Lateral Dynamics "Next Gen" 3-Link Suspension Systems

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Greetings Pro Touring enthusiasts!

Lateral Dynamics have been working hard, quietly, to develop the “Next Gen” 3-Link Rear Suspension Systems, and we are now ready to release the product for sales. We have had a very long standing relationship with Pro-touring.com dating back to when the whole P-T movement was in its infancy, and as such, we wanted to use this platform – even before updating the company website – to introduce the new configuration.

For those familiar with the legacy 3-Link systems, you know that the original setup was competition proven; with class wins in the One Lap of America with James Shipka’s epic “One Lap Camaro,” our customer from the Montreal area, winning his class in the extremely challenging Targa Newfoundland, and perhaps the most notable overall win of the Inaugural Optima Ultimate Street Car with Steven Rupp’s iconic “Bad Penny.” Beyond the competitive events, our customers have also taken country-wide, multi thousand-mile road trips while reporting back comfort and exceptional wet weather handling – the systems were proven to be capable everywhere.

So of course, what do engineers do? Make things even better, and that’s what we have done. Virtually every aspect of the system was scrutinized, data from our own testing as well as our customer’s feedback was critically assessed, and improvements in other areas of the hobby were also considered – namely tire technology.

We had three main goals for the Next Gen Systems:


Broaden the overall geometry adjustment “window”: We enabled customers to focus the main performance parameters to not only augment driving styles and overall vehicle setup, but to further maximize the performance of today’s extremely capable tires – with focus not only on racing slicks/”R” compound selections, but today’s incredibly popular and capable “200 Tread wear” tires required in a multitude of competitive driving series (works amazingly with any other performance street tires too!).
Dramatically simplified the installation process: While the systems still require welding to complete the installation, the amount of cutting and sheet metal work has been significantly reduced. Further, we incorporated changes to minimize frustration due to the very loose OEM tolerances in these 50+ year old cars, as well as frame and sheet metal repairs commonly found on restored cars. The result is an installation process that can easily be managed by a capable enthusiast in a typical home garage.
Maximize the Performance to Cost Value: We arrived at a price point, along with the simplified installation updates that we feel is the very best in the industry, and not just the initial cost, but through the lifetime of the product. All serviceable/routine maintenance items are readily available from multiple sources. We use the best quality components throughout, the vast majority of which are sourced within 100 miles of our So Cal location.

Displayed in the photographs is the 67-69 Camaro and Firebird system, which will begin shipping within the next two weeks. The system comes standard with “Late, Big Ford” housing ends (not shown here), in two standard widths (optional with virtually any type of housing ends/full float options/width, per quotation). Early Mustang, and Second Generation Camaro/Firebird will be available in approximately 4 – 6 weeks.

[Build-It-Break-It]

What is the starting price point? What coilovers/ springs? Installation photos?

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

What is the starting price point? What coilovers/ springs? Installation photos?

Thanks Ahmad, the retail price on the kit is $3965, for all of the pieces you see in the previous photos.

As for shock selection, we elected to be shock "agnostic," in our travels there is a LOT of brand loyalty and so many amazing options out there these days. The best "budget" value out there that we have seen is Viking, they have an excellent offering, very high quality and their shocks have a very broad adjustment range, which is important when initially setting up a car with no previous baseline. Many of the higher end shock have far narrower adjustment range, and require re-valving in order to dial in, but there are some incredible options out there - JRI, Penske, Ohlins, etc. Unless you are an expert and will need the help of a shock tuner, we recommend that you run what your fast local folks are running and lean on a local tuner. We can help your selection based on the type of tires you are running, front suspension, intended usage, etc.

Install information is on the way!

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

As noted previously, many of the early muscle cars suffer from poor initial tolerances, and many of them have been reworked. The result is dealing with slight, but important differences that can be very frustrating, and sometimes costly rework in order to accurately install. We engineered the front cross-member on our system to be modular. Unless your car is WAY off, this approach will eliminate the issues noted above.

The LCA brackets shown are the starting point for the installation. They are designed with slots/holes that mate to the OEM frame rails, simply remove the OEM leaf spring buckets, locate the brackets to the factory (or replacement) frame rails, mark the sheet metal and cut the small section of floor pan beneath the rear seat area. The LCA brackets install from below, clamped in place and then the Cross-member is centered on the flat sections of the LCA brackets. Once all is verified from a full trial fit, they are simply (securely!!!) welded in place creating an extremely stout support. Before final welding we recommend a quick coat of paint for the crossmember, after all is final welded a small amount of sheet metal work, seam sealing, and paint finishes the job.

