The Mustang Forum for Track Enthusiasts

Track Mustangs Online was built specifically for those who track their Mustangs!

Suspension Newbie - Need Advice

Ewheels

TMO Advanced
110
119
SoCal
HPDE
Under 3 Years
I'll be buying springs, shocks, and camber plates (used) from a friend who upgraded to coilovers. I'd prefer to install everything at once and align the car once sooo is there anything else I should buy/install while I'm at it? I have completely stock PP suspension at the moment.
I was looking into rear shock mounts and the BMR cradle lockout kit. My car is my daily but I do as many HPDE days as Nasa offers in my area.

I'll happily take any input and advice as I have no experience here. Cheers!
 

boardkat

CAMtard
123
148
Lake Oswego, OR
W2W Racing
10-20 Years
getting rid of the rubber in the suspension and correcting roll center will ensure your car remains predictable at the limit:

1.) front tension link w/ extended ball joint and bearings
2.) rear lower control arm bearings
3.) rear poly vertical links
4.) rear knuckle bearings

if only for simplicity, replacing the upper rear camber arms and toe links makes doing an alignment much easier, especially if you DIY in your garage (i *hate* cam and slotted adjustments). and getting adjustable front/rear swaybar endlinks allows you to corner balance. and if you or your shop have the tool for measuring bumpsteer, adding a kit and setting it correctly makes the car easier to handle over bumps (i got mine within 0.020" +/- 1" from static ride height and no longer have to correct steering after hitting bumps due to dynamic toe). and setting rear ride height and swapping springs is infinitely easier with adjustable perches (also allows you to capture inboard space from not running a coilover to run wider wheels/tires without increasing track width)
 

BmacIL

TMO Intermediate
Agreed with the above. Getting rid of the deflection and inconsistencies in the suspension makes an enormous difference. Since I know what suspension you're getting...I'd echo boardkat's list.

- cradle lockout kit - a must
- extended ball joint lateral links (front roll center correction) & tension arms...wise to get bumpsteer kit too
- rear LCA bearings: BMR's BK055 with big fat, high load bearing
- vertical links: BMR TCA048, on-car greasable, work great, inexpensive
- rear knuckle bearing: Ford performance toe knuckle bearings

I'd also definitely recommend a stiffer, adjustable front bar.
 

RBELUN

TMO Beginner
3
7
Houston
Hello Gentlemen. Just found the website and wanted to ask do the factory GT350 knuckles come with an upgraded rear lower control arm bushing? After reading your posts I think I may have been victim to the aftermarket money pit with my purchases thus far....But it looks like I over looked the rear knuckle bearing and lower control arm bearing....your insight would be welcomed. The following is what I've done thus far.

I have a P1 that I upgraded to GT350 brakes which needed a GT350 rear knuckle which I bought new and some Full Tilt Boogie specific parts. I've done what I thought was a lot to the suspension so far with Steeda IRS (sub frame bushing, sub frame support braces, G Track Brace K member brace, vertical links, sub frame alignment kit), and added the and Ford performance #M9602M (spring,sway and with magnaride update). Car is night and day better than the stock by the way.

I just purchased for the front the Steeda bumpsteer kit, Front Control Arms Lateral Links w/ Extended Ball Joint, Front Control Arms (Lateral and Tension Links w/ Bearings).
 

blacksheep-1

Epic Contributor
2,664
2,220
try to get all the parts from the same manufacturer as the suspension components, nothing worse than having FP parts here, BMR there and Steeda over here.
 

blacksheep-1

Epic Contributor
2,664
2,220
for one thing, all of the Ford Racing parts are designed to work together, same with other companies. if you have the same resources they do for RnD then go for it, but I bet not a single manufacturer would recommend the mixing of parts.
 

Scootsmcgreggor

TMO Intermediate
Well with most of our modifications we're off in the deep end when compared to OEM R&D budgets anywyas right?

