early ford handling

[Nothingface5384]

just a quick question
which setup would you guys thing would make an early ford handle better

tcp coil over setup ?
http://www.totalcontrolproducts.com/fcoc-fd.html

or

rrs/gateway performance macphearson strut coilover kit?

http://www.gatewayperformancesuspension.com/gps_1005_super_stock_GT.aspx
with no brakes its 1500

both are the same price..but you still have to buy brake componets for the tcp kit

first setup wou can still add an opentrack roller spring perch to improve upon the stock type design..

for a bout 600 more you can upgrade to bigger 12"rotors/2piston calipers for the 2nd kit

This is for a 73 maverick if it matters
both kits are bolt-in

[Bryce]

I would use TCP if I was to choose between the two.

[Dee T]

I agree with Bryce if these are the only suspension setups you are looking at. I believe that most of the better handling cars have upper and lower control arms. I also don't like the idea of the camber adjustment on the spindle. I like the street or track coilover system myself, but that's just my opinion.

[Bryce]

i actually built my own suspension for less than that.
I also built a bolt in coilover for my 65 mustang.

[GrabberGT]

I have the TCP kit on my Maverick. The only problem I have is related to the sway bar. In upgrading my sway bar to a larger than stock size, I've run into issues with the sway bar rubbing against the strut rods. I imagine this would be a problem with any larger than stock diameter strut rod though. It is also likely the result of my unusually low ride height as well.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2011/09/20110902_133521_48-1.jpg

[dontlifttoshift]

Off topic but......

I saw early Ford and got all excited......I'm still the only one :-(

[Bryce]

Off topic but......

I saw early Ford and got all excited......I'm still the only one :-(

HAHA! you are really early ford.

[BulldawgMusclecars]

Yeah, I saw it and thought someone was messing with a straight axle!

[dontlifttoshift]

Bulldawg, that's what I am doing...

back on topic, I consider the guys at Gateway friends. Their product is good but I have never been a fan of the Mcstrut design. I know it can be made to work but the fact of the matter is it was designed as a cheap suspension. Again it's not the Gateway parts I have issue with, its the suspension design itself.

I would also go with TCP. I don't see why you would need the roller spring perch if you are going to coilover. I like the way the shelby mod is built into the UCA and the ease of adjusment on the UCA is a HUGE plus.

We have that whole TCP setup on a falcon here at the shop (with a borgeson steering box) and it works very well. Admittedly, it has never been driven hard (graybeards!) but ride quality is satisfactory considering all the bearing in their parts.

Hope that helps
Donny

[Bryce]

I personally dont like the added moment induced by the offset (shelby drop) cross shaft. If mavericks are like 65 falcons then you should have plenty of room in the reinforcement plate to drill new UCA holes.

[dontlifttoshift]

Bryce, that's valid. You said "moment" you're such an engineer......

It would be better to run a straight crossshaft and redrill the mounting holes in the proper location.

[Bryce]

Bryce, that's valid. You said "moment" you're such an engineer......

It would be better to run a straight crossshaft and redrill the mounting holes in the proper location.


HAHA, white short sleeve button up with pocket protector slide rule and all!


WAIT!




I am only 27, whats a slide rule?

[GrabberGT]

I personally dont like the added moment induced by the offset (shelby drop) cross shaft. If mavericks are like 65 falcons then you should have plenty of room in the reinforcement plate to drill new UCA holes.


Bryce, that's valid. You said "moment" you're such an engineer......

It would be better to run a straight crossshaft and redrill the mounting holes in the proper location.

Alright... School me. Whats the difference in using the drop pivot shaft for the drop vs. straight shaft and drilling new holes. I actually had the drop shafts installed to begin with and then opted to purchase the straight shafts and drill holes. This was done so that I could trim my shock towers 1" lower. I see no difference in suspension geometry.

[Bryce]

Alright... School me. Whats the difference in using the drop pivot shaft for the drop vs. straight shaft and drilling new holes. I actually had the drop shafts installed to begin with and then opted to purchase the straight shafts and drill holes. This was done so that I could trim my shock towers 1" lower. I see no difference in suspension geometry.

Suspension geometry is exactly the same.

It is the loading on the shock towers that differs. The non-drop UCA cross shaft puts an axial load on the bolts and a straight load on the shock tower. With the drop cross shaft the Control has the same load but with a 1" lever arm, this put a moment on the bolts and the shock tower.

[GrabberGT]

Suspension geometry is exactly the same.

It is the loading on the shock towers that differs. The non-drop UCA cross shaft puts an axial load on the bolts and a straight load on the shock tower. With the drop cross shaft the Control has the same load but with a 1" lever arm, this put a moment on the bolts and the shock tower.

That makes perfect sense. I never would have thought of that. Im always learning SOMETHING new from you guys.

[Bjkadron]

HAHA, white short sleeve button up with pocket protector slide rule and all!


WAIT!




I am only 27, whats a slide rule?

HAHA! Nice. I have yet to get someone to explain to me how a slide rule actually works.