The car shown in the pictures is a great example of our design approach here. This car is a convertible that had leaks that took a big toll on the floor pans, rear seat sheet metal, and the trunk! Previous repairs were good, but less than perfect, but the kit went in with no drama whatsoever. It is very rare to find a car without needing these types of repairs, but fortunately for all of us, the replacement sheet metal parts are getting better and better. None of these cars should be sent to the scrap heap, pretty much anything can be replaced to save the cars.

[Tweak]

Hey, looks interesting. Does having the UCA offset from the centre have any adverse effect on articulation and load transfer?

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Hey, looks interesting. Does having the UCA offset from the centre have any adverse effect on articulation and load transfer?

Hey Tweak! I have been following the progress on your car and feel you did a great job.

Offsetting the UCA to passenger was done for a few reasons. One, it helps (slightly) offset the left to right corner exit torque bias generated by the engine and drivetrain, which isn't an obvious thing. You will sometimes see cars in autocross lift the inside left front tire during hard throttle, hard left turn - this is due to the drivetrain torque creating a lift. This offset helps reduce that a bit. Second, in our legacy system we had the adjustment for the UCA inclination on top of the rear housing, which was centered on the axle. The issue was that once the car was all together it was very difficult to access the adjustment, which defeated the purpose. With the UCA adjustment offset, it's simple to access from the interior of the car. Third, and the main reason, is that we wanted a much tighter packaging at the housing side, which will allow us to use one common housing for a far larger variety of vehicle specific applications where the old approach wouldn't work. Pickup trucks, our shop El Camino and a lot of other applications we'll be exploring in the future will package FAR easier with this approach.

As far as articulation and load handling, both of these are a non issue. Under very hard acceleration, the LCA's take up the Lion's share of the loading (in compression), and the UCA has a far easier job to do from a load standpoint (in tension). It is still a completely zero bind setup. The only mechanical difference is a very slight difference in pinion angle change from left to right corners, but our links are so long that it is a complete non-issue in practical terms.

Great questions!

[chicane67]

Good lord man... you finally said something. I have been tapping my foot for a year now and its cramped up. I need to drink some more water or eat a banana.

Can't wait to stuff this into the '67. And... I can't wait for all the other news to come from Lateral-D.

Pro-Touring is interesting, once again !! (finally)

[CarlC]

Like like like like like..........

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Good lord man... you finally said something.

I continue to be impressed with your ability to keep secrets!!!


Can't wait to stuff this into the '67. And... I can't wait for all the other news to come from Lateral-D

You don't have to! Ready to go now!!! Well the rear setup is, other side soon.

Thanks for the nod, Carl, very much appreciated!

The only tricky part about the installation of the system is the precision needed to locate the rear crossmember. Because the Watt's pivot defines THE center of the axle assembly, it needs to be located accurately. Beating on the dead horse, tolerances and rework to the frames pushed us to use a system of shims to bring the crossmember exactly where it needs to be. Covered in the installation instructions (will be posted to our website soon for download), we show you how to simply and accurately establish the axle centerline. We intentionally left the width of the crossmember frame mounts approximately 3/8" narrower than the nominal dimensions from our decades of experience working these cars. A set of shims are included to locate the crossmember fore/aft, and left/right. Trial fit, measure, adjust, trial fit, measure, adjust... until it is on.

It's easiest at this point to put a coat of paint on the crossmember prior to the final fit. None of this is hard, but it is important because once it is welded in, it has to be correct. Patience is your friend, and a second set of eyes often helps.

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Once the rough fitting is done, it's time to tack the rear crossmember into place, and prior to welding completely, validate the final location, perform a final fit check, run the system through motion and insure there are no issues.

One of the primary motivations about using a 3-Link is that there is no bind in the system, whatsoever. In the picture with the housing in full bump on the left side, the right side is a full 8 inches lower - WAY beyond the useful range of the suspension in the real world, but it shows the amount of precise articulation with the setup.

