HEIDT's Rear 4-Link& sub-frame connectors

[mikethebike]

man i sure wish someone would ban you sorry ass. you come here and talk crap to all the MUSTANG ENTHUSIASTS on this board and i for one am sick and tired of your BS.:Zip2:

'

Please, allow me.....a list of my BS:

1. BB Chevys had weak rockers and 3/8" rod bolts
2. Ford didn't support the little guy
3. Chevy did.
4. The SBC was a better go-fast engine than the SBF
5. The t/c toploader was the best 4-speed
6. The Ford 9" was the best differential
7. The BOSS 302 rod was too short to safely rev 8000 rpm
8. The BOSS 429 had a 735 crm carb that was far too small for THAT engine.
9. The 426 HEMI was a great RACE engine but was not that good on the street.
10. No matter HOW good your product is, without proper support it sucks.

Yep, sounds like BULL-**** to me.

Maybe YOU don't want to hear it, but the truth hurts narrow minded people like you.

I see by your profile that you were born 1 JULY 69.......I was 20 that year and stationed at Great Lakes, Ill. in IC-A and C schools. You need to show some respect to your elders...especially those who bought these cars new and actually lived as a young adult when they were new and KNOWS who ruled the streets and who tells the truth about them no matter WHO made them.

GROW-UP. And don't take it personally.

 

[reenmachine]

Maybe YOU don't want to hear it, but the truth hurts narrow minded people like you.

I see by your profile that you were born 1 JULY 69.......I was 20 that year and stationed at Great Lakes, Ill. in IC-A and C schools. You need to show some respect to your elders...especially those who bought these cars new and actually lived as a young adult when they were new and KNOWS who ruled the streets and who tells the truth about them no matter WHO made them.

Look, if you feel the need to keep wagging your dick around to show everyone how big it is, fine. I just wish you'd quit polluting otherwise good threads with it. Why don't you start a new thread called "The mikethebike Thread of Infinite Knowledge, Experience, and Wisdom" and put everything you feel the overwhelming need to share in there. I'll even vote to get it stickied.

Simply managing not to die for a large number of years isn't nearly enough to earn true respect. I have a hard time respecting uncouth blowhards who have no sense of tact or subtlety.

 

[bnickel]

'

Please, allow me.....a list of my BS:

1. BB Chevys had weak rockers and 3/8" rod bolts
2. Ford didn't support the little guy
3. Chevy did.
4. The SBC was a better go-fast engine than the SBF
5. The t/c toploader was the best 4-speed
6. The Ford 9" was the best differential
7. The BOSS 302 rod was too short to safely rev 8000 rpm
8. The BOSS 429 had a 735 crm carb that was far too small for THAT engine.
9. The 426 HEMI was a great RACE engine but was not that good on the street.
10. No matter HOW good your product is, without proper support it sucks.

Yep, sounds like BULL-**** to me.

Maybe YOU don't want to hear it, but the truth hurts narrow minded people like you.

I see by your profile that you were born 1 JULY 69.......I was 20 that year and stationed at Great Lakes, Ill. in IC-A and C schools. You need to show some respect to your elders...especially those who bought these cars new and actually lived as a young adult when they were new and KNOWS who ruled the streets and who tells the truth about them no matter WHO made them.

GROW-UP. And don't take it personally.

i am far from narrow minded. i like ALL muscle cars but this is a MUSTANG forum not an LS6 forum, not a Zl1, or L88 forum, it's not a copo forum, it's not a Group 19 forum an AMX forum or barracuda S forum, a hemi forum (331, 392 or 426), it's not a poly 318, B, RB or LA motor forum, it's not a Buick GNX forum, hell it's not even a Galaxie 500, Fairlane, Torino, Ranchero or Pinto forum it's a Mustang forum and only a MUSTANG forum. I'm sure you were as big a loser 20 years before I was born as you are now, I'm also sure you probably don't have any friends because they probably all got sick of you know it all POS self about the time you learned how to talk. so piss off.

 

[lauras70mach1]

'
1. BB Chevys had weak rockersWeak for what application?
2. Ford didn't support the little guy Who cares?
3. Chevy did. Again, who cares?
4. The SBC was a better go-fast engine than the SBF More prolific, but better? Arguable.
5. The t/c toploader was the best 4-speed I'd match a mopar A833 up against a Toploader any day.
6. The Ford 9" was the best differential 9-inch will break long before a Dana 60 will
7. The BOSS 302 rod was too short to safely rev 8000 rpm Apparently the guys in Formula 1 haven't heard your long rod theory
8. The BOSS 429 had a 735 crm carb that was far too small for THAT engine.So did the 440 Magnum, LS6 454, Buick GS and just about every other big cube engine released in a production car
9. The 426 HEMI was a great RACE engine but was not that good on the street.Hemi myth No. 3,529
10. No matter HOW good your product is, without proper support it sucks. See No. 2

I inserted my comments in red.

