New 05 Mustang has our Rear suspension!!!
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 6,621
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 91 Red Sled
Axle/Gears: 10bolt Richmond 3.73 Torsen
New 05 Mustang has our Rear suspension!!!
Check it out. It's our suspension on a mustang! One thing different... smaller torque arm . GM really had their priorities F'd up when they dropped the f-body. It should have taken a year off for a major redesign but just because you're being out sold 2-1 doesn't mean give them that third of your sales! If Ford can keep things rolling AND the GTO could be imported then I'm sure they could have designed the f-body to appeal to a larger crowd. Oh, and what happened to the large rear wheel driver cars... yup, only Ford .
http://www.musclemustangfastfords.co...403mm_mustweb/
I quote from the above source;
A state-of-the-art solid rear axle was designed for the V-6 and GT models. It's a three-link setup (two lower control arms, one upper) with a Panhard bar standard. The GT gets a stabilizer bar, but the base model does not.
http://www.musclemustangfastfords.co...403mm_mustweb/
I quote from the above source;
A state-of-the-art solid rear axle was designed for the V-6 and GT models. It's a three-link setup (two lower control arms, one upper) with a Panhard bar standard. The GT gets a stabilizer bar, but the base model does not.
#2
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Elgin, IL
Posts: 3,085
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 1997 Corvette
Engine: LS1
Transmission: 4L60E
Axle/Gears: 2.73 IRS
At least all the F-bodies, including V6 models, got stabilizer bars at least
In any case, taht isn't like our suspension much. As stated, thats a 3-link setup.
Oh, and that's a 9", ours are wimpy 7.5" lol
In any case, taht isn't like our suspension much. As stated, thats a 3-link setup.
Oh, and that's a 9", ours are wimpy 7.5" lol
#3
Supreme Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,629
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 2003 Porsche C4S
Engine: 3.6L
Transmission: 6-speed Manual
New 05 Mustang has our Rear suspension
#5
Senior Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Chesapeake, Ohio
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 02 WS6 White/Ebony
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: Stock 3.42
It's basically the same ideal as our rearend.
Shocks are more outward. 8.8 rear instead of crap 10 bolt.
The 06 Cobra is gonna be off the chain!
I can hear the darkside calling me. And the faint sound of bassani duals coming to life. I will miss you guys though.
Shocks are more outward. 8.8 rear instead of crap 10 bolt.
The 06 Cobra is gonna be off the chain!
I can hear the darkside calling me. And the faint sound of bassani duals coming to life. I will miss you guys though.
#6
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Orange, Calif
Posts: 1,340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: '87 Cam RS V6
Engine: Top Secret
Transmission: DYT700R4 custom inerts and conv.
Originally posted by DuronClocker
Oh, and that's a 9", ours are wimpy 7.5" lol
Oh, and that's a 9", ours are wimpy 7.5" lol
The floating swaybar centermounts are interesting. This will allow better freedom of suspension movement. Also the reverse design with the links attached to the axle are better on unsprung weight.
Shock are mounted outboard for better control. Does increase unsprung weight, but a fair tradeoff for better damper control of the solid rear axle. This is good positioning for coilover rear conversion.
That upper 3rd link (torque arm) is too short to be reliable. The bushings were designed for movement freedom so things wouldn't bind, however, the amount of force and twist on them under daily cornering,acceleration, and braking will take its toll on these bushing fast. Bad design here.
#7
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Orange, Calif
Posts: 1,340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: '87 Cam RS V6
Engine: Top Secret
Transmission: DYT700R4 custom inerts and conv.
Here's a 9"- this is my 1/2ton chev worktruck. The beauty of a Ford 9" has always been the strength the non removable cover has on the carrier bearings.
ps- this is also a Currie 9" rearend with a Detroit Locker. You can notice the "V" cuts and strength welds where the axle tubes meet the diff.- heavy duty.
ps- this is also a Currie 9" rearend with a Detroit Locker. You can notice the "V" cuts and strength welds where the axle tubes meet the diff.- heavy duty.
Last edited by vsixtoy; 09-17-2004 at 10:22 AM.
Trending Topics
#8
Supreme Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The State of Hockey
Posts: 2,047
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1987 Trans Am GTA
Engine: Miniram'd 383, 24X LS1 PCM
Transmission: TH700R4, 4200 stall
Axle/Gears: 9", 4.33:1
Actually going to a 3-link is a very common upgrade for Stangs when they go road racing....