Now that the final location of the rear crossmember has been validated, the setup will be disassembled for the last time, components painted, and the rear crossmember will get a full final weld to the car's frame rails.

[David Pozzi]

Looks great! I'm really happy to see this improved version come to market. It' looks much easier to install and adjust. I think this one will have better exhaust clearance and easier shock mounting.

[payne]

How do you expect the NVH to be compared to traditional TA and 4-link options?

Will you offer a closeout panel with an access hatch, or how will the interior be sealed with the hole in the floorboard?

Thanks!

[carbuff]

A couple of questions for you Mark...

First, why the 'X' designs instead of something more solid? Was that purely for weight reasons? Structurally I imagine they will be just fine, but it seems like an off approach that I see used in a few spots in this setup.

Second, am I seeing correctly that to adjust the Watt's pivot up or down you have to remove 2 screws and reposition? Would it be possible to replace that mechanism with a screw adjuster to have finer-level (and easier also) control of the pivot location?

I too am curious about what you will provide for close-out panels, or is that exercise left up to the reader. ;)

Have you routed exhaust on any cars you have completed installs on? Any comments on how that was done and fitment? This setup looks like it will be similar to what I had on TOW with the Watt's. The 3rd link instead of a torque arm would make the front to back pipes much easier as well as running an X or H pipe. That over-the-axle work is a challenge though!

Oh, one more question... Have you looked at installing a sway bar with this setup yet also? ;)

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Hey all, and thanks for the interest and questions!

@David, thanks sir, and yes this one is far easier to install than the one(s) you worked on. We did increase the room for tailpipes, and yes, the shock mounts are relocated to the better as well. We pushed the upper mounts out as far as we could to improve the motion ratio, and this also created even more space for the exhaust. I know you will appreciate the increase in geometry adjustments also, this was based in large part to your feedback as well - mainly in the area of Anti-squat - which now has the adjustment to decrease A/S.

@Carbuff: The "skelotonized" x features are mainly aesthetic, it's a design style that we incorporate into all of our new designs. For the Watt's adjustment, pictured is the hardware stack for it. To adjust, all you need to do is loosen the 3/4" bolt, the retaining nut is semi-captive from the back tubular structure for the crossmember. The two small screws are just used for indexing the assembly, they don't need to be touched. We resisted the idea of using a lead screw for the adjustment, we had a customer insist on using one in the past from a competitor and I hated it (but it was a really poor design). Added complexity would just add more cost with little benefit. Secondly, using the approach we have allows us to know exactly what position it's in, we could do this on a lead screw version with an encoder but again, not worth it. I will say though, it is possible that we will put electrically controlled lead screws on both the Watt's pivot, and the forward UCA mount on our next in-house build! For certain the setup has provisions for a sway bar, we elected to go with an underslung/axle mounted approach so you can use pretty much any of the commercial ones already out there (most of them are made by Hellwig by the way, regardless of the brand). Also shown here is Steven Rupp's EPIC Bad Penny, showing the tailpipe approach. There is a ton of room for very large tailpipes.

@Payne: NVH is going to be similar to any other ultra performance suspension out there. We insist on using top quality rod ends from FK, made is USA and used extensively in the off-road community. This setup is performance first - but we also recognize that our potential customer base will also use their cars as daily drivers. As such, we will offer a "touring" version of 3-Link control arms using a very novel bushing that will knock down some of the harshness.

The opening in the floor will be closed off with a fire-resistant shifter boot style cover. Currently narrowing the source but it will likely be from Simpson Racing.

[carbuff]

Mark,

One more clarification on the pivot... You say the 2 small screws are for indexing. If I'm understanding correctly, the pivot can only be located vertically in one of the positions where the 2 small screws are located, it's not infinitely adjustable. Is that correct?

Not that it matters that much, I'm just trying to see if I understand.

I love the electrically adjustable ideas. :)

Now, what are you building for the front to match up with this? :)

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Bryan, you are correct. The system is not infinitely adjustable.

Front stuff will be just as effective as the rear, but not sharing any details about it until the setup is complete!