I was just thinking for newcomers to suspension modifications that a blanket "don't mix parts" might be overly prescriptive, but of course that's a matter of opinion. In my eyes I don't see any engineering reason why for example I can't use a Steeda RLCA bearing with a BMR tension rod bearing. Ford didn't design the car to have bearings in those locations in the first place, and I'm not sure the spec of an RLCA bearing would make a difference for the bearing you'd spec/engineer for the front control arm would it? Wouldn't each part be designed around the needs of that bearing in that suspension system (either front or rear in this case)?
 

JAJ

TMO Addict
835
764
In the V6L
Not to be a spoil sport, but there is a downside to some of this stuff. Wear is inevitable, so poly bushings will eventually squeak and rod ends will eventually clunk.

The more of them you have, the harder it is to figure out which one's the culprit causing the noise problem you have on any given day. The further you can develop your driving without them, the better.
 

TymeSlayer

Tramps like us, Baby we were born to run...
3,443
2,181
Brighton, Colorado
HPDE
3-5 Years
It's your ride so do with it as you wish but I agree 100% with Blacksheep-1. Form, fit and function is one thing but little nuances can make a big difference. If you stick with the same manufacturer, the parts were designed to play nice together.
 

Dave_W

Cones - not just for ice cream
107
97
Connecticut
Autocross
20+ Years
I'm of two minds on the "buy everything from one manufacturer" rule. It's certainly the "easy button" approach, especially for components that affect wheel rate - springs, sway bars, shocks. A good suspension engineer (or a team of them at Ford) should be able to design those items to complement each other. The spring rate and sway bar rate are balanced for single-bump wheel rate, roll stiffness, and dive/squat control, and the shocks are valved to control the spring/swaybar rates. In addition, you should trust that parts that connect to each are designed to fit together properly.

OTOH, there are times when it may be desireable to substitute one of the items when using a suite of parts from one source. For example, I really like the gussetting on the upper "tab" of the Maximum Motorsports rear LCA brackets; it seems much more robust than the single-plane piece of thin plate steel used by most other manufacturers. Does it make a difference - I don't know, and all the other vendors seem to sell enough of their designs - but it's a personal choice I made. But I bought the upper & lower control arms and Watts link from BMR because I liked the engineering and price. Well, I did get the diff-to-UCA bronze bushing from Steeda because I think it has better motion compliance than the BMR urethane bushing, and I don't care about NVH (everything else is rod ends). So there's a second example. In both cases, it was a well-considered personal decision, and if things don't fit, I accept it's on me.

If you choose the "mix & match" route, to some extent you become the suspension engineer. Be prepared to accept all the research and development that may entail.
 

blacksheep-1

Epic Contributor
2,664
2,220
I agree with Dave, if you hose something up you can't go to one manufacturer and ask them what went wrong, I would simply copy an IMSA or PWC car, both of those rules sets start out based on street driven cars (the tubs do get seem welded however, which is one reason they don't use the shock tower supports) then the rules limit them to a specific set of parts, even the aero, there's the simpler IMSA version and then the more complex PWC version. They do use Penske coil overs though, which are stupid expensive, so you'd prolly want to avoid that, but those cars are crazy stock for the most part.
The idea is... all the work has already been done for you, just copy the IMSA or PWC formula, if you ever get faster than those guys then you can try engineering it yourself, or buy it all from Fabman, who has basically done all of that work for you as well, there's just no reason to re engineer a car's suspension when there are already so many workable formulas out there.
Believe me, if this guy hasn't broken a stock style suspension, you'll have nothing to worry about, and on the same level, are you going to drive your car this way? Because this is what you'll nee dto do to be competitive on a professional level.

