Detroit Speed And Engineering Mustang Parts

[bighead]

Hey,
Does anyone know when DSE is going to release there Mustang parts? Any chance they will bring them out for SEMA?

A guy can only hope!

[mikey]

I asked them @ the Kansas goodguys show they said they hoped to have a prototype next year. I'm ready for them we have a 68 that we are building for a friend.

[MuscleRodz]

my guess would be at least Columbus before any release. Parts have not been tested yet that I am aware of

[BigMal69]

I sure wish they were when I was doing my mustang. It seems as though most of the PT crowd is slanted towards Chevy.

[andrewb70]

I sure wish they were when I was doing my mustang. It seems as though most of the PT crowd is slanted towards Chevy.

Are you kidding me?

http://www.totalcontrolproducts.com/front_systems.html

http://www.maierracing.com/index.html

http://www.streetortrack.com/

http://www.cortexracing.com/

http://www.griggsracing.com/index.php

http://globalwest.net/

http://www.heidts.com/

http://www.schwartzperformance.com/

http://artmorrison.com/homepage.html

http://www.ridetech.com/

Most of the companies listed above have been around for years.

Andrew

[laguna4efi]

Hey Andrew don't forget us too!! We've had Ford applications for quite a few years.

[andrewb70]

Hey Andrew don't forget us too!! We've had Ford applications for quite a few years.

My apologies Jay. My list was certainly not exhaustive. Hope you are doing well my friend. It's been too long. I should really try to make it to PRI this year.

Andrew

[Bryce]

Hey andrew what about my 4 suspension systems for fords? HAHA.

[bighead]

So has anyone at SEMA heard or talk to the DSE guys about the mustang parts coming out?

[Bryce]

So has anyone at SEMA heard or talk to the DSE guys about the mustang parts coming out?

March

[bighead]

March

Awesome! Thanks for the info, I'm looking forward to see what they offer!

[dontlifttoshift]

I have seen the prototypes. It is going to be very cool.

[67cougnut]

when I talked to them at Sema I also heard March as well.I was told the parts are on test vehicles as we speak.Was also told that the front will be a mustang II type suspension and will be a bolt on setup.

[Nothingface5384]

would be sweet if everything they'll offer would work with a maverick, but I highly doubt it.

[formula]

when I talked to them at Sema I also heard March as well.I was told the parts are on test vehicles as we speak.Was also told that the front will be a mustang II type suspension and will be a bolt on setup.

Not sure what you mean with mustang II type, but just for clarification the dse front setup will certainly not use any mustang II components.

[Bryce]

I think he means, remove the shock towers and everything will mount to the stock frame rails.

[dontlifttoshift]

What Wes said. It is very much a DSE suspension and NOT a mustang II at all. The rear stuff is going to be killer as well.

[Jeff70]

Formula, think DSE Nova it removes the oe shock tower and suspension to replace with subframe and also add new custom made inner fenders.

[bighead]

That's good to hear. The Mustang II suspension is played out! I would expect DSE to go above and beyond like Jeff70 said "think DSE Nova".

Thanks again for the info from everyone.

[67cougnut]

I think he means, remove the shock towers and everything will mount to the stock frame rails.

Yessir you got it! thats why I said "TYPE".

[67cougnut]

Formula, think DSE Nova it removes the oe shock tower and suspension to replace with subframe and also add new custom made inner fenders.

The guy at their booth said that it would use the existing frame rails but would allow for removal of the shock towers. I have a feeling that it will be kind of like the JIM MEYER setup that came out. knowing DSE it will be Different then the J.M. but its the only kit that comes to mind that will bolt up,still utilizes an upper and lower arm with different coil spring placement, and doesnt use a strut and will allow shock tower removal.

[bighead]

I seriously hope its more like the 1962-1967 Chevy II front clip that DSE produces!

http://www.detroitspeed.com/1962-1967-Chevy-II-Products/032031-frnt-frme.html

[67cougnut]

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

I seriously hope its more like the 1962-1967 Chevy II front clip that DSE produces!

in which way? a mustang doesnt have a bolt on front subframe so there is no dice there. I'm sure DSE is going to do a hell of a good job and will be a serious contender in the aftermarket ford suspension world.

[bighead]

in which way? a mustang doesnt have a bolt on front subframe so there is no dice there. I'm sure DSE is going to do a hell of a good job and will be a serious contender in the aftermarket ford suspension world.

I have no question that what they are going put out is going to be awesome! I was just thinking more along these lines.

http://www.roadstershop.com/products/1964-70-fast-track-mustang-suspension-subframe-form

[dontlifttoshift]

The RS stuff is very nice and will perform quite well.... but that is a complicated install by comparison. For some, that is no big deal for others it might be a little intimidating.