But what is with the non-rigid mount torque arm on the axle end of things? Or am I not seeing that correctly.... I mean that just flat won't work properly if it isn't rigid on the axle end with freedom of movement forward and back on the car end of it.....
But what is with the non-rigid mount torque arm on the axle end of things? Or am I not seeing that correctly.... I mean that just flat won't work properly if it isn't rigid on the axle end with freedom of movement forward and back on the car end of it.....
#9
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Clifton, NJ
Posts: 640
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: '88 Formula
Engine: 350 TPI
Transmission: T-5... in need of slight rebuild
That's not a torque arm at all. It pivots at the front and rear mounting, it resembles a standard 4 link where the upper links also center the rear end. But in this case the single upper link can not control the side load, thus the need for a panhard bar.
IF that was a torque arm, and if it was really THAT short there will be a ton of rear end lift and a butt load of axle hop under braking. Ideally you would want a long torque arm for braking comfort and a short torque arm (but not that short) for accelerating. I know the mustang guys like to switch over to a real torque arm for road racing.
As a final note this is not a torque arm rear suspension like ours. I kind of like the idea, but not enough to become a ford guy.
IF that was a torque arm, and if it was really THAT short there will be a ton of rear end lift and a butt load of axle hop under braking. Ideally you would want a long torque arm for braking comfort and a short torque arm (but not that short) for accelerating. I know the mustang guys like to switch over to a real torque arm for road racing.
As a final note this is not a torque arm rear suspension like ours. I kind of like the idea, but not enough to become a ford guy.
#10
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Long Neck, De
Posts: 1,963
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 2002 SS
Engine: Ls1
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3:42 posi
" GM really had their priorities F'd up when they dropped the
f-body"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I dunno like i kinda agree and dis agree with that statement.. cause its rare to find our cars which means not everyone has an oppurtunity to have one
f-body"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I dunno like i kinda agree and dis agree with that statement.. cause its rare to find our cars which means not everyone has an oppurtunity to have one
#11
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Orange, Calif
Posts: 1,340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: '87 Cam RS V6
Engine: Top Secret
Transmission: DYT700R4 custom inerts and conv.
Originally posted by slowTA
That's not a torque arm at all. It pivots at the front and rear mounting, it resembles a standard 4 link where the upper links also center the rear end. But in this case the single upper link can not control the side load, thus the need for a panhard bar.
That's not a torque arm at all. It pivots at the front and rear mounting, it resembles a standard 4 link where the upper links also center the rear end. But in this case the single upper link can not control the side load, thus the need for a panhard bar.
A TQarm style link has a solid mount joint on the diff that will cause the arm itself to push upward on acceleration, and downward on braking. This setup pulls back and forth, not up and down on the chassis. The difference bettween this and a 4link Vette setup is the Vette is IRS and doesn't rely on the upper links to control diff torque onto the chassis. The IRS is mounted solid to the chassis via several mounts to avoid prolonged wear on a single link bushing. Then the outer four link bars control caster only, and not pinion angle.
The Vette relies on camber links inboard to contol side to side of the wheel assembies. This setup uses to different mount points that affect rear roll center. One is the 3rd link pivot on the diff, the other is the panhardrod. The panhard is the superior positioner and llimits the 3rd link form any side to side so the roll center thus is determined by the dominate panhard rod- Thats why they went to a panhard rather than a spread mount 3rd link (3 mount pionts- triangular positioning. This would incorporate two fronts on one rear instead of the shown one front one rear)
The trouble I see is the shortness of the 3rd link. It is not a parallel swing length with the LCA's. Thus it has to rotate the diff rearward, then frontward in a compression travel arc. If they lengthened the 3rd link to the same length as the LCA's, then install a soild rodend on the diff side, This would give a very pecision setup causing very little change in the any instant center of gravity front to rear, or rear to front- very much like the Vettes. They are just trying to do this with one short radius link and two rubber bushings- thats were the bad comes in. The bushings will be under constant strain and wheel base will move back and forth constantly under travel(especially as the bushing wear)
Last edited by vsixtoy; 09-18-2004 at 01:30 PM.
#12
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Orange, Calif
Posts: 1,340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: '87 Cam RS V6
Engine: Top Secret
Transmission: DYT700R4 custom inerts and conv.
Also, A paralell 4-link does still need a panhard rod to center the axle. A triangular 4-link does not.