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Suspension travel is obviously important, here are a few mockup shots of the new system. In order to have a fully competent system, meaning street, aggressive street, and competition ride heights the system was designed to have full suspension travel without mechanical interference. The hobby has trended towards very low ride heights, and especially in competition events, this is beneficial because it reduces the amount of lateral load transfer (resulting in roll). But you never want to be riding on the bump stops, that locks the suspension up solid and typically results in dramatic spinouts. On the other end of the spectrum, not everyone can go to the track as often as they would like but still want to enjoy driving the car. Even in our So Cal location, the roads keep getting worse and worse, and it seems like parking lots can't get enough speed bumps to boot, which means higher ride heights.

This is where the adjustment of the suspension geometry we engineered into the system really shines. Whereas most "performance" aftermarket suspension systems (i.e. using coil over shock/springs) have provisions for ride height, spring rate, shock tuning, there are very few that even offer roll center height adjustment, and none even close to the range of the Next Gen system. Or ability to adjust gives the user a significant set of tuning "tools" that practically no other system offers - short of a custom built race specific setup - independent of the ride height selected.

This also allows a significant head start for tuning cars that have already established that choose to upgrade their existing systems. Have a four link system with a 12" roll center height? No sweat, adjust the 3-Link to aggressive Anti-squat (resulting in poor anti-lift under braking) as a baseline, then make one adjustment at a time to suit the balance of the car, and driving style. Bumpy corner exit tracks? Adjust for less anti-squat to allow the suspension to work under heavy throttle. Seriously aggressive braking corner entry? Eliminate wheel hop by adjusting for improved anti-lift. And so on. We are not aware of any system on the market that allows the extremely broad range of setup options we do, not even close.

Sound daunting? Don't worry. Let us know what tires you are running, and the intended usage of the car and we will recommend the baseline setup for you. And if something doesn't feel right, we'll guide you to options to improve, and also know that we intentionally limited the range of options so that nothing really "stupid" will result.

During our last mockup for this car, we took some shots of what we feel is a good but aggressive street ride height, typical competition ride height, and one showing nearly full bump - of course with no springs or anti-roll bar installed.

[TitoJones]

Mark-

Glad to see this make a comeback. Hope you're well.

[parsonsj]

Nicely done Mark! Good luck with sales, and glad to see your company up and running again.

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Tyler! John! O.G. PT.com'ers, thanks for the kind words. It is truly fantastic to be back, cannot wait to share the next stuff to compliment the rear suspension.

Cheers, guys, nice to "see" you again.

[Cdog]

So awesome to see you back at it. I spy some cool stuff on that firewall too.

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Hey, thanks Cory!

So the last step in the overall install, prior to geometry setup and alignment, is to seal off the area removed for the UCA to mate with the forward crossmember in the interior. Nothing says "Racecar" like true race car parts, Simpson have been some of the very first pioneers in race car safety and make excellent products. This is a fire-resistant boot designed to keep flames from entering the car in the case of fire, designed as a shifter boot. Works very well for this as well! It's a bit over-sized so after the perimeter sheet hold down is secured with self tapping sheet metal screws, a quick trim with a razor knife cleans things up.

Take care, be well!

[CarlC]

Very nice Mark! Any reason an easily removeable sheet metal cover could be also used?

[carbuff]

Very nice Mark! Any reason an easily removeable sheet metal cover could be also used?

That's what the 'legacy' system used I believe...

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Hey guys,

A sheet metal cover could be used, but then it would require getting underneath the car and around the exhaust to adjust the inclination of the upper link. An alternative would be to use a jacking screw on the forward mount, and we'd absolutely be open to that if a customer wanted to go this way, which would still allow adjustment but then could be closed off with some tin. But it isn't something we have in hand today.

Have also been thinking about a "set and forget" configuration, where we pick the overall best geometry and don't offer the adjust-ability, and also drop in some compliant bushings to ease a bit of NVH. Kind of a "Touring" option. Already know which compliant bushings we would go with and at least one customer has expressed interest in this as well. But for a somewhat - to - very serious competitor, nothing beats the ability to tune all aspects of the suspension, which is our main current target market - "racers wanted!"

[dhutton]

Hey guys,

A sheet metal cover could be used, but then it would require getting underneath the car and around the exhaust to adjust the inclination of the upper link. An alternative would be to use a jacking screw on the forward mount, and we'd absolutely be open to that if a customer wanted to go this way, which would still allow adjustment but then could be closed off with some tin. But it isn't something we have in hand today.