 

[mikethebike]

I inserted my comments in red.

1. 427/425-435hp and 396/425-375(same engine..rated 600 rpm lower) broke rockers at 1500 rpm in traffic. Ask me how I and loads of others know this.
2.Who cares if Ford supported the little guy? ALL those Ford guys who got dusted by the Chevy guys.
3. Again...all those Ford guys who got dusted by the Chevy guys.
4. Well, go look at the Modified Eliminator ranks wher you ran strictly lbs-per-cid. Mostly Chevy, about 90% Chevy back then.
5. You can match anything you want aganist the top-loader, but when damn near all the Chevy's that made real power and near every NASCAR ride that was not a Chrysler ran them I'd say there is a reason for that. Racers tend to run what works.
6. Yes, a DANA WILL hold more torque than a 9"....at about a 100 lb. unsprung weight disadvantage. And that's not even considering the better gear ratio selection of the 9".
7. F-1? Don't know what they run...those guys tend to keep secrets better that the USN sub service. But I do know that every hard core 600 and 1000cc *** sport bike uses a 1.86/1 or better...some have better than a 2/1
8. And the carb issue?396/375 and 427 engines used a 780 4-barrell or 3/2's....HEMI's used either 2/4's or the biggest thermo-guad made. The BOSS 302 used a 780!! The 429 SHOULD have had at least an 850.
9. I street raced in Burlington,NC, Norfolk, Va., Charleston, SC and only saw ONE HEMI that would run with the BB Chevys....and it was dialed-in by Jake King at Sox&Martin.
10. Who cares about support? Maybe YOU don't....maybe you have an inside line but I know only two guys (Bill Newton in Charleston,SC and Zake Reynold in Winston-Salem, NC) who could get their hands on a tunnel-port or a high-rise 427.
The rest of us who had Fords back then were S.O.L. That's why by 1975 about the only Fords in NASCAR was Bud Moore and the Wood Brothers and even they were reduced to combing the junk yards for BOSS-351 parts.
Pretty sad.
So, you guys keep on defending what Ford did back then. YOU didn't have to live with it. I finally realized that I didn't either, that's why I bought the 427 Chevelle. I give Ford credit for what they have done since the mid 80's when somebody in Dearborn decided to help the guy on the street but I'll never buy another one and as much as I like the 65 coupe it WILL be the last Ford I ever own.

 

[DukeGnarley]

I give Ford credit for what they have done since the mid 80's when somebody in Dearborn decided to help the guy on the street but I'll never buy another one and as much as I like the 65 coupe it WILL be the last Ford I ever own.

because it will run forever and you'll never need to replace it?

 

[NasaGT]

It was in the Greenville News on either Monday or Tuesday. I went to their web site and couldn't find it. it happened in either Pickens or Anderson Cty. The paper had a photo of the cars. You didn't want to be in the Mustang.

The web site is: greenvillenews.com

Found the article:

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007709240319

That was no 15 mph impact. The driver's rear quarter seems to be completely crumpled - in this pic look at the trooper's legs - there should be a quarter panel there:

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/app...No=923002&Ref=PH&Profile=1069&Params=Itemnr=3

 

[bnickel]

Found the article:

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007709240319

That was no 15 mph impact. The driver's rear quarter seems to be completely crumpled - in this pic look at the trooper's legs - there should be a quarter panel there:

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/app...No=923002&Ref=PH&Profile=1069&Params=Itemnr=3

the front of the car is pretty smashed as well. i'd say the Taurus was probably going closer to 60 or more. i've been in wrecks that were faster than 35 mph that didn't have that much damage with as many as 3 cars involved. to be honest the poor lady in the mustang was probably already gone due to the spearomatic steering column before the fire even started. that's sad i feel for her family

 

[mikethebike]

Found the article:

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007709240319

That was no 15 mph impact. The driver's rear quarter seems to be completely crumpled - in this pic look at the trooper's legs - there should be a quarter panel there:

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/app...No=923002&Ref=PH&Profile=1069&Params=Itemnr=3

I can't see the 1/4 panel due to the door of the Taurus being open. As to the front of the car..I wrecked a 67 in 1968 right into the back of a 59 Chevy...inpact speed was right at 10 mpg...did about the same damage you see on the front of this car. NO crumpled fender..see? I've also seen these cars that were hit at 65 mph and the passenger compartment was folded in the middle of the roof. Ever seen one torn in half? 1968, Burlinngton, NC a new (72 miles) 68 390 GT Fastback openup at the drivers door jamb across the rear floor with the passenger side bent to a 60d egree angle. 2 dead. This is not to let Chevy off the hook...1 week prior 2 brothers cut a 678 Camaro in half with the help of a guard rail...THIS ws the accident that helped NC to decide to bury the leading edge of guard rails only to find years later that the rool-overs created by this "fix" was worse than the 'knife' affect.