#13
Senior Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Chesapeake, Ohio
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 02 WS6 White/Ebony
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: Stock 3.42
I imagine Griggs or Kenny Brown will quickly solve any issues with the short 3 link design. It's a much better starting point than the previous mustangs suspension IMO.
I imagine the 06 Cobra will get an IRS setup. I wonder if it will be an improvement of their current offering.
I imagine the 06 Cobra will get an IRS setup. I wonder if it will be an improvement of their current offering.
#14
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Northern CA.
Posts: 5,321
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Car: '82 Z28
Engine: 350
Transmission: TH400 4,000 stall
Axle/Gears: Currie 9", 4.56 gears
Originally posted by vsixtoy
Thats not anywhere close to looking like a Ford 9". A 9" does not have a removable rear inspection cover.
Thats not anywhere close to looking like a Ford 9". A 9" does not have a removable rear inspection cover.
#16
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 6,621
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 91 Red Sled
Axle/Gears: 10bolt Richmond 3.73 Torsen
Originally posted by contactpatch
I don't understand how the center(upper) link
controls the pinion angle.
Is there some other restraint on suspension motion,
that is not obvious?
I don't understand how the center(upper) link
controls the pinion angle.
Is there some other restraint on suspension motion,
that is not obvious?
#17
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Orange, Calif
Posts: 1,340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: '87 Cam RS V6
Engine: Top Secret
Transmission: DYT700R4 custom inerts and conv.
Originally posted by EvilCartman
You can get an aftermarket housing with a removable plate in the back. As far as stocker stuff though, you're right
You can get an aftermarket housing with a removable plate in the back. As far as stocker stuff though, you're right
#18
Supreme Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Boscobel, Wisconsin
Posts: 1,002
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1987 Iroc-Z
Engine: 355
Transmission: 700r4 w/ about 7500 miles on rebuild
well, technically, the Camaro is coming back in 2007.
And in the latest super chevy (or hi pro, one of the two) they say the 7.5 10-bolt can handle over 400hp at the rear wheels if it is built with aftermarket parts. Im not planning on having more than that at the rear..
$750 to build 10-bolt
$1600 12 bolt or 9-inch
guess which one im doing
And in the latest super chevy (or hi pro, one of the two) they say the 7.5 10-bolt can handle over 400hp at the rear wheels if it is built with aftermarket parts. Im not planning on having more than that at the rear..
$750 to build 10-bolt
$1600 12 bolt or 9-inch
guess which one im doing
#19
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Orange, Calif
Posts: 1,340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: '87 Cam RS V6
Engine: Top Secret
Transmission: DYT700R4 custom inerts and conv.
Originally posted by Rabbitt
$750 to build 10-bolt
$1600 12 bolt or 9-inch
guess which one im doing
$750 to build 10-bolt
$1600 12 bolt or 9-inch
guess which one im doing
As for the 9", the one I have pictured above was build 8 years ago for $2450+tax with moderate goodies to handle everyday 300 hp and heavy loads. Vehicle weight is what mainly kills rearends, not HP.
#20
Supreme Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Boscobel, Wisconsin
Posts: 1,002
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1987 Iroc-Z
Engine: 355
Transmission: 700r4 w/ about 7500 miles on rebuild
well, i have a friend of the family who runs a race shop. Eaton posi with, installation kit, ring and pinion, beefed up axels, cover, and bearings, will hold up me fine... and cost me between $700-$800.
also, why would i want a locker? a locker spins both tires when one tire is loose
limited slip spins both tires when a certain amount of torque is applied.
also, why would i want a locker? a locker spins both tires when one tire is loose
limited slip spins both tires when a certain amount of torque is applied.
#21
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Orange, Calif
Posts: 1,340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: '87 Cam RS V6
Engine: Top Secret
Transmission: DYT700R4 custom inerts and conv.
because an Eaton or Auburn cone style Posi is not going to hold up long under that kind of power. Plus generally when someone puts down that kind of power, they are more focused on straight line performance. The only way to get long term reliablitly is to go with a Detroit Locker for an everyday vehicle with big HP. I have a RR-version Auburn in my little V6 Camaro that cost me about $600. The standard ones are about $400. I would not run even a RR-version one on a car that put out over 250hp and saw daily use, but thats just my opinion and experience.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
bjpotter
History / Originality
47
01-22-2019 12:27 PM