ok suspension guru's.. 2005 tq-arm/panhard on 94?

Discussion in '1994 - 1995 Specific Tech' started by jetuomi, Jan 5, 2004.


  1. jetuomi

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,465
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    I'm saving up (and slowly buying) Griggs torque arm setup.. I just noticed the 2005 has a torque arm / panhard rod (3-link) setup which is identical (maybe not for exact dimensions)..

    I'm wondering how hard it would be to get this setup from ford, and install it??? any thoughts? Or should I just keep buying griggs??

    tx
    Jani
     
    #1
  2. Matt90GT

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2001
    Messages:
    3,055
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    Look before posting!

    First off the chassis is NOT the fox chassis which started in 1979. It is entirely new.

    Second, look at the suspension of the new car. You will quickly see the live rear axle is totally different. I dont think much will transfer over at all.

    [​IMG]
     
    #2
  3. jetuomi

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,465
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    Thanks for the reply (kinda ignoring the attitude??)... I did do research.. But since torque arms aren't stock in a fox-body (ie: a big time MOD for our cars) and this isn't fox-based rear-end, what's the diff is what I'm tryin' to get at..

    As for the live-axle part of it, it looks similar.. all that's really changed is that the axle doesn't have mounts for UC-arms and that it has a topmounted torque arm (vs. a bottom mount-to-the-diff-cover from griggs)... and if you go coil-overs, cya different coil springs...

    That's why I'm asking, as soon as a 2005 V6 car gets smashed up I can get in there for cheap $$ and take out the rear-end?? if I already have subframes, what would need to be done?

    I honestly have a feeling that this will become a cheap/simple mod for our cars one day, similar to other "take newer technology and dump it in older cars"... I just don't have the hands-on skillz to experiment...
     
    #3
  4. Matt90GT

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2001
    Messages:
    3,055
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon

    First problem is the TA mounting. How you going to do that in a fox chassis?

    Second, the springs are in different locations.

    Third, we have no measurements on the suspension locations thus who knows if the LCA and shocks will line up in a fox body. Who knows the width of the axle and axle shafts also. It may be so wide or narrow that it is unworkable under the fox body.

    Fourth, same issue on the PHB there.

    Fifth, who knows what else will cause interferrence issues with that axle on a fox body.

    sixth, were you going to mount that swaybar? that is way different than the fox bodies.


    On a side note, from the pics I have seen of the brakes they look like Sn95 parts front and rear. Hard to say for sure on the front, but they seems to be also an identical 99+ spindle from the mounting points of everything. that may be interesting! The rear the calipers face forward on the car, but still look like Sn95 cobra parts.


    I am sure in time that someone will know for sure or try the swap. But at this point you are not going to find any at a yard!
     
    #4
  5. jetuomi

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,465
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, ON

    See if I can quote this much.. you're very correct in everything you say, but, hey, its not hurting to throw ideas around... (plus, have you seen how much griggs wants?) :)

    Yeah, this wouldn't be an easy project, and possibly not do-able either.. interesting to see... it'd be cool to be able to call up a maximum motorsports and say I want the 2005 - SN95 style 3-link conversion kit..

    I also like the vette style front-feed intake manifold on this new 4.6, I've always hated the side entry one on 5.0's and 4.6's to date. (hehe, I won't even begin to ask that question!)..

    tx for thinkin' thru this with me.. even tho the car isn't on the road yet. haha
     
    #5
  6. Rootus

    Rootus Officially Addicted

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2003
    Messages:
    6,747
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Portland, Oregon
    Evolution Motorsport is working on a three-link setup that is very similar in design to what the '05 looks like (top mounted short torque arm). The odds of retrofitting something from '05 is basically zero, given the entirely different chassis design, you're better off using aftermarket components that are designed to work with the Fox chassis (and even then there are hassles).

    Evolution Motorsport Tri-Link for Mustang

    Dave
     
    #6
  7. jetuomi

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,465
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    that looks cool, thanks for posting that !
     
    #7
  8. Therian

    Therian The Highlander
    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2002
    Messages:
    2,216
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Waterloo, Ontario
    Jani you crazy bastard, what the hell are you getting into this time? I tell you what...go for the griggs setup, and then in 05/06 if this somehow becomes feasible, I'll buy the griggs setup off you for a decent price...what are your plans for those extra E7s you have lying around?...heh...
     
    #8
  9. jetuomi

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,465
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    HAHA, yeah, I want my stang to actually keep up in the corners with my buddies CIVIC. :) (especially if I start doing that ontario circuit)...

    Y DO U WANT THE HEADS?? I'm sure I can let them go really cheap.. haha
     
    #9
  10. yellow5.0cobra

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,867
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    In the garage, On the floor.
    Who cares?

    It would cost more from Ford and trying to make it work anyway.

    Buy a Steeda 5link and be done.
     
    #10
  11. Therian

    Therian The Highlander
    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2002
    Messages:
    2,216
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Waterloo, Ontario
    Ford owns junkyards now? Damn, I guess the corporatization of globalization is true everywhere... :rolleyes:
     
    #11
  12. 331 cobra

    331 cobra New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2003
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Silicon Valley CA
    first thing, a torque arm and ford's new three link setup are entirely different suspension designs.

    The three link can provide optimal suspension geometry if it is designed right. It is also a lot lighter than a torque arm for reduced unsprung weight. The problem is that bushings add unwanted deflections so in reality, it does not follow the optimum geometry 100% of the time.

    The torque arm can have the right anti-squat, but most other aspects of the geometry are slightly compromised. This is because the arm travels through an arc instead of a straight line. To minimize this, designers make the torque arm long, which decreases the angle of the arc, making a closer approximation of a straight line.

    The better design is a matter of debate, both can work very well.

    I'm waiting for the aftermarket to get involved, there will be a bunch of details and interchange information that will be helpfull for SN95 and FOX also.

    I have also heard of a suspension similar to the steeda, but made by a company called SVD 1(203)272-7928.
     
    #12

Share This Page