Ford Mustang Forums banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
891 Posts
I thought about using this when I bought all the axle stuff back in 2005. Looks like a nice piece. Too late for me though. Audio system has claimed that real estate now. Maybe in a future build. Definitely keep us updated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drew96gt

·
Registered
Joined
·
219 Posts
I'll be honest that was tough to watch and I wound up fast forwarding through a lot of it. A little editing and some thought as to content would go a long way to making it some what entertaining.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
@Popeye Thanks for the feedback. As you can tell I am new to this. I admit that one got away from me. I would like to keep videos to 10 min or so in the future.
 

·
Registered
1989 Mustang GT, coyote swapped*
Joined
·
2,018 Posts
I ran one back in 2007, honestly with a pan hard bar there is no lateral load between the shock towers. And you are still using rubber bushings (and potentially not on coil overs yet)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
I ran one back in 2007, honestly with a pan hard bar there is no lateral load between the shock towers. And you are still using rubber bushings (and potentially not on coil overs yet)
I agree, if you are not on coilovers its not providing any benefit. My car is on coilovers (soon to be with rod ends), and is running an IRS.
 

·
Registered
1989 Mustang GT, coyote swapped*
Joined
·
2,018 Posts
I agree, if you are not on coilovers its not providing any benefit. My car is on coilovers (soon to be with rod ends), and is running an IRS.
There is zero benefit of this rear shock tower brace,

once you go coilovers, and MM rear racing shock mounts they may be a benefit because of rear end movement, but you should be using a MM panhard bar anyways to eliminate lateral movement of the rearend. I plan on tying the rear shock towers into my roll cage but thats because I just installed the MM rear racing shock mounts so now theres more stress going into the shock towers.

However, before that I plan on welding the entire shock towers to beef them up, Ford only did a few stitch welds because the OEM design the shock towers just mounted the rear shocks, most of the load went through the springs into the frame.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
909 Posts
What am I missing here, with an IRS all of the lateral load is applied to the IRS frame which in turn transfers the load to the rear sub frames. How does tying the rear shock mounts provide support for those forces? The rear shocks are tasked with compression and extension forces, no lateral load applied. Seems like useless additional weight to me.

Jay
 

·
Registered
1989 Mustang GT, coyote swapped*
Joined
·
2,018 Posts
What am I missing here, with an IRS all of the lateral load is applied to the IRS frame which in turn transfers the load to the rear sub frames. How does tying the rear shock mounts provide support for those forces? The rear shocks are tasked with compression and extension forces, no lateral load applied. Seems like useless additional weight to me.

Jay

Agreed, also i didnt know OP was IRS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
If nothing else the brackets are bolted into the frame and floor pan. That should help distribute the load. The bar from side to side doesn't add much.
 

·
Registered
1989 Mustang GT, coyote swapped*
Joined
·
2,018 Posts
What lateral forces are present at the rear shock towers with a stick axle? Same conclusion as far as I'm concerned, waste of time, weight, money and effort.

Jay
The lateral forces go through the panhard bar into the frame rail, so yea i am agreeing with you, zero lateral load in OP's setup.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
290 Posts
What lateral forces are present at the rear shock towers with a stick axle? Same conclusion as far as I'm concerned, waste of time, weight, money and effort.

Jay
But it looks cool if you're into bling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
This is a very simplified model. Not considering the material, and removing some mounting points. I think it does help to view the loads.
The dark blue is the load coming into the mount from the coilover.
The black lines is a simplified version of the shock tower brace.
The red are the reaction loads
The light blue is what the deflected shape would look like

1070205
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
891 Posts
This is a very simplified model. Not considering the material, and removing some mounting points. I think it does help to view the loads.
The dark blue is the load coming into the mount from the coilover.
The black lines is a simplified version of the shock tower brace.
The red are the reaction loads
The light blue is what the deflected shape would look like

View attachment 1070205

so in your drawing instead of tieing the towers together, youre placing the load outward to the side panels of the car? if so, i can see that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
891 Posts
But it looks cool if you're into bling.
its not really about being blingy, but there is some funtion to its form. some early model town cars and continentals from Lincoln came from the factory with rear shock tower setups. there were no panhard setups for Ford variants back then, that i know of. so this was just testing bed that didnt gain any real traction til now with modifying our Fords.
 

·
Registered
1989 Mustang GT, coyote swapped*
Joined
·
2,018 Posts
Also lets take a step back here, what tires are you using? How wide? How much lateral G's are you even pulling around a corner? If you 4 lug/drum brakes in rear with some 235 all season tire tires you are not putting any where near enough lateral load into this thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
For me this is a track only car. I have no interest in bling. The car is on 275s Toyo RA1's at the moment. After I cut up the quarters to make room I plan to run 315s.
I have seen where factories added rear shock tower braces after the fact. The first gen Miata came without one. In 94 (I think) they all started to come with factory braces.
 

·
Registered
1989 Mustang GT, coyote swapped*
Joined
·
2,018 Posts
For me this is a track only car. I have no interest in bling. The car is on 275s Toyo RA1's at the moment. After I cut up the quarters to make room I plan to run 315s.
I have seen where factories added rear shock tower braces after the fact. The first gen Miata came without one. In 94 (I think) they all started to come with factory braces.
Awesome, Im running 315s A052's but i bet those toyo's are sticky! I plan on tying the rear shock towers into my cage, now the miata is an IRS car with a different setup, like my Lexus IS300 I installed front and rear strut/shock tower braces and a bunch of lower (front/mid/rear) braces. I honestly love chassis and suspension mods more than HP mods. Its so much fun to fling cars around corners and feel confident about doing such.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top