 

[reenmachine]

I can't see the 1/4 panel due to the door of the Taurus being open. As to the front of the car..I wrecked a 67 in 1968 right into the back of a 59 Chevy...inpact speed was right at 10 mpg...did about the same damage you see on the front of this car. NO crumpled fender..see? I've also seen these cars that were hit at 65 mph and the passenger compartment was folded in the middle of the roof. Ever seen one torn in half? 1968, Burlinngton, NC a new (72 miles) 68 390 GT Fastback openup at the drivers door jamb across the rear floor with the passenger side bent to a 60d egree angle. 2 dead. This is not to let Chevy off the hook...1 week prior 2 brothers cut a 678 Camaro in half with the help of a guard rail...THIS ws the accident that helped NC to decide to bury the leading edge of guard rails only to find years later that the rool-overs created by this "fix" was worse than the 'knife' affect.

There's a separate thread about this now. Please go there. As interesting a discussion as this is, it has nothing to do with 4-link rear suspension systems.

 

[Helmantel]

I did just hear back from RRS and they do have what they call an "over-centre" link mounted at the front of the torque arm. I asked for pics and they'll send them. I'm assuming it's like the dogbone at the front of the TCP torque arm.

I saw some pictures of it on www.corner-carvers.com

ALthough it will probably work great once upgraded (maybe even without), I find it a little stupid that they didn't realize this in the first place. There seems to be a new suspension kit available all the time (at least two a month, it seems....), but more than once they give me a feel that the manufacturers know more about TIG welding and powder coating than about suspension geometry....

I hate to go offtopic, but mikethebike, what's wrong with the rod length of a Boss 302? Although it could be better, I doubt that it had a great impact on its ability to rev. Here are some examples of different engines. The Chevy 302 has a very good rod ratio, but the one of a 350 is less.

Rod Stroke Ratio
Chevy 302: 5,700 3,00 1,90
289 5,155 2,87 1,80
Boss 302 Trans Am 5,315 3,00 1,77
Boss 302 5,155 3,00 1,72
351W 5,956 3,50 1,70
stock 302 5,090 3,00 1,70
428 6,560 3,98 1,65
351C 5,750 3,50 1,64
Chevy 350 5,700 3,48 1,64

You claim to be unbiased towards different brands (which I think is great), but you make it sound like you think Ford sucks, although that may just be the way you put it in words. Others are a bit overly sensitive towards any negative Ford comment though

 

[phast69]

Hey guys stop feeding the troll. Lets get back to 4links and the likes. I think there should be a thread started that list your 4 ling brand or rear suspension brand, price, difficulty of installation, pros and cons, etc.

 

[Helmantel]

Yeah, you're right.

About the Martz rear suspension: I see that they have the coil overs moved inward quite a bit. That doesn't matter when the whole rear axle moves up and down and it's probably handy when you're installing huge tires, but the leverage of the springs is much reduced, so the body will roll more in turns (for a given spring rate).

 

[phast69]

Sounds about right Helmantel. I'm thinking of going w/ the TCP rear. I've got the TCP rack and pinion and it bolted right up and is a very...very high quality piece. I also wanna get some tubular uppers and lowers for the front from them. Now if I can just remember where I planted that money tree.

 

[Helmantel]

Now if I can just remember where I planted that money tree.

Not in my garden, that's for sure

I like the TCP craftmanship, but I think their rear suspension is a little more complex than necessary. Their Watts linkage pivot under the rear end housing is not my favorite either.

 

[reenmachine]

I like the TCP craftmanship, but I think their rear suspension is a little more complex than necessary. Their Watts linkage pivot under the rear end housing is not my favorite either.

That's part of why I like the RRS 3-link better. It's basically the same concept, but with a longer torque arm and fewer moving parts.

 

[phast69]

Reen,

Just saw ya in Mustang Monthly. Great article and congrats!


Anyways...I'm more of a 1/4 mile type guy. How does that RRS plant?

 

[reenmachine]

There are those here who can answer this better than I can, but it should hook like nobody's business. The impression I get from the true suspension geeks is that a well-designed 3-link/torque arm setup with a Watts link gives you almost the best of both worlds -- handling and straight-line traction. You'd go IRS if you were after maximum lateral G's and ladder bars if you were building a dedicated drag car, and a good 3-link is 80% of both.

 

[bnickel]

i saw sneak pics of the newly redesigned TCP G-bar on the pro-touring site the other day that looked awesome, it's a lot beefier than the old version though no idea what the price point is yet, i also understand that they have new version for the 67-70 cougars as well

 

[phast69]

bnickel,

I noticed the other day on TCP's site that they had the Cougar option listed. Figured you had saw it already. Didn't know you hadn't or else I would have msg'd you about it. I love TCP but damn they're prices are a wee bit high.

Reen,

Thanks for that info. I'm not looking to make it a dedicated track car but I've had so many issues hooking w/ just 300-350 hp that I know I will when I bump it up to 500 or so.