Ford Mustang Forums banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
669 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi all, I've been checking this forum out for some time.

I've got an 87 LX. The bushings in the rear control arms have 314,000km on them, and are probably due for replacement. With that in mind I am looking for suggestions.

The front end has poly strut bushings, poly rack bushings, poly swaybar links. The front control arms are the FMS pieces, with rubber bushings. These have been on the car for 5 years, about 30,000kms.

The car is running GT struts/shocks, about 8 and 5 years old respectively, and four cylinder springs (conversion car). V8 front and rear sway bars. I have also added a Kenny Brown strut tower brace and super subs.

I understand that poly bushings in the rear is a bad idea. I'm looking for a decent upper and lower control arm combo. Is the Ford SSP upper a good choice? Is boxing imprtant? I've read that lower arms should have a bearing instead of a bushing. Are there serious noise/vibration problems with this?

I'm also fine with the idea of just replacing bushings, if that is a good choice.

Intended usage is mostly street/some highway driving. I drag race the car once/twice a year, and may chase some pylons this season. I've always tried to replace parts with something better than stock, as they are needed.

Any help would be appreciated.

Ryan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
Polys aren't bad if you only use them for the LCAs and only on one end in the UCAs.

If the car for for street then a good spring set is the Ford B-spring kit of the C-spring kit for more aggresive stance.

A good inexpensive strut/shocks combo is a VST line made by Gabriel which are comprable to the discontinued Monroe Formula GP line. Pep Boys sells them for under $150 for all four.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
241 Posts
GT shocks/struts? I was under the impression that the GT and LX 5.0 rolled on the same suspension, am I wrong?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
669 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Nestromo said:
GT shocks/struts? I was under the impression that the GT and LX 5.0 rolled on the same suspension, am I wrong?
Car was originally a four cylinder. I just upgraded to the GT stuff when I replaced my originall struts/shocks. The LX 5.0 and GT are probably the same. 4 cyl LX is different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
241 Posts
AHH, OK. I thought you were saying that you went with GT units as opposed to LX 5.0 parts. :)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
27,655 Posts
You don't want poly at both ends of either the upper or the lowers. A spherical bearing in the LCA allows the arm to twist and angle inward as it must when the suspension articulates, while eliminating fore/aft slop better than any other kind of bushing. The debate about which end to put the spherical on borders on the spiritual but it boils down to whether or not you want to go the full panhard bar route (if so, bearing in rear) or if not, whether you want the LCA to contribute at all to lateral resistance which is not technically its job but can be done to some extent, at a cost. If you don't care about that, stay with bearing in rear. If you want some semblance of lateral control at the price of some bind that isn't as bad as full poly, go the GW route with the bearing in the front and a low-deflection delrin/aluminum bushing in the rear.

Then if you go with Ford FRPP HD or Cobra uppers to either of those combos, you have enough deflection there to allow articulation but not so stiff as to add too much to binding.

Boxing the uppers is not important IMHO.

Do some searching on this forum and the general tech forums for a lot of info contributed over time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
Good point. I failed to mentioned that the polyurethane pose no problem when OE LCAs are retained. Polyurethane used in tube or box type LCAs crack and will fail!

I've run the OE LCAs equipped Energy Suspension polyurethane bushings and have raced the car with no failures. The car is fitted with a panhard and none boxed UCAs.




MFE said:
You don't want poly at both ends of either the upper or the lowers. A spherical bearing in the LCA allows the arm to twist and angle inward as it must when the suspension articulates, while eliminating fore/aft slop better than any other kind of bushing. The debate about which end to put the spherical on borders on the spiritual but it boils down to whether or not you want to go the full panhard bar route (if so, bearing in rear) or if not, whether you want the LCA to contribute at all to lateral resistance which is not technically its job but can be done to some extent, at a cost. If you don't care about that, stay with bearing in rear. If you want some semblance of lateral control at the price of some bind that isn't as bad as full poly, go the GW route with the bearing in the front and a low-deflection delrin/aluminum bushing in the rear.

Then if you go with Ford FRPP HD or Cobra uppers to either of those combos, you have enough deflection there to allow articulation but not so stiff as to add too much to binding.

Boxing the uppers is not important IMHO.

Do some searching on this forum and the general tech forums for a lot of info contributed over time.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top