I agree, Double A-Arms are almost always better than Struts for on-road performance,
but I would also ask if you have the skill/interest to build your own set-up because you seemed highly concerned with price. if all you are wanting to do is switch to coil-overs and better shocks it would be relatively simple to design your own set-up.

[Bryce]

https://www.pro-touring.com/showthread.php?63486-65-mustang-(k-model)

check out that thread. It is a build up of the boltin coilover I designed for my drag mustang.

[Nothingface5384]

Thanks for the replys guys, and i'll readup on youre thread in a few bryce.

I may also just wait till DSE comes out with their kit to compare( tey said it should be out by march..but also mentioned 6-8 months....so we'll see

[Bryce]

Thanks for the replys guys, and i'll readup on youre thread in a few bryce.

I may also just wait till DSE comes out with their kit to compare( tey said it should be out by march..but also mentioned 6-8 months....so we'll see

My guess is that DSE will have a bolt in or weld in subframe and you cut out the stock sheetmetal. But that is just a guess based on their other suspension offerings.

[Nothingface5384]

i dunno, they just released a universal bolt in suspension, they'll work in any sub-frame car(though this doesn't sound like a good idea looking at a geometry standpoint..)

so, I'm thinking they'll come out with their version of upper/lowers/strut mount...i'm sure whatever they offer for sway bars and rear suspension wont matter much to me as the mav is narrower then the stangs

[rustomatic]

Mac struts blow, both on mountain bikes and cars. When the design came on a super-cheap Volkswagen Beetle update, it's not a real compliment to a performance application that was not originally insulted with the design. It's a packaging design to make things cheaper, with fewer parts, rather than a performance upgrade. As for TCP, under the heaps of compliments on their pretty blue paint, there are some realities behind the true application of their parts under real stresses. There are more than a few reasons why track guys still go with gusseted stock-style control arms... That said, many people are happy parking their TCP components at cruise-ins.

[rustomatic]

Bulldawg, that's what I am doing...

back on topic, I consider the guys at Gateway friends. Their product is good but I have never been a fan of the Mcstrut design. I know it can be made to work but the fact of the matter is it was designed as a cheap suspension. Again it's not the Gateway parts I have issue with, its the suspension design itself.

I would also go with TCP. I don't see why you would need the roller spring perch if you are going to coilover. I like the way the shelby mod is built into the UCA and the ease of adjusment on the UCA is a HUGE plus.

We have that whole TCP setup on a falcon here at the shop (with a borgeson steering box) and it works very well. Admittedly, it has never been driven hard (graybeards!) but ride quality is satisfactory considering all the bearing in their parts.

Hope that helps
Donny

I'm in agreement on the Mac strut idea--they're just cheap and pointless, although RRS's stuff is quite attractive. As for the coilover, I believe some of the TCP designs land the lower coilover mount on the upper control arm, hence the roller spring perch thought (although the perch is obviously done away with). When combining this with the relocated mounting point at the tower (instead of drilling/relocating), you essentially have a really expensive solution to not wanting to deal with UCA shims and a drill.

Drill = 25 bucks

Shims = 2.5 bucks

TCP stuff = way freakin' more

You may want to throw in another 20 for the angle grinder to cut some standard coil springs...

Experience of being a cheapskate, bleeding your knuckles, and getting dirty on 1960s tech that still works = priceless.

[rustomatic]

I might be wrong, but this sounds like the difference between a 65-66 bar and a 67-68 bar. The latter is wider...


I have the TCP kit on my Maverick. The only problem I have is related to the sway bar. In upgrading my sway bar to a larger than stock size, I've run into issues with the sway bar rubbing against the strut rods. I imagine this would be a problem with any larger than stock diameter strut rod though. It is also likely the result of my unusually low ride height as well.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2011/09/20110902_133521_48-1.jpg

[Nothingface5384]

bump
dont think i'll be going with the DSE mustang front setup as it sounds like it'll replace my new fancy roadrace belly bar made by toporanger from the maverick.to forum
how does the globalwest setup compare to the tcp? is it better the negative control version vs the tcp coilover

[GrabberGT]

Another option you might take a look at is the new Tru-Turn setup from Ridetech. They now have a Mustang setup that looks pretty good if you are wanting to keep your shock towers. Its hard comparing one company to another without seeing some hard numbers. TCP is more of a direct replacement in tubular form with better components and adjustability. Reading over Ridetech and Globalwest info, it appears they have actually engineered the components to provided the desired suspension geometry.

[Bryce]

Ridetech now has a mustang tru-turn? Anymore info on this?

[Nothingface5384]

http://www.ridetech.com/store/tru-turn-package-1964-1966-ford-mustang.html

just add coilovers or airshocks and front swaybar and you got complete kit pretty much

[GrabberGT]

http://www.ridetech.com/store/tru-turn-package-1964-1966-ford-mustang.html

just add coilovers or airshocks and front swaybar and you got complete kit pretty much

I havent seen an official announcement yet but it was in the catalog they sent me and also on line.

Looks like a fantastic setup.