Have also been thinking about a "set and forget" configuration, where we pick the overall best geometry and don't offer the adjust-ability, and also drop in some compliant bushings to ease a bit of NVH. Kind of a "Touring" option. Already know which compliant bushings we would go with and at least one customer has expressed interest in this as well. But for a somewhat - to - very serious competitor, nothing beats the ability to tune all aspects of the suspension, which is our main current target market - "racers wanted!"
I think the set and forget option with compliant bushings would be great for someone like me.

Don

[payne]

Have also been thinking about a "set and forget" configuration, where we pick the overall best geometry and don't offer the adjust-ability, and also drop in some compliant bushings to ease a bit of NVH. Kind of a "Touring" option. Already know which compliant bushings we would go with and at least one customer has expressed interest in this as well. But for a somewhat - to - very serious competitor, nothing beats the ability to tune all aspects of the suspension, which is our main current target market - "racers wanted!"

Say we're not a competitor but instead someone that enjoys $100 hamburger runs with friends in exotics and the occasional HPDE.

Would the 'set and forget' have any changes? Something like:
Hole #1 for fast tracks
Hole #2 for autox and tight tracks
Hole #3 for street driving

IE if we don't want to chase the last tenth, but want to have the car be as fun as possible in all conditions, what are the compromises of a set and forget?

Thanks!

[CarlC]

The key word about the cover is "easily", as in a retainment tab + buckle or some other method. The idea is to keep the adjustability while helping reduce NVH. I for one would have zero issue taking a few minutes to R&R a cover, keep the adjustability, and increase cabin comfort.

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

@Carl: I saw this last night, thought about it all night, and agree with you. We will take this on, and this will be the standard going forward for both versions.

@Payne, and Don: Heard, loud and clear. We have other customers interested in a "Touring" version, so here will be the changes to that:


We will substitute the forward FK Rod Ends for a very trick piece from our favorite Rock Crawler supplier, MetalCloak. You can see the novelty here, we use these on our personal Jeeps and they are amazing, better in every way than the "Johnny Joint" variations: https://metalcloak.com/duroflex-joint-2-5-8-x-9-16-bh-x-2-5-8-housing.html Check out the video on their website. Incredible, simple and extremely effective.
The UCA Crossmember will only have one mounting hole, the same installation approach as the "Competition" version with the LCA brackets, etc, but will result in a slightly shorter bracket. Per above, will be sealed off with a sheetmetal cover.
LCA brackets will be the same as the Competition version, so one will still be able to adjust SVSA/Anti-squat - it's "free."


To answer Payne's question on "set it forget it," this system in our experience will still outperform everything else we have seen out there in our strong opinion. All of the competition will take exception with that statement and we sincerely don't mean any disrespect to anyone at all, there are TONS of really great options out there. But the LD 3-Link systems address the main shortcomings: zero bind, eliminates brake hop in hard braking situations, significantly lighter and far less difficult to install (and WAY less expensive) that the current IRS offerings, TONS of room for exhaust tailpipes, etc. It even looks cool and racy, if you participate in the USCA events it will almost certainly help with the Design and Engineering subjectivity in the judging.

There's more work to do as a result, but honestly we anticipated this anyway so the changes for the "Touring" version are simple to implement.

Thanks for the feedback, it is sincerely appreciated!

[Rod]

Looks great Mark! super happy to see you getting the improvements you wanted in play! cant wait to see a few of these out there tracking ...

[SSLance]

Love what I'm seeing here Mark. Keep up the good work.

You are also aware there are a LOT of G-Body guys trying to find better rear suspension setups for their cars...right? :drive1:

[CarlC]

@Carl: I saw this last night, thought about it all night, ........

I didn't mean to do that....... ;-)

[ErikLS2]

@Mark - As I said on the phone, I would suggest making the forward mount brackets the same spacing, so one could go back and forth between the touring arms and full rod ends. I too would enclose the upper forward mount in a sheet metal enclosure that's welded in place, with removable side panels to gain access to the adjustment point.

I'm dying to see the front!

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Hey, thanks all! Appreciate the input and positive words.

@Erik: Yep, all of the pickup brackets will work with either the rod ends OR the Duroflex bushings, the only change will (probably) be a slightly shorter link arm for the bushing option, which is simple. Will reach back out to you this weekend with more info and details!

Take care, be well!

[Gmc427]

is there any reason for not useing a currie type johnnyjoint in a setup like this?

