Front suspension design preference

[bentwrenches]

I'm starting a '64 Falcon Sprint project and doing research... My question is what is the reasoning behind some Great car builds (Bryce project BLUEprint, Gas Monkey,) use standard-hybrid type of suspension design, and some use Mustang II (project "Chicken nugget") Is it a class requirement, or does the "Stock" design offer better adjust-ability? Handling is the name of the game... Which is better? Why?
Thanks in advance for your time and comments.

[Nothingface5384]

after lots of reasearch on my bros maverick

Mustang 2 setup from Rod and Custom Motorsports is best bang for your performance dollar

Stock boltons like TCP upper/lower tubular arms, with disc spindle and coil overs, plus Uni-steer R&P kit is allot of $$$ to do same thing versus RCM M2 kit
and you're still left with the ****ty power ram assist steering...unless you go manual and or uni-steer electric steering more $$$

Fatman fab sn95? strut setup seemed like a good idea/setup, but ready one in a mustang essentially fell apart after owner did the Power Tour

also m2 kit also leaves you with more future possibilities of engines

[mmosley]

Some race classes require aftermarket suspension to be bolt on. So, dropping a NASCAR chassis under your shell for example would not be allowed. If you desire to compete in a specific race class, then find out what the rules are.

Handling is about tire placement and stability. Maximize contact patch, weight, balance, response, transition. All modifications would be geared towards keeping weight distributed as much as possible to the tires you want it on and maximum tire contact patch. Some products also have an aesthetic or "bling" factor.

M2 kit "5384" refers to looks OK, looks to be almost exactly like the kit sold by TCI. There are a few others out there that specialize in the Mustangs, much of the same applies to the Falcon. The DSE kit is beautiful at more than twice the price. It does have lower weight components, possibly a bit better geometry (maximizing tire contact patch), and likely can run bigger brakes.

If your suspension has lighter components it will respond faster and do a better job keeping the tire where it is supposed to be. Likewise with double adjustable remote reservoir shocks and all the other fancy toys. What you have to decide is what you are willing, or able, to spend and what is the best you can get for that money. You can do pretty well with the M2 or TCI system. The DSE system, for example, may perform at a higher level, but at what cost and is it a difference you would ever notice, or could utilize? The difference between $3k and an $8k suspension may not be worth it to you. And, at the ultra competitive levels, the cost for incremental gains is stupendous.

[bentwrenches]

Thanks for the input

[bret]

The strictly stock OEM Mustang/Falcon front suspension leaves a lot to be desired, BUT most of these sins can be resolved with commonly available bolt-on components. The biggest sin is the awful camber curve [it leans the tire AWAY from the turn instead of INTO the turn]. That can be fixed by dropping the pivot point of the upper control arm down about an inch. Seveal companies offer components and/or templates to acheive this. It is not hard, requiring no welding nor fabrication.
The next biggest sin is the slave cylinder style power steering system. This too can be resolved by installing an internal style power steering box from Borgenson. It is a nice system that makes the car drive like a Mercedes. Many have tried to use a rack and pinion system in these cars. Not a good fit. The bumpsteer, turning radius, and overall strength of the steering system are all compromised and the car ends up not being happy to drive. Although I have not tried every rack and pinion system available for the Mustang/Falcon, but this has been my personal experience so far. [keep in mind I am speaking of retrofit R&P systems, not racks that are actually designed into a scratch built chassis]

The problem that cannot be resolved with the OEM style front suspension is the shock towers. They will get in the way of a late model Coyote or Modular engine. If you are using a 302 based engine, they are no problem.

We have a VERY nice bolt on system for the 64-66 Mustang. http://www.ridetech.com/store/tru-turn-package-1964-1966-ford-mustang.html
We HAVE NOT validated it for the Falcon. I do not know that it won't work, but not having installed one on a Falcon at our shop ourselves, I cannot tell you that it WILL work either.

I understand that Chassisworks [TCP], Global West, Hotchkis, and a few other have bolt-on components that they offer for the Falcon. If your options expand into a complete front clip, then TCI, Fatmans, Schwartz, and many others build nice stuff.

[rustomatic]

Strictly speaking, with a Falcon, nobody really cares what's under the body (short of safety, quality, and cleanliness), except for a select few grumpy Falcon purists. If you're doing track days or autocross, you can do what you want--it's all a matter of how competitive you are, but you'll always find a class to join, regardless of what's under the body. It's really only for the strict, competitive, and exclusive (big money) vintage-racing events that the originality of your car will really matter. Fortunately, most folks around here don't really care about that.

Here's the reality: If you want the best stuff in a stock configuration (no fabricating/shock tower removal), you'll pay about the same or more than you will for something comparable to what TCI or others offer (and there will always be compromises in a "complete" kit). The application and adjustment will be up to you (not some alignment goofball with laser eyes). The overall functionality is to be determined on the street/track. Everything's been proven to work quite well, given quality installation, alignment, and tire selection.

Here's what you need to keep in mind about the crossmember-based kits: The Falcon is about an inch narrower than the Mustang (between the frame rails)...

[Carl @ Chassisworks]

As Bret mentioned, one of the biggest issues with the stock style suspension on the Falcon is the camber curve. This can be improved by either drilling new holes in the tower or using our drop pivot shafts. The lower strut-rod is also a big part of the problem; the stock bushings flex over big bumps and under braking. That flex changes the alignment and contributes to the bump-steer issues that these cars have. TCP solves this deflection using our TrueCenter™ pivot socket in both the strut rod end and the lower control arm. You can read more about that HERE (http://www.totalcontrolproducts.com/download/datasheets/STRD_DS_WEB.pdf). We also offer a scratchbuilt power rack and pinion system that was developed specifically for the Mustang and Falcon. Details HERE (http://www.totalcontrolproducts.com/download/datasheets/RCK_DS_WEB.pdf).

If you are considering installing an FE, big block, or Mod/Coyote, then the stock towers are going to be a HUGE obstacle. There are lots of Mustang-II style kits out there to resolve this, but why go to all that effort to replace 60s technology with more 60s technology? A Mustang-II is a fat Pinto - a car famous for bursting into flame but not for superb handling last time I checked.

On the Chassisworks side we have a solution in our Street Machine Custom-Fit crossmember system. It was designed and engineered from a completely clean sheet. All suspension components mount to a mandrel-bent 4x2 tube which is CNC machined for precision. It's available with power rack in two different hub widths, 57" and 60", and manual rack in 15 different widths. Sure, the cost is going to be slightly more than the M-II kits but you're getting superior components. All brand new and all made in the USA.

The Street Machine system is the foundation of our bolt-on front clips, like Bret's guys installed in the GoodGuys SuperNova (https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.474887452604214.1073741838.360398240719803&type=3), and the crossmember has been installed in everything from Hudsons to Mavericks. You can read about all the options HERE (http://www.cachassisworks.com/cac_library_7160.html).

Here's a shot of one a customer installed in a Maverick. A Falcon install would be pretty much the same.

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