The Mustang Forum for Track & Racing Enthusiasts

Taking your Mustang to an open track/HPDE event for the first time? Do you race competitively? This forum is for you! Log in to remove most ads.

  • Welcome to the Ford Mustang forum built for owners of the Mustang GT350, BOSS 302, GT500, and all other S550, S197, SN95, Fox Body and older Mustangs set up for open track days, road racing, and/or autocross. Join our forum, interact with others, share your build, and help us strengthen this community!

Looking for input on Whiteline rear suspension components (S197 autocross)

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Looking to make the jump to CAM-C next year with my S197 V6 performance pack car next year and have been back and forth over the parts I’d like to use to modify the rear suspension. After autocrossing the car for a year, I’ve learned that even with decent shocks (Koni yellows), shorter Ford racing bump stops, a smaller 22mm rear sway, stock springs, and factory gt500 lower control arms there is a lot of room for improvement to be had in the rear end of the car. The car has atrocious wheel hop with sticky tires, feels skittish at times, and doesn’t put down power well on corner exit.

My goal is to put together a very simple suspension autocross setup that still provides decent street manners as I daily the car year round in NYC. I’m specifically looking to upgrade the panhard bar, rear lower control arms, and possibly add relocation brackets (not sure if they are needed at stock-ish ride height). The car will more than likely be getting coilovers with a rear spring rate somewhere between 175-200lb to be semi-competitive, but will be as close to stock ride height as possible to keep the factory geometry as well as ground clearance (she see snow duty). At this point I’m leaning towards ground control sleeves/camber plates on my existing Koni Sports but that’s a discussion for another thread lol.


After searching here on TMO there seems a consensus that rod-end control arms are superior for racing applications but have NVH/wear issues when exposed to the elements. Urethane bushings seem to offer have binding issues/squeak/require greasing. Brand preference seems to vary extensively as well.

Specifically I’m looking for some input/experiences with Whitelines products for the rear end of s197 as the max-c style bushing seems to over a nice compromise for a street car that will see extensive autocross work. I’ve run whiteline products on past projects (Subarus) but nothing with the Max-C bushings, so any input would be greatly appreciated

Thanks in advance,
J

BTW Whiteline is running a 25% off Black Friday sale as we speak
 
Just an update incase anyone else finds themselves looking at Whiteline goods for the s197. Dug up the old Vorshlag s197 development thread and found they used Whiteline rear end components on their black S197 that was being set for ESP with some success. If its good enough for them, I figure its gotta be good enough for me!

Scored the adjustable lower control arms and panhard bar on Black Friday for $270 shipped, will post my experiences with them in my updated build thread.

J
 

PatientZero

@restless_performance
825
865
Exp. Type
Autocross
Exp. Level
10-20 Years
Kansas City, Missouri
Just an update incase anyone else finds themselves looking at Whiteline goods for the s197. Dug up the old Vorshlag s197 development thread and found they used Whiteline rear end components on their black S197 that was being set for ESP with some success. If its good enough for them, I figure its gotta be good enough for me!

Scored the adjustable lower control arms and panhard bar on Black Friday for $270 shipped, will post my experiences with them in my updated build thread.

J
I put all Whiteline stuff on my car, no complaints.
 
Not sure if I am the right DaveW but I have ended up with a WL watts and rear bar on the back of my car. Upper link, bracket and LCA relocation brackets are BMR, just because I already had them.

The whiteline rear sway bar is axle mounted versus chassis and this ends up being important if you run wide wheels as they will rub on the stock chassis mount bar (I use 19x11, 19x11.5, 19x12 or 18x12 square for my various setups) I had a chassis mount pivot watts before but it did not work with the Whiteline bar and I didn't feel like fabbing a bar up so I just switched to the Whiteline Watts.

In general, I install a decent amount of Whiteline at work on various cars and it is all high quality and customers seem happy with its performance.