[67cougnut]

I have no question that what they are going put out is going to be awesome! I was just thinking more along these lines.

http://www.roadstershop.com/products/1964-70-fast-track-mustang-suspension-subframe-form

that is an impressive looking setup!

[andrewb70]

The package from Cortex Racing is very nice as well. It includes their billet spindles with a severe duty bolt in hub assembly. Very nice.

http://www.popularhotrodding.com/tech/1108phr_1967_cougar_project_car/index.html

Andrew

[67cougnut]

The package from Cortex Racing is very nice as well. It includes their billet spindles with a severe duty bolt in hub assembly. Very nice.

http://www.popularhotrodding.com/tech/1108phr_1967_cougar_project_car/index.html

Andrew

$7995.00 less brakes!

[andrewb70]

$7995.00 less brakes!

Definitely at the high end of the price scale. The spindles certainly add to the price. The hubs alone are probably 300-400 dollars each.

Andrew

[ace_xp2]

It's interesting, both the Cortex and the Griggs system have a suspension which should move back in bump. They seem to give up some caster gain and end up with anti-dive to get it, so I wonder what for? Both (especially Griggs) are pretty track oriented, so I wouldn't think bump compliance would be a big concern.

[andrewb70]

It's interesting, both the Cortex and the Griggs system have a suspension which should move back in bump. They seem to give up some caster gain and end up with anti-squat to get it, so I wonder what for? Both (especially Griggs) are pretty track oriented, so I wouldn't think bump compliance would be a big concern.

Care to spell that out a little better for dumb dumbs like me?

Andrew

[ace_xp2]

If you look at the lower arm, you'll see that the rear mount sits further outboard than the forward mount. In other words, from a top down perspective the mounts are splayed out instead of being parallel to the frame rail. So when you hit a bump, the ball joint moves back relative to the chassis instead of just going up and down.

Now the upper arm has some anti-dive on it, you can see it's tilted front to back in the side shots. That also means that it does the same thing, the ball joint moves back as it encounters a bump.

This is often done to increase ride compliance, the suspension now moves in two dimensions instead of just one, so the tire now moves up and back as it encounters a bump.

If the upper ball joint moves back relative to the lower ball joint, you get caster gain. The suspension essentially "leans" the spindle back (to the rear of the chassis). But by having the lower ball joint move back as well, you don't get as much caster gain as you would without it.

Now, Caster gain isn't always a good thing, it generates load at the wheel based on body roll, so too much of it can create the impression of "bunching up". An unnatural rise in steering effort as the car rolls. So maybe they're just trying to mitigate the caster gain that comes around as a result of the amount of anti-dive they went with.

I'm not big on anti-dive, there was an interesting article by Mark Ortiz where he mentioned that it can produce a variable amount of understeer based on tire loading. However, making up for it not being there with spring rate may make for an uncomfortable street ride, I haven't been able to test that yet. I would note that the Lotus Elise apparently gets away with none, which is likely easier for it due to its weight and weight distribution.
Article at the bottom of page 3:
http://www.theoryinpracticeengineering.com/resources/ortiz_newsletter/2004_12.pdf

[andrewb70]

Ace,

That was perfect! Thank you for the explanation.

Andrew

[andrewb70]

As a side note, the Cortex red Mustang that features this suspension and a LS7 competed in the Optima Ultimate blah..blah..blah deal. I wonder how it did.

Andrew

[Jeff70]

The Cortex Mustang ran a 1:50.265 good for 8th fastest to Danny Pops 1:42.208.

I've seen the Mustang run a my local track Sears Point I would say its more race than street, badass car though.


http://mustangsdaily.com/blog/2011/11/03/sema-2011-filip-trojaneks-1966-widebody-mustang-race-car/

And here is a fastback back they are building.

http://www.cortexracing.com/projects/colin-65/

[andrewb70]

I've seen Danny Pop's Z06 at the MotorState Challenge and it is definitely more race than street as well.

Andrew

[faust]

Looking at the CorteX website, the complete front suspension if you provide your own SN95 spindles runs $5696. The high-end package that comes with the Radial X billet drop spindles is $7995. That makes sense since the Radial X spindles go for $2995 on their own. If you buy the complete kit you are essentially getting a discount over getting the components by themselves. This kit gives you the option to either keep or remove the shock towers depending on if you want to maintain a factory looking engine compartment.

http://www.cortexracing.com/store/suspension/1964-1970-mustang-suspension/vintage-front/

Here is a picture with the shock tower in place.

51887

[Rols574]

I have seen the prototypes. It is going to be very cool.

Now this is just being mean!!

