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!

Maximum Motorsports Road and Track Grip Box

Maximum Motorsports offers a complete package for our S197 Mustangs. This looks like a solid option along with the Kenny Brown, Ford Racing and Cortex packages. Check it out.

http://www.stangtv.com/tech-stories/brakes-suspension/maximum-motorsports-road-and-track-grip-box-for-our-2013-stang/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=maximum-motorsports-road-and-track-grip-box-for-our-2013-stang

IMG_3240.jpg
IMG_3268.jpg
IMG_3319.jpg
http://cdn.speednik.com/image/2013/06/IMG_3303.jpg[img]
[ATTACH=full]28100[/ATTACH]
 
mcmmotorsports said:
$2,050. Hmmm
http://www.maximummotorsports.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=1_67&products_id=1443

I was going to *pshaw* your miserly comment, but when I priced-out the components, I found the same thing. The kit is almost $200 more than ordering à la carte, except that it doesn't appear that the springs or front swaybar are available separately, at least according to their online catalog (I used other MM-branded components for price comparison).

Still, I am much more interested in fully developed and tested systems (which is why I also like Kenny Brown stuff), rather than trying to pick and choose my way to handling perfection. That's a recipe for disappointment and I'm getting too old for that shizzle. I want to be the problem with my car's handling, not the car. ;)

Technical note: I notice that MM doesn't go in for the RLCA relocation brackets. Anybody know why? Do they address a problem that MM fixes in another way? Are they less critical than I have been led to believe? I saw a couple of World Challenge Bosses that had the brackets, but the RLCAs were in the stock location, so the brackets weren't actually being utilized. Wha? ???
 
Jimmy Pribble said:
Technical note: I notice that MM doesn't go in for the RLCA relocation brackets. Anybody know why? Do they address a problem that MM fixes in another way? Are they less critical than I have been led to believe? I saw a couple of World Challenge Bosses that had the brackets, but the RLCAs were in the stock location, so the brackets weren't actually being utilized. Wha? ???

In the article quoted above, a Roush UCA was utilized. On SVTPerformance this topic came up and BMR suggested it was not advisable to have both the Roush UCA's and LCA brackets. The general theory was Roush lowers the UCA mounting point down, which increases AS% and shortens the IC. This UCA along with LCA brackets would increase the AS% beyond what's recommended and actually result in a loss of traction (basically we want 100% AS). I certainly don't know if this is why MM doesn't opt for a bracket, but just something I thought about.

I don't think you can utilize the stock location with LCA brackets since the factory mount is actually use to bolt the bracket in place. Then again, I guess you could remove the mounting hardware and utilize the LCA bolt through the factory hole...
 
Theviking said:
I don't think you can utilize the stock location with LCA brackets since the factory mount is actually use to bolt the bracket in place. Then again, I guess you could remove the mounting hardware and utilize the LCA bolt through the factory hole...

RLCA_bracket.jpg

Thanks for the other information. Maybe I will go look-up that SVT thread. Interesting stuff.
 
Jimmy Pribble said:
Thanks for the other information. Maybe I will go look-up that SVT thread. Interesting stuff.

Here's the post on svtperformance.
http://www.svtperformance.com/forums/2011-2014-mustangs-354/958091-lca-brackets-car-slows-down.html
 
I've been looking for more rear grip/forward bite on cornering acceleration. Would moving the LCA up to the factory location help with this? Right now I'm in the upper of the two holes on the LCA relo bracket.....
 
cloud9 said:
I've been looking for more rear grip/forward bite on cornering acceleration. Would moving the LCA up to the factory location help with this? Right now I'm in the upper of the two holes on the LCA relo bracket.....

When I took that photo, I looked back at the mechanic and made the ??? face. He said, "Why would we want to give-up grip out back." He didn't elaborate. Also, keep in mind (and of course you know this), more grip out back is going to give you a push, which goes against your "rear grip/forward bite" goals. Moving it back to the factory location might increase rear grip, but you will also need to do something up front to balance it. The nice thing is that it is a very easy thing to try. The scientific method and such. ;)

Do you have an aftermarket UCA?
 