[Bigblue73]

Hey Mark - Welcome back! Glad to see you are still hard at it!

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

180437180438

Thanks for dropping in Tony! Man it's been a long time, hope all is well with you and yours!

Here's a couple shots of an empty housing that we mocked up under the shop car for illustrative purposes. We wanted to show perhaps the primary objective of our design approach - zero bind. The unique aspect of the 3-Link approach over nearly all of the other stick axle suspension designs is the fact that it is completely free to move, freely, in the directions that we need (bump, droop, roll), but completely rigid in the directions that we need to preserve (lateral, linear, yaw). In this shot, the driver's side is 6" off of the deck, the passenger's side is 24". Inches. Not millimeters. That's Rock Crawling suspension travel. Obviously we don't need that much excursion for our hobby, but it does illustrate the lengths we go to in order to provide a non-friction, and therefore highly predictable/tunable system.

This is shown with all Heim/Rod Ends, but the rubber bushings we have selected for the "Touring" version are equally as flexible with the same benefit of extremely high articulation, and extremely low friction. You can have cake, or pie, and eat it too. With our help!

[payne]

Any updates?

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Small update while we await the completion of "Touring" version UCA mount and cover from the laser shop - we dropped 50+ new part numbers on them at the same time so taking a bit longer than typical.

In 1968, Chevrolet changed the rear bump stops from a simple unit that bolts onto the frame rail, to a formed plate with separate rubber bushing. We like the original approach, which is as simple as drilling a couple holes, and installing a "Nut Sert," shown in the tool kit. But not everyone has that tool, so we made a simple Nut Plate that gets welded onto the frame rail. With this, one can use a standard re-pop bump stop from a '67, or as we did here, grab some aftermarket ones. We are not a fan in general of poly type bushings, but non-issue here. Further, if you want to fine tune the setup, you can shim under the stops to drop them down a bit.

[Gmc427]

180437180438

Thanks for dropping in Tony! Man it's been a long time, hope all is well with you and yours!

Here's a couple shots of an empty housing that we mocked up under the shop car for illustrative purposes. We wanted to show perhaps the primary objective of our design approach - zero bind. The unique aspect of the 3-Link approach over nearly all of the other stick axle suspension designs is the fact that it is completely free to move, freely, in the directions that we need (bump, droop, roll), but completely rigid in the directions that we need to preserve (lateral, linear, yaw). In this shot, the driver's side is 6" off of the deck, the passenger's side is 24". Inches. Not millimeters. That's Rock Crawling suspension travel. Obviously we don't need that much excursion for our hobby, but it does illustrate the lengths we go to in order to provide a non-friction, and therefore highly predictable/tunable system.

This is shown with all Heim/Rod Ends, but the rubber bushings we have selected for the "Touring" version are equally as flexible with the same benefit of extremely high articulation, and extremely low friction. You can have cake, or pie, and eat it too. With our help!
will you be running swaybar with these?

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

will you be running swaybar with these?

Yes, absolutely. We designed the mounting brackets to accommodate virtually all of the existing commercially available units, and will be also designing our own in the future, which will (of course) be highly adjustable.

[payne]

Any updates?

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Here are a few shots of the revised UCA mounting system in the cabin area. Some good practical advice pointed us towards a better solution than the previous "boot" approach, a simple but effective change resulted. Instead of having several adjustment points as on the "Competition" version, we elected to have one for the Touring approach, it's a set and forget (we still have two options for the rear mounting point of the UCA, shown in earlier pictures on this thread). The new brackets and cover drop slightly below the floor pan, allowing full perimeter tack welding/sealing. While it wasn't necessary, this also made the forward UCA mount stiffer - due to the additional bracing from the actual sheet cover - in the load path direction. Simple, effective, easy to install.

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Here are a few shots of the final setup. This is what we would consider to be a pretty aggressive road ride height, rear rocker height is just below 8" (335/30/18 Rival tires). There is nearly 2" of suspension bump before it touches (i.e. not compressing) the OEM style bump stops on the frame rails, with trimming you can get far more. Note also how wide the shock mounts are, and the near vertical mounting. This has a significant impact on the springs/shocks to help manage body roll, many of the competing systems mount the shocks quite a bit further inboard - which has a far less positive impact on that attribute. Also give us even more room for huge tailpipes. The rear sway bar is actually a DSE unit borrowed from a friend, it's just mocked up so folks can see the mounting on our system. Might even use it for some initial tuning? Main point here is that you can probably run the exact same rear bar you already have on the car with our system to get started.