qFrE6hnl.jpg
 
Last edited:

blacksheep-1

Epic Contributor
2,664
2,220
Ford Mustang FR500C (5.0) 2009 GS
Final Drive: 3.73:1
Fuel capacity: 18 gal.
Weight: 3275
Tire size: 275/35/18.
 Must use OEM unmodified ECU
 Must use unmodified exhaust manifold as supplied with engine.
 Must use IMSA air restrictor as supplied.
 Maximum rear camber allowance is a total of .3 degrees (Left and right combined).
 Engine must be sealed as provided by Roush Yates Racing Engines
 Engines may be built by any engine builder.
 Engine must be submitted to Roush Yates for physical inspection and power audit.
 Engine physical inspection will include a visual inspection of the crank, rods and pistons.
 Physical inspection will include an evaluation of cylinder head ports (intake and exhaust.)
 Physical inspection will include an evaluation of camshaft events.
 Physical inspection will include an evaluation of intake manifold and throttle bodies.
 Power audit includes running engine on dynamometer to establish compliance to IMSA accepted power levels.
 Audit will include spark and fuel slew to confirm max power level.
 If engine is found compliant in both physical inspection and power audit documentation of engine number and seal number will be recorded on-site and provided to IMSA.
 Engine will be sealed and returned to customer.
Approved Modifications
1. Fuel cell mounted behind rear axle.
Permitted replacement components
1. 5.0 liter engine # M6007-R50P with fixed runner length at 3 and 4 inches.
2. Transmission package, part number M-7003 T56-RP, fordmotorsport.com
3. One pc. Driveshaft, part number M-4602-J, fordmotorsport.com
4. Front control arm, part number M-3075-R. fordmotorsport.com
5. Front outer tie rod, part number M-3130R, fordmotorsport.com
6. Rear control arm, part number M-5649-R. fordmotorsport.com
7. Front rotor 355 mm.
8. Caliper upgrade as per rules.
9. Steeda Autosports Hood, part number 307-0011
10. Steeda Autosports Rear wing, part number 605-SW100
11. Steeda Autosports Rear Panhard bar, part number 555-2551
12. Multimatic Motorsports Inc ABS part
number 7R33-2C353-AB,
Boss 302
submitted by Ford and as approved by IMSA, according to the Homologation document.
Final Drive: 3:73:1
Fuel capacity: 18.5 gal.
Weight: 3290 lbs OR 3335 lbs as per Permitted replacement components #11
Tire size: 275/35/18
Maximum RPM 8000
 Must use OEM ECU as supplied by Ford Racing.
 Must use unmodified exhaust manifold as supplied with engine. Permitted band clamp attachment.
 Maximum rear camber allowance is a total of .3 degrees (Left and right combined).
Engine must be sealed as provided by Roush Yates Racing Engines
 Engines may be built by any engine builder. Engine must be submitted to Roush Yates for physical inspection and power audit.
 Engine physical inspection will include a visual inspection of the crank, rods and pistons.
 Physical inspection will include an evaluation of cylinder head ports (intake and exhaust.)
 Physical inspection will include an evaluation of camshaft events.
 Physical inspection will include an evaluation of intake manifold and throttle bodies.
 Power audit includes running engine on dynamometer to establish compliance to IMSA accepted power levels.
 Audit will include spark and fuel slew to confirm max power level.
 If engine is found compliant in both physical inspection and power audit documentation of engine number and seal number will be recorded on-site, provided to IMSA and engine
will be sealed and returned to customer.
Approved Modifications
1. Fuel Cell required mounting behind rear axle. Mounting to be with short axis of fuel cell can along length of car and long axis
along height of car.
2. Battery relocation to right rear of trunk.
Permitted replacement components
1. One piece drive shaft, part number M-4602-S, fordmotorsport.com
2. Multimatic Motorsports, Inc. mono-ball in front upper third link mount.
3. Front rotor 355 mm.
4. Front caliper upgrade per regulations.
5. Multimatic Motorsports, Inc. ABS part number 7FRT-2C353-AA
6. Multimatic Motorsports, Inc. Rear wing 605-SW100 with pedestal modification and mounting shims. (Mounting to be at same angle
of attack as 2005 Mustang) Permitted Boss front grill as produced for road car.
7. Alternate connecting rod. (Manley Part # 14318)
8. 2013 Boss 302 front fascia part# DR33-16C928-AAW, hood part# DR3Z-16612-A.
9. Boss R front grill part number M-8200-MBRA and rear taillight panel part# DR33-13B504-AC, DR33-13B505-AC and associated
components and hardware.
10. 2013 Boss 302 lower front “spoiler” or “splitter” DR3Z-17626-BA
11. 2013 GT500 brake package, (Front calipers P/N XB10511LH, P/N XB 10512RH; disc 09852874LH, 09852884RH; rear rotor
DR3Z-2C026). Teams that opt to use this package are not permitted dimensional tolerances or front caliper upgrade. If used in
combination with Bosch ABS controller, or Ford Racing ABS Module M-2353-CA or Module, Hydraulics and Bracket Assembly M-
2353-BA controller, Minimum weight shall be 3360.
Ford Shelby GT350R-C Mustang GS
As submitted by Ford and as approved by IMSA, according to the Homologation document
Final Drive: 3.31:1
Fuel capacity: 21 gal
Weight: 3400 lbs
Tire size: 275/35/18
Maximum RPM: 8200
Engine Restrictor: 58.00 mm
Car is approved with Conditional Homologation for 2015
Car is exempt from CTSC SR Attachment 2.1.1 and 2.1.2
 
