New mopar member

[Kowalski340]

I hope you have followed the threads on the failure points of the front and rear suspensions of Ron Sutton's designs'?

What are the failure points of Ron Suttons designs? I'm not familiar. Do you mean legitimate design flaws with the geometry? Or some sort of failure with his in house fabrication?

[sccacuda]

What are the failure points of Ron Suttons designs? I'm not familiar. Do you mean legitimate design flaws with the geometry? Or some sort of failure with his in house fabrication?

Geometry is good, design and construction (I would say engineering, but none was done), not so much. The rear suspension is pretty much the same regardless of which front you have. The passengers side watts attachment will need a reinforcement or it WILL break off (Welds' Mustang). The watt's link structure he supplies flexes up to a 1/4" (GoPro vid of this available from Herb Lump). It will need to be supported around the pivot area. The decoupled three link is unusable as supplied. The lower adjustable connection at the front will break. The decoupled shock valving is completely wrong (Ron Ver Mulm spent a lot of time and money trying to get this thing to work) and your best solution is just to run a conventional 3 - link. The shocks supplied by Ron will need to be revalved as well.

The front, depending on whether you have the one piece or two piece lowers, will both fail. The curved rear link on the two piece design has failed and almost caused a serious accident (Dusold). The one piece lower arms crack at sway bar mount, splitting the arm in two at that point (Oberle's Chevelle). The attachment points on the subframe are poorly designed and WILL crack and break OFF the subframe (Oberle's Chevelle again). Reinforcement of the front control arm bracket as well as addition bracing in the load path is needed to fix this.

Most of this is documented and posted on FB and Lateral G. I have my own build thread that highlights a lot of the problems: https://lateral-g.net/forums/showthread.php?t=52748

[Bjkadron]

Geometry is good, design and construction (I would say engineering, but none was done), not so much. The rear suspension is pretty much the same regardless of which front you have. The passengers side watts attachment will need a reinforcement or it WILL break off (Welds' Mustang). The watt's link structure he supplies flexes up to a 1/4" (GoPro vid of this available from Herb Lump). It will need to be supported around the pivot area. The decoupled three link is unusable as supplied. The lower adjustable connection at the front will break. The decoupled shock valving is completely wrong (Ron Ver Mulm spent a lot of time and money trying to get this thing to work) and your best solution is just to run a conventional 3 - link. The shocks supplied by Ron will need to be revalved as well.

The front, depending on whether you have the one piece or two piece lowers, will both fail. The curved rear link on the two piece design has failed and almost caused a serious accident (Dusold). The one piece lower arms crack at sway bar mount, splitting the arm in two at that point (Oberle's Chevelle). The attachment points on the subframe are poorly designed and WILL crack and break OFF the subframe (Oberle's Chevelle again). Reinforcement of the front control arm bracket as well as addition bracing in the load path is needed to fix this.

Most of this is documented and posted on FB and Lateral G. I have my own build thread that highlights a lot of the problems: https://lateral-g.net/forums/showthread.php?t=52748

Wow. I was planning on working out my own designs but this is crazy. Reading your build thread now.

EDIT: Holy crap. Just finished the build thread. That is an amazing car! Sucks you went through all that crap with the "top of the line" pieces you bought. Can't wait to see it finished.