Road / Track Suspension Discussion

The tech help at Howe is looking into an alternative lower ball joint that might work with some minor modifications to the lower control arm.   I'm hoping there is something that all we might have to do is open the lower ball joint opening to allow it to fit.

Psquare75 wrote: I would have done it, but I did the DJM setup... I hadn't heard of the Panther swap at the time. Doh!

BackInBlack wrote: Do you have a part number in mind or do you have a link to look at?   Using a GM upper ball joint ?   Thanks

Been reading this thread: so......has anyone found a longer lower ball joint for the 1" drop that will fit with reasonably modification of the lower arms (opening the hole)???

Any updates on this topic? Especially from John.

I would be interested in trying the same lower ball joints but I'm worried about negative effects on tire wear.

BackInBlack wrote: I'm open to other options or opinions....

Okay, here's my opinion....again.  You're overthinking it.

#1 tires
#2 driver retention/seating
#3 sway bars
#4 bushings
#5 chassis stiffness
#6 shocks

The stock geometry needs NO alteration. 

Take a look at the video below.  You'll notice that I caught and passed an RX8 as well as a BMW.  I also caught and passed a 2013 Mustang GT that day, and had a Factory Five cobra spin out behind me trying to hold my line.  See the G meter....almost 1G on some of the corners.  Cut coils in the front, clamped coils in the rear, poly graphite bushings and PST sway bars, street stock / circle track shocks, 17" alum wheels with 255/50R17 street radials.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvFn-eCb4oU

And another video...extended periods of time at 100-120mph without any vibrations, also ran 132 mph with no issues.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHr59VAGYns

I don't know what you plan to do with your car, but you've got to get it out on whatever kind of track you're going to run before you know what needs to be improved.  In my case it turned out to be slop in the steering system and aerodynamics.




Edited by Carl - 12-September-2012 at 4:02PM

I have been watching this thread with great interest, as I am converting my wagon over to newer (improved) suspension parts for better handling. It is the guinea pig for my 3 Sportroofs and Formal, and will be a learning experience. I installed Gabriel performance shocks for a CVPI, a Saginaw box 17 inch wheels, and the HD rear springs (still need to install the CVPI front springs) and it made a world of difference. It is stiffer, handles better, and got rid of the slop. However, by doing this, I have made the flaws of the rest of the suspension/frame design much more appearent (jittery ride, cowl shake, bushings/sway bars, frame flex, etc). More work is required to get it where I want it, but it is a step in the right direction and will be the basic platform for my others.

It pretty much does let me know, but thankfully the old car is pretty solid. Back area is the worst offender with all that plastic on metal.

I agree with the shock comment and stiffening the frame. For esthetic reasons, I decided against installing a roll bar in the wagon (will probably do that in a couple of the cars) so I am going to be boxing the frame/suspension attachments for strength as well as adding an extra crossmember.

Thankfully, I am utilizing the experiences of fellow members to eliminate much legwork. Thank you all for that.

Brakes. I purchased a 9 inch disc brake rear from a Mark, and while it will bolt in, it carries the GM 5 X 5 truck bolt pattern. This led me to wonder if I could adapt a GM large diameter truck braking system to the front spindles (either the stock '72, later Torino, or even GM spindles) - thereby increasing the contact area of the front brakes, and keeping the same bolt pattern as the 9 inch Lincoln rear. I run synthetic brake fluid in our Hondas and my Titan for the simple reason that it has a much higher boiling point, is less suseptible to moisture, and keeps longer. Works very well in racing and heavy load towing. Plan on converting all of them over.

Any thoughts on this?

It depends upon your goals...what do you want to do with it.

Good comments on the brakes...I didn't think of the extra heat and fluid.

Edited by BackInBlack - 14-September-2012 at 11:29AM

BackInBlack wrote: The spring comments have me rethinking the softer vs stiffer springs for street now...I'm probably over analyzing this.   I guess the only way to find out for sure is just try it.   The springs are probably the cheapest part to change if I get it wrong.

I know you are going for a different outcome than me, but I really don't think you will be disappointed with CVPI springs. My car is a street car with no track time, and I went with the CVPI springs, Bilstiens, 1 1/8" sway bar but stock style bushings (I don't think the poly bushings are worth it for street driving IMO). I agree with what you said about the shocks making a big difference. IMO the Bilstiens are worth every penny (I have used them in several other vehicles I have owned too).

I know your car might be setup more for track use, and honestly, I was surprised at how the CVPI springs really are not that stiff. Yeah, the car is much firmer than the stock springs, but compared to most modern "sporty" vehicles, I think my Torino rides nicer (although a full frame helps there). It definietly feels a bit smoother than a Crown Vic cop car, but seems to have slightly less roll. My truck still rides a fair bit stiffer than my Torino and it's bone stock. Even my wife thought the car only rode "a bit stiffer" after the new springs. It is unbelievable how flat the car stays in corners compared to stock and the car is way for fun to drive which was my goal. I really see no advantage to go to a softer spring. I mean if it were a killer harsh ride, than yeah, but I actually prefer the ride of the car now over the stock springs.

Remember, even the stock Competition Spring cars had springs in 500 in/lb range. Since we are for the most part limited to a 1 1/8" bar (while some GM Muscle cars can get 1 5/16" now), the only option to increase front roll stiffness is through the springs.

And looking at that Montego article, they used 750 in/lb springs in a lighter car.





Edited by 72FordGTS - 14-September-2012 at 2:48PM

I would tend to agree with you on that bar size.

Also, keep in mind my car had spring code "94" springs stock, which are much softer than even the factory competition springs. Not sure if your car had the competition suspension or not, mine was just the heavy duty/cross country suspension.

Here's another interesting article re suspension on a Crown Vic Cop car and spring selection. They don't really seem to go overly stiff in the rear. Keep in mind though that this car is a 2003+ Crown Vic that uses a complelely different spring to arm ratio due to the mini-strut style springs (a 330 lb/in is about equal to the old 700lb/in in the old cars 2002 and prior). And they upgrade to a 550lb/in coil over.

http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/ccrp_1202_choosing_springs_and_shocks_build_a_project_panther/



Edited by 72FordGTS - 15-September-2012 at 5:49AM

True enough, the ride is effected by tire sidewall height and overall tire stiffness. Maybe that's why CVPI's seem stiffer than my car, because they have 17" wheels vs my 15" (60 series). Although the ride difference between the two is not drastic what you experienced. Ride is subjective though, what seems comfortable to me may not be to you.

All I am saying is that my car with CVPI springs is not by any stretch harsh, esepcially compared to many other firm riding cars.

Edited by 72FordGTS - 16-September-2012 at 6:03AM