another coilover by Bryce
- Thread starter 5280/4
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
Federico Garza
Member
- Jun 12, 2009
- 37
- 1
- 9
SlammedGT
Active Member
Dutch65mustang
New Member
i am keeping the suspension on my falcon. This is a new design that i built for my dads mustang.
Posted via Mobile Device
Tanus
New Member
88gt
Founding Member
Great design, I have a question for you about the lower mounting plate you used. Understanding that the "u" bracket that is bolted to the flat bar, is there a concern about it deflecting under load? Would a machined bar like the one for the top mount resist deflection better?
Not knocking the design, great stuff..just something I see and am curious about.
Keep up the good work!!
Not knocking the design, great stuff..just something I see and am curious about.
Keep up the good work!!
the only thing i did not fab are the special order afco shocks. They dont even have a part number for what i ordered. They are closely related to the T2 double adjustable 4" stroke length. And the 225 lb springs are an afco part number 10" long.
everything else i made, fasteners are off the shelf.
The summary first then the explanation. There is no concern about deflection under load. The 'T'-bar design is comparable in overall strength.
Okay, lecture is in session students please take your seats. HAHA. just playing around.
The main thing you want to focus on when taking about bending is the unsuported distance and the cross sectional area. Also the moment of inertia plays a heavy roll as well.
To explain the MOI, picture bending a flat piece of steel 1/8" thick and 2" wide. It is easy to bend it so that the bend is across the 2" width. because you are only bending the 1/8" thick part.
The cross sectional are is the area of the part if you took a vertical cut at the highest load.
The T-bar has more unsupproted distance. Since the force is directly in the center of the bar. My design with the U-bracket brings the forces closer to the A-arm attach points. Therefore, less bending moment. Also since my lower plate is wider than the t-bar I have more cross sectional area. The T-bar would have been a 5/8" diameter bar that is flattened at the ends. Mine is a 2" wide steel bar with a 1/4" thickness. there is no concern about deflection or fatigue.
My design also make the shock mounting points adjustable. I was able to fine tune the amount of droop I wanted, and i was able to dial in where the shock bottoms out compared to the stock bump stop bottoming out. Since this is a drag car i was most concerned about the droop of this suspension and the spring rate chosen. However it will also be a light use street car and needs to have the ride height adjustable.
The other advantage is my design weighs 8lbs less per side. The biggest saving was my spring only weighs 3lbs.
88gt
Founding Member
Thanks for the explanation...that dang "cross-section" stuff, for some reason, gives me the most grief.....
.
Great stuff!!
.
Great stuff!!
Seems like you got the tech, So I am going to ask what might be a stupid question. I have never been a fan of cutting the springs without compensating at the shock tower caps.
I have no tech for this, just something that seems common sense to me.
I am assuming it was mounted on 2 different cars, judging by the picture's.
Under one of the shock tower caps you show a bracket that is for the export brace bar on another it's gone.
Is that going to make a difference?
I have no tech for this, just something that seems common sense to me.
I am assuming it was mounted on 2 different cars, judging by the picture's.
Under one of the shock tower caps you show a bracket that is for the export brace bar on another it's gone.
Is that going to make a difference?
I hate to tell you guys this. Since you mention the Shelby drop and it seems like, its almost an automatic thing to do on the 65-66 mustang.
Those of you that have done it on the 65-66 are only doing a partial mod.
67 mustang and above it was done by the factory. Somewhere along the line, someone omitted a very important part of the Shelby drop, for the 65 and 66 mustang. I bet even most of the 65-66 Shelby owners can not tell you what it is.
Any guesses?
Those of you that have done it on the 65-66 are only doing a partial mod.
67 mustang and above it was done by the factory. Somewhere along the line, someone omitted a very important part of the Shelby drop, for the 65 and 66 mustang. I bet even most of the 65-66 Shelby owners can not tell you what it is.
Any guesses?
The only reason to raise your shock towers after lowering your car is to have the shock mid range at ride height. But the shock will not bottom out before the stock bump stop when you lower the car. So you could drive the car with just cut springs and not adjusting the shock tower mount.
This was the same 65 mustang. The pictures were taken at different stages of mock up. And it would not make a difference. without the strut brace bracket I can take out the spacers i used betwwen the shock and the upper shock mount. this was to space the shock down. This gave me more droop.
No, We knew of this mod (Shelby drop) back in the 60's.
The reason no one done it, on the 65-66 mustang is because along with the Lowered (1 in.) front upper A-arms, they added special lengthened pitman and idler arms on the 65-66 Shelby's that were not available for the 65-66 mustang's.
Back then just finding a affordable, larger 1-in. front sway bar was a pain and had to be taken out of a junk yard wrecked car.
Today it's easy with the internet.
Okay, I guess I will be the first to bite. The question on everyone's mind, naturally is going to be are you going to offer this for sale and how affordable will it be?
The design looks great, and its obvious that you know what you are doing. Judging by the mustang, the quality of the works speaks for itself.
I should get a hefty discount, seeing we are in a recession and all and it being I that was the first to ask. Everyone else can line up behind me at a hefty mark-up.
Anyone that complains, you can charge them double.
Should work out pocketbook wise in the end.
The reason no one done it, on the 65-66 mustang is because along with the Lowered (1 in.) front upper A-arms, they added special lengthened pitman and idler arms on the 65-66 Shelby's that were not available for the 65-66 mustang's.
Back then just finding a affordable, larger 1-in. front sway bar was a pain and had to be taken out of a junk yard wrecked car.
Today it's easy with the internet.
Okay, I guess I will be the first to bite. The question on everyone's mind, naturally is going to be are you going to offer this for sale and how affordable will it be?
The design looks great, and its obvious that you know what you are doing. Judging by the mustang, the quality of the works speaks for itself.
I should get a hefty discount, seeing we are in a recession and all and it being I that was the first to ask. Everyone else can line up behind me at a hefty mark-up.
Anyone that complains, you can charge them double.
Should work out pocketbook wise in the end.
Similar threads
