, now that that is done, time to start reassembling everything with the new MWC Watts Link! Should get a few hours later today to work in it. As long as my new fuel pump test primes and test starts without any issues...

 

Allright! Fuel pump primes, engine starts, I'm calling that done!

Got started on the Watts Link and already found a few noteworthy things.

The fuel tank heat shield does interfere with it just slightly, the tab and maybe a quarter of an inch. I just rolled the edge using an adjustable wrench to start the bend and finished it up / evened it out with a ball peen hammer. Ended up with the perfect clearance.



In my car, there was a relief in the sheet metal welded against the sub frame, but it didn't seem centered, and it interfered with the driver's side connection near the three bolts. I just took an angle grinder with a cut off wheel and trimmed that so the main bar would sit flat against the sub frame.



I'm finding the spacing on the passenger side seems much wider in my car than the watts link is wide. I'm going to have to see how it clamps down with the nuts installed. I did buy some plated washers I could slide between the link bar and the inside of the frame mount, if it seems to be flexing too far... It does seem a bit strange though, since the UMI pan hard rod, I just took out, was actually quite snug in that space.

 

So I'm getting closer to finishing...

How critical is it to have the link bars horizontal at ride height? Or is it totally fine as long as they are exactly the same angles? In my head it may be better to have the angles be closer to those of the thicker tubes in the main watts bar...

The way a panhard rod needs to be level to keep the rearend from moving side to side as little as possible, doesnt apply in any way here since this is a completely different principal. Right?


Current mock up


Is 'A' crirical, or is 'C' totally fine?

 

I'm trying to finalize which hole to put the propeller in... I'm running 200 rear springs which are substantially firmer then the factory ones, so I'm thinking I'll start one hole lower than the 4th one which is stock roll center height. Does this make sense, does one below factory sound right with my springs sway bars and setup?

Front springs UMI 600 lb/in
Rear springs IMI 200 lb/in
Front swaybar 36mm (factory)
Rear swaybar 24mm (factory)
Koni Yellow shocks front and back

 

To me the way I'm seeing it is that it's more of a " height based" system rather than spring weight system. So as long as the height remains a constant than it will sit in the same hole but start lowering/raising things and now you'll be moving the position up or down accordingly.

Honestly tho I would just put in to where you think it's gonna be and then drive out around a couple days then start fine tuning things. It's kinda like a set of coilovers where there isn't a one size fits all setting, which is what I'm going thru currently. The recommended settings are way too soft and it's all wheel hop but cranked up no wheel hop

 

Adjusting the height of the bell crank adjusts the height of your rear roll center. The RRC of these cars is already too high stock in the rear so lowering it is never really a bad thing. Most people’s starting points are 3-4” lower than stock with a panhard bar. The mechanism may be different but the effect roll center has on the car during weight transfer is the same. The stiff rear springs and biggish bar are a good match to a lowered RRC since to maintain the car’s cornering characteristics the rates need to go up as the RRC goes down. Can’t say for certain but I’m assuming that when you lower the RRC closer to the front RC that on these cars you may even be able to lighten up on these front springs and bar since the car’s tendency to crush the front outside tire during turns will be reduced. That being said, even with my RRC lowered approx 3” I’m still running a 900lbs front spring and a 1.25” splined front bar. All this is to say the watts link bell crank adjustment is to adjust roll center, not level the arms at the car’s
ride height, and the lowered roll center will require the use of a higher rate spring.

 

My rear is lowered 1.5" (front 1") so are you saying I should be lowering my roll center that much? I think that is more than 1 hole on this MWC watts link... could be closer to 2 maybe 3...

 

My watts link is installed, and I've been driving it for a bit. Definitely feels smoother than before, I do wonder though if parts of my rear suspension were bottoming out and touching each other, I think there may have been some marks on the top of the panhard bar, I'll have to take a look to confirm...

I did find some useful tips to share regarding the install during the process:
- It took me just about 5/8" of spacer for my rear sway bar bushings to clear the axel clamp bolts from the Watts setup as installed on my car. The angle of the arms will make a significant difference to clearance. I made them out of 1"x0.125" aluminum stock from Home Depot 5 pieces stacked up. May have been simpler to just go with the 1"x1" box tube they also have in either aluminum or steel. I didn't think I was going to need so much spacer...
- I needed to reverse the direction of the bolts, so the head was closest to the sway bar instead of the nut end where the bolt protrudes. The end of the bolt was interfering too much with the sway bar.
- I ended up using arrangement C from the above diagrams. Both my link bars are angled 10 degrees down from horizontal. I was able to use my magnetic digital camber measuring device which worked perfectly!
- I did go with 1 hole down from center (stock) height, which so far feels good, but haven't been able to put the car through its paces yet.
- There seems to be plenty of room for my 3.5" over the axle exhaust pipe. But there is some contact at full compression of the axle clamp bolt heads against the exhaust tube. I can feel this when bouncing the car from the rear by hand. I don't know if I have noticed it yet while driving though... I may try lifting up the exhaust hanger on that side a tiny bit, but it's pretty close on the top with the factory heat shields. Another eighth or quarter of an inch may be enough though.
- I only ended up using one 1/2 washer between the passenger side of the watts bar and the chassis. I put it in front to move the bar back ever so slightly more, I want to maximize clearance to my cast AL diff cover, but there seems to be enough room currently. I also removed some of the washers because I wanted the nylon ring in the nut to engage full threads on the bolt, any more washers would have kept this from being possible. It did seem to bend in the chassis tabs a bit when torquing down though.
- I ended up making a variety of spacers for the axle clamp arms. They give you pretty long bolts to connect the watts links, but no spacers, and it seems like using flat washers would have limited the rotational ability of the spherical end links. I found I would make perfect spacers from 3/8" galvanized. I cut some spacers 1/2, 3/8, and 1/4" long on my metal chop saw, then drilled the ID out to 1/2" on my drill press. I was able to get the rearward sweeping angle of the link bars just about even on both sides as looking from below, and in my opinion it's a nice, polished look.
- I thought at first, I might have been able to get away without having to remove the brake line tabs from my axle, but in the end the alignment couldn't be made perfect, so I went ahead and removed them. I started with a small sledgehammer and a chisel as I had seen on a YouTube video, but it was going slow and I didn't have a lot of room, so I switched to a chisel in an air hammer. On one side this was perfect, and the tab just popped right off. On the other side, I must have had the angle slightly wrong, and I accidentally dug into the axle tube slightly. My message is just to be cautious if going that route. Once removed, I cleaned up the axle tubes, put a quick rough coat of paint on it, and was able to get proper adjustment. **You can tell your alignment is correct when you go to bolt the second link to the axle tube clamp, the bolt must turn in easily by hand with the link end sitting up against the axle tube clamp arm.


Note the marks on the exhaust tube

Drivers side

Passenger side

Chassis mounting

Wide angle