Last edited:

Grant 302

basic and well known psychic
OTOH, there are times when it may be desireable to substitute one of the items when using a suite of parts from one source. For example, I really like the gussetting on the upper "tab" of the Maximum Motorsports rear LCA brackets; it seems much more robust than the single-plane piece of thin plate steel used by most other manufacturers. Does it make a difference - I don't know, and all the other vendors seem to sell enough of their designs - but it's a personal choice I made. But I bought the upper & lower control arms and Watts link from BMR because I liked the engineering and price. Well, I did get the diff-to-UCA bronze bushing from Steeda because I think it has better motion compliance than the BMR urethane bushing, and I don't care about NVH (everything else is rod ends). So there's a second example. In both cases, it was a well-considered personal decision, and if things don't fit, I accept it's on me.
I like the rest of your post...but ironically, I disagree with most of what you have in this part. The FRPP/FP relocation brackets are stiffer by design. And I say that as an actual engineer. And remember that Ford employs actual engineers to design parts like this.

And BMR...if I’m being nice, I’ll stop right here.
 

blacksheep-1

Epic Contributor
2,664
2,220
What about the 13mm bar that was seen on some cars? Seems like you guys never used it.
To the best of my knowledge, we didn't, but may have tried it at some point, I remember the Roush guys walking buy with about 6 rear bars in their hands, some looked like spaghetti strings, but we always seemed to graduate to the 18mm or no bar. Remember once the setup was dialed in fairly close, AJ and Kurt were making spring changes as low as 25#. Those guys, especially AJ, lived on the shock dyno and these days shocks mean about everything, in some ways that's unfortunate because you build a car around a $10K set of Penskes, what HPDE guy can afford that? That's one reason I say just bolt on the FRPP/FP stuff and live with it.
 

bob

TMO Advanced
187
120
sfo
The concept of sticking to one manufacturer's system makes sense assuming everything is designed to work as a package. I would say yes to that for sure picking a vendors shock and spring combo because assuming they actually tested that combo. But there are other things I don't see making a difference. Aren't all vertical links doing the same thing? We know there is a bumpsteer issue on lowered S550s and if you go all BMR up front your only choice is steeda's control arm to change the roll center and anyone's bumpsteer endlinks you are going to bumpsteer the car for which spacers so who's bumpsteer endlinks don't matter. So I don't see a problem with J&M's toe link and Steeda's vertical link, and BMR's spherical bushing. I actually can't think of two suspension components that won't play nice with each other...except a shock and spring maybe a bar if the rate is high enough?
 

TMO Supporting Vendors

Buy TMO Apparel

Buy TMO Apparel
Top