DaveW
 

xr7

TMO Addict?
706
821
Exp. Type
Autocross
Exp. Level
10-20 Years
Minnesota
One minor issue you may want to watch for if you use the Whiteline Watts linkage. The diff cover bolts in my kit were chrome plated and the threads were plated too. That caused an interference fit when screwing the bolts into the diff housing. I ran a die over the bolts and problem solved. Also used a lubelocker diff cover gasket, no silicone sealant. No leaks for 3 years.
 

Dave_W

Cones - not just for ice cream
984
1,277
Exp. Type
Autocross
Exp. Level
20+ Years
Connecticut
I had a chassis mount pivot watts before but it did not work with the Whiteline bar and I didn't feel like fabbing a bar up so I just switched to the Whiteline Watts.

@DaveW, did you notice a handling difference between the chassis-mount pivot and axle-mount pivot?

From what i've read, the chassis-mount should have slightly more oversteer on entry and understeer on exit, which I'm thinking is what you want in autocross. The axle-mount is supposed to be more neutral, and could be better for road racing due to that.

With the chassis-mount the roll center is always the same distance from the car's center of gravity, so the roll moment is the same, though the roll center is moving vertically relative to the ground under dive & squat. For the axle-mount, the RC is the same distance from the ground under dive & squat, but the CG is changing distance to it, changing the roll moment. The roll moment is effectively the lever that the CG has to influence body roll. More roll moment needs more roll stiffness to net the same roll per lateral G load, or more roll moment with the same roll stiffness yields more roll. The larger roll moment under braking and smaller one under power is essentially weight-jacking diagonally differently on corner entry & exit, changing the total lateral load transfer distribution.

The other factor is that the closer the RC is to the CG (lower roll moment), the more weight transfer goes through suspension links and less through springs & shocks, making the car feel "crisper" but trending to "snappy" at the extreme. So with the larger roll moment under braking with an axle-mount, the car is less eager to rotate on corner entry. At least in theory.
 
@DaveW, did you notice a handling difference between the chassis-mount pivot and axle-mount pivot?

From what i've read, the chassis-mount should have slightly more oversteer on entry and understeer on exit, which I'm thinking is what you want in autocross. The axle-mount is supposed to be more neutral, and could be better for road racing due to that.

With the chassis-mount the roll center is always the same distance from the car's center of gravity, so the roll moment is the same, though the roll center is moving vertically relative to the ground under dive & squat. For the axle-mount, the RC is the same distance from the ground under dive & squat, but the CG is changing distance to it, changing the roll moment. The roll moment is effectively the lever that the CG has to influence body roll. More roll moment needs more roll stiffness to net the same roll per lateral G load, or more roll moment with the same roll stiffness yields more roll. The larger roll moment under braking and smaller one under power is essentially weight-jacking diagonally differently on corner entry & exit, changing the total lateral load transfer distribution.

The other factor is that the closer the RC is to the CG (lower roll moment), the more weight transfer goes through suspension links and less through springs & shocks, making the car feel "crisper" but trending to "snappy" at the extreme. So with the larger roll moment under braking with an axle-mount, the car is less eager to rotate on corner entry. At least in theory.

Very minor change in driver feel, if any.

I went through the mental gymnastics on the Watts stuff on my old EM car which I designed and built from the ground up. I got backed up on time to finish that car and threw an extremely short panhard on it because I could fab that stuff quickly and have plenty of adjustment range to play with. The following winter I did an axle mounted watts and felt almost no performance difference but missed the adjustment range and ended up putting the PHB back on the following winter and leaving it. With the underslung frame there were some packaging issues back there that would have made a chassis mounted watts with reasonable adjustment a challenge. That car was a "Mustang" in name only and was very sensitive to rear RC adjustment as a tuning tool, it had a very low CG, low RC, 55% rear weight, 2200lbs, 600hp, etc.

I haven't found the S197 chassis, at least on200TW tires, to be nearly as sensitive to RC adjustment (what little I have) .

DaveW
 

TMO Supporting Vendors

Top