Track Width?

[LowFast]

I am working on transforming my 1965 Ford Falcon. I have been through all of the suspension options out there and have decided on using the Art Morrison IFS. My question, based on the dimensions of my car and those of the AM front clip, in order to get the correct crossmember width from frame to frame (31") the overall track width (hub to hub) will increase 3 inches, ie 1.5 inches per side. Aside from requiring a different wheel backspacing will this cause any issues with the handling of the car. Widening the front track 3 inches pretty much makes the F/R Hub-to-hub the same. I would think having longer arms with better geometry than stock would improve handling, but wanted to get others opinions.

The other option is to go with TCI or Rod & Custom IFS which maintains the stock Hub-to-Hub but I feel is not as good of an IFS from a geometry standpoint. (I wish TCI made a falcon suspension like the mustang unit they have, the falcon unit seems much more MSII based)

[Bjkadron]

have you talked to Bryce?

https://www.pro-touring.com/showthre...on-pro-touring

I am sure he researched the suspensions that are available before he made his own, And there are a couple other guys on here with falcons as well.

[LowFast]

I have not PM'd him directly but have been following his posts on his project. Very nice stuff but not exactly the route I plan to go. I am wanting to remove the shock towers because I plan to most likely go with the 32v modular engine or maybe even the new 5.0, so I need the engine bay room.

[MonzaRacer]

Wider is better. Ever hear of the Wide Track Pontiacs? The track width will give the suspension better control over all rather than a narrower suspension.
Ever look at RC cars, wide and they like plant when dropped on the ground, no bounce, no jiggle, just thunk and its stuck.

[Bryce]

The only issue with increasing track width is the larger scrub radius as a result of more back space on the wheel.

[LowFast]

Bryce,

I know you designed and fabbed your own set-up. Given that I need to remove the shock towers for engine reasons(and plan to add bracing to up the rigidity of the entire car) What are your thoughts on the Art Morrison IFS weld in option. The issue is that the cross memebers are avaiable in 28" or 31" and the falcon frame rail is smack dab in the middle of these. So I can either go with the 28" and maintain the original 54" Hub-to-Hub or I can go with the 31" and increase the Hub-to-Hub to 57". It would be easier fab wise to go with the 31" but this will increase the h2h and increase the backspacing needed on the wheels by 1.5" each. As you know the falcon has anything but extra wheel well space, I have not done all of the math yet but my inital concern is that with the increased backspacing along with big brakes it will be hard to still fit a wheel under the fender and have any sort of turning radius.

The other options are to go with TCI or Rod and Custom (which would be easier) Unfortunately TCI decided that Falcon guys are not into corners and thus do not offer the improved geometry set-up like they do for the mustangs. I like the Art Morrison because it is a better design and will actually improve the cars handling. In the end I am not building a race-car but am commited to making a true Pro-Tuoring car that is more than just looks.

Thoughts?

[Bryce]

I would not settle for poor geometry.

I think you need to determine if you can fit a tire in there before you commit to a IFS. I run a 8" wheel with a 5" backspace on my falcon with a 245 tire. That means you would have to get a 8 with 6.5 BS. does that exist? Then you would need to determine what your scrub radius will be. This might be the deciding factor.

[LowFast]

Using your set-up as a baseline it looks as though if I do go the IFS route I would need to go with the 28" crossmemeber for a 54" h2h since most wheels 17x8 are available in a max bs of 6.125" (I plan on using Billet Specialties SLG15 wheels), maintaining the stock h2h and using an 8" rim with 5" bs should give me the appropriate scrub radius, correct?

[Bryce]

The spindle kingpin inclination and tire rolling radius will determine if the scrub radius is correct. So AME should tell you what wheel backspace and tire size will give you close to zero scrub.

[TCI Engineering]

We took a MII & Drag style 4-link equipped Nova to this year's Super Chevy Handling Challenge. This was a former street/strip car that the only changes made were wheels/tires, the addition of power steering, a bigger front anti-sway bar, disconnected the rear bar and made some adjustments to the alignment. We weren't able to finish the autocross portion of the test due to an engine issue but the Nova finished the slalom within a few ticks of our Camaro. So don't sell the MII front end too short.

