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

    Login / Register




    Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
    Results 21 to 28 of 28
    1. #21
      Join Date
      Dec 2010
      Posts
      709
      Mac struts blow, both on mountain bikes and cars. When the design came on a super-cheap Volkswagen Beetle update, it's not a real compliment to a performance application that was not originally insulted with the design. It's a packaging design to make things cheaper, with fewer parts, rather than a performance upgrade. As for TCP, under the heaps of compliments on their pretty blue paint, there are some realities behind the true application of their parts under real stresses. There are more than a few reasons why track guys still go with gusseted stock-style control arms... That said, many people are happy parking their TCP components at cruise-ins.

    2. #22
      Join Date
      Dec 2010
      Posts
      709
      Quote Originally Posted by dontlifttoshift View Post
      Bulldawg, that's what I am doing...



      back on topic, I consider the guys at Gateway friends. Their product is good but I have never been a fan of the Mcstrut design. I know it can be made to work but the fact of the matter is it was designed as a cheap suspension. Again it's not the Gateway parts I have issue with, its the suspension design itself.

      I would also go with TCP. I don't see why you would need the roller spring perch if you are going to coilover. I like the way the shelby mod is built into the UCA and the ease of adjusment on the UCA is a HUGE plus.

      We have that whole TCP setup on a falcon here at the shop (with a borgeson steering box) and it works very well. Admittedly, it has never been driven hard (graybeards!) but ride quality is satisfactory considering all the bearing in their parts.

      Hope that helps
      Donny
      I'm in agreement on the Mac strut idea--they're just cheap and pointless, although RRS's stuff is quite attractive. As for the coilover, I believe some of the TCP designs land the lower coilover mount on the upper control arm, hence the roller spring perch thought (although the perch is obviously done away with). When combining this with the relocated mounting point at the tower (instead of drilling/relocating), you essentially have a really expensive solution to not wanting to deal with UCA shims and a drill.

      Drill = 25 bucks

      Shims = 2.5 bucks

      TCP stuff = way freakin' more

      You may want to throw in another 20 for the angle grinder to cut some standard coil springs...

      Experience of being a cheapskate, bleeding your knuckles, and getting dirty on 1960s tech that still works = priceless.


    3. #23
      Join Date
      Dec 2010
      Posts
      709
      I might be wrong, but this sounds like the difference between a 65-66 bar and a 67-68 bar. The latter is wider...

      Quote Originally Posted by GrabberGT View Post
      I have the TCP kit on my Maverick. The only problem I have is related to the sway bar. In upgrading my sway bar to a larger than stock size, I've run into issues with the sway bar rubbing against the strut rods. I imagine this would be a problem with any larger than stock diameter strut rod though. It is also likely the result of my unusually low ride height as well.


    4. #24
      Join Date
      Apr 2010
      Location
      Pittsburgh, PA
      Posts
      717
      bump
      dont think i'll be going with the DSE mustang front setup as it sounds like it'll replace my new fancy roadrace belly bar made by toporanger from the maverick.to forum
      how does the globalwest setup compare to the tcp? is it better the negative control version vs the tcp coilover
      72 buick skylark
      twin-turbo fuel injected buick 350..perhaps stroked to 370 in the works!

    5. #25
      Join Date
      Aug 2007
      Location
      Roanoke (FortWorth) Texas
      Posts
      786
      Another option you might take a look at is the new Tru-Turn setup from ridetech. They now have a Mustang setup that looks pretty good if you are wanting to keep your shock towers. Its hard comparing one company to another without seeing some hard numbers. TCP is more of a direct replacement in tubular form with better components and adjustability. Reading over ridetech and Globalwest info, it appears they have actually engineered the components to provided the desired suspension geometry.
      Chris

      Total Cost Involved - Ridetech - Fatman - Total Control Products - Gateway Performance - MaverickMan Carbon

    6. #26
      Join Date
      Apr 2009
      Location
      san diego
      Posts
      5,101
      Country Flag: United States
      ridetech now has a mustang tru-turn? Anymore info on this?

    7. #27
      Join Date
      Apr 2010
      Location
      Pittsburgh, PA
      Posts
      717
      http://www.ridetech.com/store/tru-tu...d-mustang.html

      just add coilovers or airshocks and front swaybar and you got complete kit pretty much
      72 buick skylark
      twin-turbo fuel injected buick 350..perhaps stroked to 370 in the works!

    8. #28
      Join Date
      Aug 2007
      Location
      Roanoke (FortWorth) Texas
      Posts
      786
      Quote Originally Posted by Nothingface5384 View Post
      http://www.ridetech.com/store/tru-tu...d-mustang.html

      just add coilovers or airshocks and front swaybar and you got complete kit pretty much
      I havent seen an official announcement yet but it was in the catalog they sent me and also on line.

      Looks like a fantastic setup.
      Chris

      Total Cost Involved - Ridetech - Fatman - Total Control Products - Gateway Performance - MaverickMan Carbon

    Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2



    Advertise on Pro-Touring.com