At this ride height/tire choice, the Rear Roll Center Height is about 7 3/4". You have the option of going a bit lower, and of course ride height has a direct impact on this as well. And it is hugely adjustable.

We haven't been posting here as much as we had previously - focus has been on new product development - but we try to make periodic updates on (anti-) social media, FB and IG. If you like what you see here, check out our pages there too for more info.

[carbuff]

Mark,

What is the clearance between the Watt's mount and the ground at this ride height? Maybe it's the angle of the photo, but that looks pretty low! And if the center pivot of the Watt's is 7 3/4" from the ground, it must be actually low!

Also, what length shock will work in this arrangement at that ride height? The bars you are using don't look very long either...

Thanx! Keep at it!

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

Hi Brian, thanks for the questions (and I think I owe you a long overdue e-mail response - sorry!).

Indeed the lowest part of the cradle is low, it's right at about 5" at this ride height. I think the unit on Bad Penny is actually lower, she had aftermarket frame rails so that affected things way back when, there's never been an issue. Typically, the lowest part on today's hobby cars is going to be the exhaust, or the front splitter (as you are well aware). 5" is a pretty "conservative" clearance for underbody components (which, is exactly the same vertical distance on the new front subframe forward-most point, at a front rocker height of 7", and not by coincidence), you'd hit a lot of other stuff before the cradle. Also, the cradle is very close to the wheels, so there's that benefit as well. I've see a lot of systems that have less clearance than ours.....

At this ride height, the installed length of the shock is 12.5". This too is not by coincidence, with so many shock suppliers out there, and so many length options, getting a correct length shock is no issue. Typical travel is about 4.5" but this is dependent, again, on ride height.

DUDE!!!! Short links?!?!?! Why I outta..... Kidding aside, they are actually quite long, we don't sacrifice there. Lowers are over 23" long, upper is only fractionally shorter. You can see exactly how long they are on your next build! :naughty:

[carbuff]

Indeed the lowest part of the cradle is low, it's right at about 5" at this ride height.

Gotcha. If I recall correctly, my subframe crossmember was around 4 - 4.5" depending on the ride height I had the car set at. It just looked lower in the picture.


DUDE!!!! Short links?!?!?! Why I outta..... Kidding aside, they are actually quite long, we don't sacrifice there. Lowers are over 23" long, upper is only fractionally shorter. You can see exactly how long they are on your next build! :naughty:

Ha! I meant the rods you have in place of the shocks, not the lower links. ;) I was just trying to figure out how long your shocks would be, and those square bars looked kinda short. ;) It's 12.5" short for a shock? I'm not certain how the length is measured. Perhaps at full extension it would be more like 15" and that is how the manufacturers list length...

Keep the updates coming. :)

[Mark@lateral-dynamics]

For the shocks, yeah, it's a bit confusing for sure. Typically the noted measurement is the total travel of the shock, then you look at the compressed and extended dimensions "after" that. Not too many years ago, you had a choice of 3", 5" 7" travel shocks for most of the coil over type units. Now, they are putting a lot more in between those, and the higher end shocks you can pretty much spec the travel/lengths you want.

For this particular setup, the ride height of the sticks is 12.5". This is in the order of a 4.5" travel shock, which is plenty for this application.

Another important aspect is the installation angle. The more you tip the shock over, the less effective wheel travel you get - it goes as the "cosine" of the angle. Not a big deal below ~30 degrees, but gets ugly fast after that. Also, in compression the angle will increase as the wheel goes into bump, meaning even less effectiveness, and because the spring is in play too, the actual wheel - spring rate drops. No bueno.

So (at least for us), the order of priority is: 1. Get the lower shock mount out as far as practical on the axle side - this has a direct impact on controlling roll resistance which takes much of the work out of the sway bar. 2. Get the top of the shock as far outboard as practical - see above. 3. Make sure you have at least 2" of bump travel, and work to get an equal amount of droop if possible. If you can't get all three, rinse and repeat the design. All of this is performance oriented approach, if you have a cushy application that needs a lot of soft travel, this still applies but isn't as important.