Jimmy Pribble said:
When I took that photo, I looked back at the mechanic and made the ??? face. He said, "Why would we want to give-up grip out back." He didn't elaborate. Also, keep in mind (and of course you know this), more grip out back is going to give you a push, which goes against your "rear grip/forward bite" goals. Moving it back to the factory location might increase rear grip, but you will also need to do something up front to balance it. The nice thing is that it is a very easy thing to try. The scientific method and such. ;)

Do you have an aftermarket UCA?
By forward bite, I meant more forward bite with the rear wheels under acceleration. Supposedly that's what the torque arm yields, but didn't want to buy more parts. Yes I have a Steeda UCA with the spherical bearing. So what you're saying is that if I moved the LCAs up to the factory position I would get more rear grip under acceleration or just under cornering with neutral throttle? I know little about proper setup, but was told you want to have the rear LCAs parallel to the ground, which is where mine are right now.

While that could cause a push, I can soften the front bar one more setting. I just feel like I'm having to wait too long to get back to WOT in corners compared to my GT500 and trying to pinpoint the cause.
 
cloud9 said:
By forward bite, I meant more forward bite with the rear wheels under acceleration.

Yes, that makes much more sense than the "I would like my cake and eat it, too" interpretation that I gave your statement. ;)

cloud9 said:
So what you're saying is that if I moved the LCAs up to the factory position I would get more rear grip under acceleration or just under cornering with neutral throttle?

Nope. I am reporting an experience and exchange that I had with a WC mechanic. ;)

cloud9 said:
I know little about proper setup, but was told you want to have the rear LCAs parallel to the ground, which is where mine are right now.

That is my understanding as well. However, not everyone uses relo brackets. Even Ford Racing sells lowering springs and kits without them. So, what is happening when those folks lower their car without them? StangTV used an UCA, but in fact, this kit does not actually come with one. This kit has a pretty severe drop (1.9" out back), but no relo brackets.

My SWAG is that the relo brackets "improve grip" in the same way that a rear swaybar does - by removing grip from the back and balancing the car better. But for guys willing to work both ends (I probably could have said that better ;) ), looking for ultimate grip, the relo brackets might not be the way to go. I don't know. But like I said, it should be pretty easy to test, unless I am missing something. No matter what, I find all of this nerdy stuff interesting and I can't wait until I can actually test this stuff for myself.
 

Grant 302

basic and well known psychic
cloud9 said:
I've been looking for more rear grip/forward bite on cornering acceleration. Would moving the LCA up to the factory location help with this? Right now I'm in the upper of the two holes on the LCA relo bracket.....

Gary, I think you want to try the lower hole. As long as you don't have modified Rear UCA geometry (longer arm or relocated forward rear UCA connection point). Should help your corner exit acceleration.

There are some potentially undesirable effects with running the LCAs pointing forward/up...There may be a (small) tendency for the car to be rear 'roll steer loose'. But if you like to mat the throttle coming out of a turn, you might prefer the lower hole setting overall.


Jimmy Pribble said:
My SWAG is that the relo brackets "improve grip" in the same way that a rear swaybar does - by removing grip from the back and balancing the car better. But for guys willing to work both ends (I probably could have said that better ;) ), looking for ultimate grip, the relo brackets might not be the way to go. I don't know. But like I said, it should be pretty easy to test, unless I am missing something. No matter what, I find all of this nerdy stuff interesting and I can't wait until I can actually test this stuff for myself.

Reasons I think they might want to use the original LCA holes are to reduce the loose roll steer I mention above, and to increase the braking load taken by the rear brakes (since some are using the larger diameter GT500 brakes). I could also see this being a track specific adjustment, perhaps for faster tracks. But I don't know either! 8)

Would be nice if somebody in the know could chime in...
 

TMO Supporting Vendors

Top