Enter your username:
Do you want to login or register?
  • Forgot your password?

    Login / Register



    Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
    Results 41 to 52 of 52
    1. #41
      Join Date
      Jul 2020
      Posts
      29
      First off why am I not getting updates in my email that you guys are posting to my thread?

      Oh well...

      Second, I saw the C5/C6 adapters about 2 years ago. I like the idea, and I’ve considered it. I just didn’t want to back half the car for it, but I’m realizing IRS will require major surgery no matter what. I’m ok with that, but I do worry about weight, and that may be what drives the end decision... those corvette adapters are sweet, and C5’s aren’t hard to find for donar cars so there’s that. I do worry though the Vette stuff just won’t translate to proper performance for the mustang as it was designed for a Vette after all.

      Shawn at SOT is a great guy, and I like his stuff.

      I may have made a mistake watching some Maier videos and I gotta say I’m impressed with the way old blue looks going around an AC course, and a drag slalom with that MOD2 suspension.

      Decisions, decisions.
      Rick
      65 Fastback Mustang
      89 Daytona Shelby
      18 Charger R/T Superbee

    2. #42
      Join Date
      Nov 2006
      Location
      Rochester, NY
      Posts
      176
      Quote Originally Posted by Pragmatist View Post
      The truck arms are for a 3/4 ton truck so stiffness is not a problem. I've been driving it this way for over four years and I still leave two long black markers from the 315s on the rear at least once a week.

      This is pretty slick. What was the original application of the composite leaf springs?

    3. #43
      Join Date
      Jul 2020
      Posts
      29
      Quote Originally Posted by Vimes View Post
      My posts on this thread have mainly been aimed at getting the OP a path to an IRS system.
      Thanks for the effort... as you can see in my previous reply it seems we think alike.
      Rick
      65 Fastback Mustang
      89 Daytona Shelby
      18 Charger R/T Superbee

    4. #44
      Join Date
      Nov 2006
      Location
      Jacksonville, Fl
      Posts
      12
      Quote Originally Posted by matthimself456 View Post
      This is pretty slick. What was the original application of the composite leaf springs?
      3/4 ton truck

    5. #45
      Join Date
      Nov 2018
      Posts
      642
      Country Flag: United States
      If the IRS isn't for you, I've seen plenty of kits out there to install a 3-link, 4 link, torque arm, ect into a Mustang while trying to find something for my project.

    6. #46
      Join Date
      Nov 2006
      Location
      Rochester, NY
      Posts
      176
      Quote Originally Posted by Pragmatist View Post
      3/4 ton truck
      But... which one?

    7. #47
      Join Date
      Jul 2020
      Posts
      29
      Quote Originally Posted by Vimes View Post
      If the IRS isn't for you, I've seen plenty of kits out there to install a 3-link, 4 link, torque arm, ect into a Mustang while trying to find something for my project.
      Oh I know... I’ve been researching this to the moon which may be part of my problem. LoL
      Rick
      65 Fastback Mustang
      89 Daytona Shelby
      18 Charger R/T Superbee

    8. #48
      Join Date
      Nov 2006
      Location
      Jacksonville, Fl
      Posts
      12
      Quote Originally Posted by matthimself456 View Post
      But... which one?
      I have no idea. I asked for the stiffest leaf springs in their inventory and built from there.

    9. #49
      Join Date
      Jul 2020
      Posts
      29
      Quote Originally Posted by Pragmatist View Post
      I have no idea. I asked for the stiffest leaf springs in their inventory and built from there.
      Brand and part?
      Rick
      65 Fastback Mustang
      89 Daytona Shelby
      18 Charger R/T Superbee

    10. #50
      Join Date
      Nov 2006
      Location
      Jacksonville, Fl
      Posts
      12

    11. #51
      Join Date
      Dec 2021
      Location
      PNW
      Posts
      33
      Country Flag: United States
      I went with the 3 link rear clip. Watts link. Adjustable coilovers. 9 in housing and a floater kit. Sub-frame connectors and mini tubs as well.

      I've been waiting 4 1/2 months on this kit with no ETA. The floater kit is whats holding things up I've been told.

      I wonder if anyone has a similar setup on their 69 camaro and could share their experience.

    12. #52
      Join Date
      Jun 2012
      Location
      Chicago burbs
      Posts
      247
      Country Flag: United States
      Quote Originally Posted by Rb_69camaro View Post
      I went with the 3 link rear clip. Watts link. Adjustable coilovers. 9 in housing and a floater kit. Sub-frame connectors and mini tubs as well.

      I've been waiting 4 1/2 months on this kit with no ETA. The floater kit is whats holding things up I've been told.

      I wonder if anyone has a similar setup on their 69 camaro and could share their experience.
      Not a Camaro, but perhaps a Cutlass would be close enough? I'm running a custom 3 Link, Fays2Watt link, and Fab 9 housing. Prior I ran the 4 link with bolt on goodies. The lateral movement on my beefed up 4 link was about 3/4'' side to side. Not only does that limit the fatties you can stuff under the sheet metal, but that movement isn't damped or controlled. When you dive into a corner, the front of the car hunkers down, then the rear end shifts over, then goes back, then bounces side to side in small little bits making for a very non-linear, unsettled car. The watts link(or panhard) stops that 100%.

      The 3 link is king for a solid axle car because it allows axle articulation without any binding. Now, if your car is big spring, stiff shocks, with not a lot of movement in the back...then I challenge someone to notice the diff between 3 and 4 link. The reason why went with a 3 link, was because I am an engineer, not an engineering department. I cannot design a perfect suspension on the first try(or the 10th). I can however build adjustability into the design and adjust my way to perfection. The 3 link allows me to easily adjust Anti squat from 40%-160%. The watts link allows me to adjust the rear roll center to dial in the perfect amount of rear grip for each track I go to. The LCA adjustment allows me to change rear steer effects for road course or autocross.

      Now, I ran the 4 link with the Watts for almost a year. The car was immediately better in regards to lateral shift-the whole car felt much more stable and would hunker down into a corner. The obvious drawback to this setup is the two roll centers, 1 virtual, 1 physical. the physical one wins, up until the virtual goes into bind, then it's a lot of snap oversteer and awfulness. I only experienced that binding when the watts link was in it's lowest position as I was exploring the system on the street. I do not have a need to run the rear roll center that low, so it probably wouldn't have been an issue in real life, but the stain inducing experience is what kicked off the whole 3 link project.

      And just to touch on torque arms... The give you the same benefits of bind free articulation and the use of a watts/panhard allows you to change the rear roll center independent of antisquat. the downside is that antisquat is permanent and based on the front mounting location(so the length of the arm itself). So, if there is a company that makes a TA that has the right amount of Antisquat for what you do, then easy peeasy. I like to vary my antisquat values quite a bit based on if it's a road course, autocross or drag, so the TA wasn't a good option for me.

      So maybe all this boils down to how good you expect the car to perform under different events you do. I'm thinking most people would be fine with a fixed AS value and a well engineered system from a company that has put the hours into figuring out the correct rollcenter heights front and back. I would still say you want a watts/panhard regardless if your running a solid axle.



      As for me..I'm weird, and half the fun is designing and the other half is racing/driving. I hope the thoughts above help you out.

      1969 442 6.0L LQ9 T56
      Fab9 w/ custom 3 Link conversion
      FAYS2 Watts link
      Thanks to Mark at SC&C for his honesty and passion for the sport, and Ron Sutton for the wealth of knowledge that has helped shape so many of the cars on this site.


    Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3




    Advertise on Pro-Touring.com