RRS strut/brake conversion

[Hefe]

Anyone on here added the RRS stage 1 kit? It includes disc brakes and coilover struts. Looks like a good deal with everything you get...The global west coilovers are about the same price and you dont get brakes. For anyone whose done it what tire offset are you using? Their site mentions you can go to 5.5 offset.(usually 4.5 regularly I believe) Does that mean you have too? also where you satisfied with the lower ride height? and what lower control arms did you use? I have a 65 coupe and this looks like a neat setup. Thanks!!


Steve

 

[1320stang]

I don't know of anyone that has done it yet. I'd like to do it to my '65 coupe, but since it's at the beginning of a restoration, it's not exactly the right time for me right now.

 

[rbohm]

i havent installed one, but the RRS system is an excellent system to use. it is well engineered, and if i were going to use such a suspension, it is one i would seriously consider.

 

[dewdrop]

Have one

Just got my set up yesterday. Front struts, power rack and pinion and rear disks. I'll have to let you know in a while how well it worked. Hate thinking about what I paid, though. They look fantastic. Very heavy duty and high quality.

 

[Hefe]

Thanks Dew! Please let me know! What backspace can/are you going to use? What year stang do you have?


Anyone else have any info?

 

[dewdrop]

RRS

Haven't got wheels yet. Looking at 3.75" Torque Thrust. Car is 1965 Fastback.

 

[4MuscleMachines]

Wow, I have been wanting RRS stuff for a while now. Did you get the rear setup? I heard you can remove part of the shock towers for more clearance, is that true?

Also, aren't their listed prices in USD higher than converting their AUS prices to USD?

 

[dewdrop]

stuff

Yes, can remove a chunk of shock towers for big block, etc. I didn't cause only using a 302 and shorty headers. Don't know about rear piece. I'm sure it's solid, but I'm not racing, just nice driver.

 

[KiwiGT]

I fitted their LCA strut rods to the front of my '66. You have to remove a very thin metal shim that sits in where the rubber donuts sit from the factory, and then drill 3 holes to hold the new RRS bearing in. When I had done that, there wasn't enough thread left on the RRS strut rod to get the end nut on. Rang RRS and they knew about the problem, and supplied bushes with less depth to get around the issue. Overall I didn't like the setup, I felt it transmitted a lot of harshness. I had it on for a few weeks and removed it, now fitting Street or Track strut rods instead.

 

[C0V3R]

I've got it, its pretty good. Search for posts by me and youll find my reviews.

Very solid, well engineered (it meets our equivalent of DMV engineering standards, which are quite strict)

 

[Marshall]

I have done a thousand miles on RRS struts and power rack. The struts were an absolute bolt- in on my 66, no drilling or fileing whatsoever.

The ride is excellent, just like a new car. I have their stage 5 kit with 17" wheels 4 -3/4" offset.

Another big plus is the ability to cut away part of the tower to allow lots of room for header access.

Marshall

 

[reenmachine]

Just got a stage 2 kit in, but the car it's for won't be back from paint for a few months. I plan on using Maier Racing lower control arms and stock strut rods/bushings as we're going for ride quality on this one.

 

[bnickel]

Just got a stage 2 kit in, but the car it's for won't be back from paint for a few months. I plan on using Maier Racing lower control arms and stock strut rods/bushings as we're going for ride quality on this one.

hey Reen, if you really want the ride to be nice check out TCP's new version of their stry rods, it doesn't use a heim joint and has a nylon/delrin type bushing instead but it will free the fromt end up enough that i doubt it will be even the slightest bit harsh, in fact it will probably feel smoother. worst case you could always try them out and if they are too harsh use them on a different project.

trust me for me to suggest using TCP parts is out of character since i think they are generally way too expensive but in this case i think they have the best possible solution for the strut rods. i'm not a big fan of heim joints on a street car.

 

[iskwezm]

I got their catalog about a year ago,and after I saw the prices,i just forgot about it.

 

[KiwiGT]

Looking at pictures of the TCP, Ron Morris and Unique Performance front strut kits, they all have an upper control arm,and the shock passes through the UCA. The LCA and UCA manage the forces under load, as in the OEM design.

Pictures of the RRS strut show a lower control arm, but it has no upper control arm. The top of the spindle bolts directly to the shock, feeding the load forces straight into the shock. Is this design not as efficient as the TCP etc, given it is feeding load directly into the long and presumably more flexible shock tube than feeding load forces into a meaty UCA ?

 

[bnickel]

Looking at pictures of the TCP, Ron Morris and Unique Performance front strut kits, they all have an upper control arm,and the shock passes through the UCA. The LCA and UCA manage the forces under load, as in the OEM design.

Pictures of the RRS strut show a lower control arm, but it has no upper control arm. The top of the spindle bolts directly to the shock, feeding the load forces straight into the shock. Is this design not as efficient as the TCP etc, given it is feeding load directly into the long and presumably more flexible shock tube than feeding load forces into a meaty UCA ?

actually the TCP, RM an UP move the the distribution of the load to totally the LCA whereas in the stock system the load is distributed through the UCA.

the macpherson strut style system of the RRS setup is not the best for all out handling. an unequal length A-arm suspension is alway preferable for best handling.

the RRS system is great for a cruiser, daily driver type car and is possibly better than a bone stock suspension, however even a well modified stock style suspension will probably out handle the RRS system

 

[KiwiGT]

actually the TCP, RM an UP move the the distribution of the load to totally the LCA whereas in the stock system the load is distributed through the UCA.

the macpherson strut style system of the RRS setup is not the best for all out handling. an unequal length A-arm suspension is alway preferable for best handling.

the RRS system is great for a cruiser, daily driver type car and is possibly better than a bone stock suspension, however even a well modified stock style suspension will probably out handle the RRS system

Thanks for that reply. My 1966 front end has boxed UCA and LCA, shelby quick steer arms, spherical bearing LCA, roller perches, roller idler, shelby drop, 600lb springs, 1" sway bar re-valved koni's and rebuilt 16:1 steering box. I still want to corner harder - Is that as good as it gets ? - a TCP type front end (or whatever) won't outperform it in terms of sheer cornering ability ?

 

[bnickel]

Thanks for that reply. My 1966 front end has boxed UCA and LCA, shelby quick steer arms, spherical bearing LCA, roller perches, roller idler, shelby drop, 600lb springs, 1" sway bar re-valved koni's and rebuilt 16:1 steering box. I still want to corner harder - Is that as good as it gets ? - a TCP type front end (or whatever) won't outperform it in terms of sheer cornering ability ?

i wasn't including the TCP, UP, RM, GW etc. strut fronts. they still use an unequal length upper and lower arm setup, the struts on those kits just relocate the suspension forces to the LCA thereby giving a better motion ratio and better damping control. so those types will outperform a stock setup but how much they will out perform an already optimized stock style suspension i can't tell you.