-J

[LowFast]

We took a MII & Drag style 4-link equipped Nova to this year's Super Chevy Handling Challenge. This was a former street/strip car that the only changes made were wheels/tires, the addition of power steering, a bigger front anti-sway bar, disconnected the rear bar and made some adjustments to the alignment. We weren't able to finish the autocross portion of the test due to an engine issue but the Nova finished the slalom within a few ticks of our Camaro. So don't sell the MII front end too short.

-J

I assume this was with your TCI kit, can I make the leap that if I use your Falcon specific kit I would get similar results? (I am currently talking with one of your vendors to provide me the full TCI Falcon set-up, IFS front and 4-link rear, the current plan would be to run it with shockwaves F/R, just exploring all my options) I was a bit dissappointed that TCI does not make the falcon kit witht he same "corrections" as applied to the mustang IFS. I am not looking to build a track monster, just a good driver that could run an autocross or two a year and not look like a fool (BTW I have autocrossed my modified subaru so I am familiar with how to drive and what a decent handling car should feel like)

[TCI Engineering]

I assume this was with your TCI kit, can I make the leap that if I use your Falcon specific kit I would get similar results? (I am currently talking with one of your vendors to provide me the full TCI Falcon set-up, IFS front and 4-link rear, the current plan would be to run it with shockwaves F/R, just exploring all my options) I was a bit dissappointed that TCI does not make the falcon kit witht he same "corrections" as applied to the mustang IFS. I am not looking to build a track monster, just a good driver that could run an autocross or two a year and not look like a fool (BTW I have autocrossed my modified subaru so I am familiar with how to drive and what a decent handling car should feel like)

Ahhh yes, the good old Scooby. Boxer 4's have a special place in my heart/ear. Not to get too far off subject. LOL

You can definitely expect similar if not better results than we we accomplished with the Nova. The track widths are nearly identical but the Falcon wheel base is shorter and the car is lighter. The weight distribution will be similar between the two and the fact we use the canted 4-bar instead of the drag set-up would make all the difference on 'turn-in' and quick directional changes. It will make the car more compliant and predictable.

The market research we did on the Falcon definitely showed a budget front end as being the best financial option for us. I think many people(Bryce included, LOL) will be surprised how well a MII can perform. It is very likely that the Nova we took to the Handling Challenge will be at the 2011 RTTC. I don't expect it to set the world on fire on the road course with its lack of power but it should definitely be very competitive in the other two events.

-J

[silver69camaro]

Lowfast, another option is our 29" rail width 57.5" hub track Sport IFS. That would widen the rails out slightly, although the track is different too. Also, keep in mind those hub track widths are if you use a 13" or 14" brake, any smaller and it narrows the hub track by 1" overall. Or, if you buy the Sport IFS kit, you can "float" the rail width somewhat, unlike our traditional IFS.

Widening the hub track is typically a good thing. You can run less spring, smaller sway bars, and it lessens your scrub radius. Shoot for about 2" of scrub, too little and it can make steering feel numb. It's nice to have some feedback from the road.

[Bryce]

ahhh yes, the good old scooby. Boxer 4's have a special place in my heart/ear. Not to get too far off subject. Lol

you can definitely expect similar if not better results than we we accomplished with the nova. The track widths are nearly identical but the falcon wheel base is shorter and the car is lighter. The weight distribution will be similar between the two and the fact we use the canted 4-bar instead of the drag set-up would make all the difference on 'turn-in' and quick directional changes. It will make the car more compliant and predictable.

The market research we did on the falcon definitely showed a budget front end as being the best financial option for us. I think many people(bryce included, lol) will be surprised how well a mii can perform. It is very likely that the nova we took to the handling challenge will be at the 2011 rttc. I don't expect it to set the world on fire on the road course with its lack of power but it should definitely be very competitive in the other two events.

-j

hahaha!!