Can't wait!!!!

[Nothingface5384]

Now this is just being mean!!

Can't wait!!!!

bump!!!

any updates...its nearing march! so it has to be close to release

[Jeff70]

I called a few weeks back & was told it will debut at Run to the Alamo next weekend.

[Nothingface5384]

bump!!

[dontlifttoshift]

I think we will know more after the Hot rod and Restoration show.

[andrewb70]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PyDd8TgreA&list=UU2qozZYzEi4Gxd8gV9o0QFQ&index=1&feature=plcp

[MrQuick]

i am amazed how flat that car runs, very well balanced.

[kiwigt]

If you pause the video, the rear end look like it has (predictably) a Quadra Link type rear - the leaf springs are gone. And there seems to be a crossmember for the front suspension right up forward that isn't present on standard '66 Mustangs. Very impressive handling in that video clip..

[andrewb70]

If you pause the video, the rear end look like it has (predictably) a Quadra Link type rear - the leaf springs are gone. And there seems to be a crossmember for the front suspension right up forward that isn't present on standard '66 Mustangs. Very impressive handling in that video clip..

I do believe you are correct on your observations. This all makes perfect sense because the Quadra Link and their front suspension package has been thoroughly tested and proven in other applications. So now they are simple changing things around slightly to package it all in the Mustang chassis. One thing that struck me was how high the ride height seems to be. The Mustang seems to sit up like a 4x4 compared to their 1st and 2nd gen Camaros. Anyone else think that?

Andrew

[71RS/SS396]

I do believe you are correct on your observations. This all makes perfect sense because the Quadra Link and their front suspension package has been thoroughly tested and proven in other applications. So now they are simple changing things around slightly to package it all in the Mustang chassis. One thing that struck me was how high the ride height seems to be. The Mustang seems to sit up like a 4x4 compared to their 1st and 2nd gen Camaros. Anyone else think that?

Andrew

There isn't much room in the wheel wells of an early mustang to suck those big tires up into. I looked at this car up close multiple times during the development when I've been checking progress on my car. The rear is a Quadra-link that's using a watts link instead of a panhard bar. The front crossmember is a prototype weldment right now and I was told it will end up as a casting for the production version.

[andrewb70]

There isn't much room in the wheel wells of an early mustang to suck those big tires up into. I looked at this car up close multiple times during the development when I've been checking progress on my car. The rear is a Quadra-link that's using a watts link instead of a panhard bar. The front crossmember is a prototype weldment right now and I was told it will end up as a casting for the production version.

Casting? Is it aluminum?

If I was to guess I would say that they are making a new crossmember that will be hydroformed, much like their current subframes are.

Andrew

[71RS/SS396]

Casting? Is it aluminum?

If I was to guess I would say that they are making a new crossmember that will be hydroformed, much like their current subframes are.

Andrew

I was told an aluminum casting by DSE not a hydroformed crossmember, the prototype is aluminum.

[dontlifttoshift]

The prototype I saw was fabricated aluminum and the production piece will be cast. Quadra link in the back and they were testing with a watts and a panhard bar. The shock/upper control arm mounts are even cooler.....wait till you see those.

As far as ride height, it does look high but I think it is deceiving because of the rocker trim. Like Tim said, there's not much room to work with there, if it could have been lower I am sure it would have been.

[ace_xp2]

The rocker height is also higher in relation to the roofline if I recall right. That's why the "$5000":) mustang looks so low. Once you can get the car down on the tires you're golden. Though there's a floor rail that gets in the way.

[faust]

It looks like it has potential. There wasn't any footage of the car being driven hard enough to have a loose grip. Without seeing it overdriven and bent out of shape it's difficult to tell how balanced the chassis is. I'm sure in the future some performance numbers will come out and possible lap times comparing the mustang to the DSE camaros.

[68rustang]

Looks like it has potential. I am very interested in the final product for my 68.

The wheels and tires are too big on that little mustang. I understand they are probably trying to clear some big brake kit but there are plenty of good brake setups that will fit inside a 17" wheel.

[dontlifttoshift]

The trade off is rim width then. A larger diameter wheel clears the front suspension at full lock better than a smaller one will. if you ran the same width 17" wheel as an 18" with identical backspace you would give up turning radius and steering angle.

[BADDRIDE II]

Donny,

Any idea if they are running C5/6 steering knuckles?

[dontlifttoshift]

Yes they are.

[Nothingface5384]

this is cool! i hope they can make it kind of modular in regards to width so the maverick/comet guys wont be left out!
rear is same just 1inch narrowor so that effect everything regarding rear suspension along with swaybar
front is the same and everything will work except swaybar wont likely mount flush to do different curve/width