Thoughts on the new CPP front suspension?

Discussion in 'Classic Mustang Specific Tech' started by bnickel, Sep 12, 2007.

  1. what is everyone's thoughts on teh new CPP suspension kit? we were discussing it in the AJE thread but i thought it deserved it's own thread and was getting way off topic on the AJE thread. here's a couple pics for those that haven't seen it yet.

    Attached Files:

  2. thanks for starting a new thread!!!

    my question started an all out war!!

    I am leaning so hard to this product right now.

    I belive it is giving alot of bang for the buck. I think the product with the upper arms and some roller springs from open tracker is just what my sloppy handling mustang needs!!

    I just wish we had some comments from people who have used the product. Maybe i will have to check some chevy nova forums!! i can not belive i just said that!! LOL.

  3. the problem is that it's so new no one has really tried it yet. the nova forums may not be a bad idea actuall.

    it does appear to have a lot of bang for the buck :nice:
  4. it looks like this could be exactly the setup needed for my would save me a lot of hassle...but I would need a picture of it installed on a mustang first....the only thing I am concerned about is where under the car the plate/subframe thingie crosses....not a concern for most of you, but I have a rear sump oil pan so it is for me

    heres an article on an installation of the nova kit...I answered my own question...I'm thinking possibly this kit with ope tracker upper control arms would make a nice least, this kit looks like it will work perfectly for me
  6. nice article, thanks for posting it. :nice:
  7. Options include perches, spindles, and disc brakes... interesting.
    Too bad (for me) that it's only available for 64-66...
  8. I don't like that it's a bolt in kit; that's kinda scary. Just the idea of it geting loose.
  9. I don't understand why we're discussing this? I understand that the suspension is the same design but they are two different cars (nova and mustang). Please someone explain why we are talking about a chevy front end.
  10. because they arent selling the mustang kit just yet, and it gives a general idea of how the kit goes on a strut rod type for being scary...I dont think so, if you dont trust the torque...weld it on
  11. If you think about it, whatever kind of suspension you have is bolt-in! Are you worried about it getting loose?

    I like this a lot. I think it would make a great combo with a nice UCA or the RRS struts.
  12. I'm wondering if it's worth the cost and install time of the kit, versus getting the strut-ball kit from Maier. Both eliminate the strut rod bind. The Maier kit isn't much cheaper, but the install is definitely easier and I trust factory arms more than welded-tube aftermarket arms. Being able to upgrade to LCA-mounted springs in the future is nice though.

    Early Novas are almost identical to early Mustangs so that write up is quite helpful. Except for the people who get sand in their urethra when a car of another company is mentioned.

    Right, because welding in these spindly tubes (circled) that most MII setups have is much more reassuring than bolting onto factory-placed chassis holes.
    View attachment 363393

    Uh oh, better weld my wheels on. They might come loose.
  13. Just my thoughts;
    It would appear that this front end eliminates the caster change inherent with the strut rod, and gives additional rigidity to the front subframes. I don't see any other advantages.
    So, I'm thinking this adds weight ahead of the front tires for not much gain.
    A stamped piece instead of the 1/4" plate would have provided lighter and better support. The LCAs look a bit spindly, and I'm not a fan of plastic bushings at all (just my own experiences). The LCAs would need to be re-engineered to handle coil overs.
    Setup would need to be done very carefully to stave off binding. And there isn't any technical information on whether or not they've modified any of the other handling characteristics.
    For about $350.00 you can put a very nice set of heim joint strut rods on that cover the major points discussed in their advertisement. Come to think of it, They didn't even mention caster change, which for me would be as big a benefit as anything else they list. Just makes me wonder how much chassis design engineering they know.

    Next to a full on Grigg's setup, I'd stick with Opentrackers stuff and a nice set of Street-or-Track strut rods. Stitch weld the strut supports, radiator support and inner fenders. And you've stiffened the whole front end for very little weight gain. This setup is also incredibly durable.
    (IMO) It's real hard to beat this setup for the money.
  14. I agree on the plastic bushings, but it looks good other than that....and I do think I'd rather have open tracker lower arms and strut rods...but this setup really isnt all that bad, and looks good for an economical solution
  15. what do you have aginast Delrin? i'd rather have Delrin than rubber and those Maier strut rod bushing kits are also made of Delrin BTW as are the bushings in the GW UCA's and their rear bushing kit as well.

    as far as the 1/4" plate adding weight, i can't see that it would too much more than the stock strut rod braces which are pretty substantial themselves.

    this kit HAS to have less caster deflection than a stock rubber bushing or most any type of stock style strut rod, even the heim jointed ones. i'd also say there would have to be some geometry change but excactly what i can't say.

    the only thing i would like to see different would to have a cross brace welded in between the 2 sides of the arm, provided there is room. they would definitely need to be modified to run a coilover that attaches to the LCA but it shouldn't be hard at all.

    they are supposed to be working on a 67-up kit as well according to an email i recieved from them a few months back.
  16. I have no real problem with the plastic, its certainly better than rubber, but eventually it will crack like plastic tends to do over time...not like its a big deal since I'm sure they would last longer than stock bushings anyway
  17. I could be wrong, but I don't think those are "Delrin" bushings. At least if it were me and they were Delrin, I would certainly make sure that was in the advertisment. And my personal experience with "plastic" bushings (I'm drawing a blank on the proper name) is that road grit becomes impregnated into the "plastic" and they wear the metal sleaves until there is slop. The same thing can happen with Delrin if the tolerances are too loose. In any case, as I stated in my original post I prefer Opentracker's stuff with Street-or-Track's strut rods. Both companies use heim joints, not bushings. Not sure where you came up with GW and Maier?... although, my Maier Panhard bar uses heim joints, as do my GW lower control arms... Hmmm.

    I would agree that if they suggest cutting off the original strut rod braces, the additional weight of the plate wouldn't make a bit of difference. Although at that point I would seriously consider welding the plate, otherwise there is going to be spot weld failure of the inner fenders and radiator support along the front frame arms.

    Slow down and re-read my post. You will see I said less caster change is one of the two benefits I could see.
    And your point of "there would have to be geometry changes"...OK, so are they good or bad geometry changes? I'm not sure, based on what I read, even CCP knows. Before I jumped on the bandwagon, I'd want to find out. Which was really my main point. In the brochure that was posted, for me there wasn't enough qualitative information to form an overall positive opinion. Hopefully when the kit comes out they will have some good qualitative information.
    I thought you were soliciting for responses? My appologies if I offended you.

  18. no offense at all and it was actually Ron67FB that posted about the Maier strut ball kit, my apologies. i was just remarking on your remarks not offended in anyway, shape or form. i'm waiting on a response from them about some more info as well. in the other thread someone had mentioned that they were being a brochure and some other info so i'm hoping that i can get them to send me some as well.

    as far as the plate goes i don't really see any other way that it can be done other than removing the original strut rod braces from looking at the kit in the pic, anyway. basically i was just wondering what the aversion to the plastic (i'm still assuming Delrin) was. still assuming that it is Delrin it's way better than rubber and still a step above poly. the only other "plastic" bushing i can think of would be Midolyne and it's a thermoplastic much like poly but has more give and less of a problem with squeaks, i have that on the rear leaf spring bushings in my car and so far i like them just fine, but they haven't been on the car long to start deteriorating yet.

    i'd like to see if someone has already installed the Mustang kit which was the main reason for the post along with feedback like you gave as well.
  19. If the car has anti-dive, the caster will change. Does the lbj move forward or back with a strut rod set up when compressed? If it moves back, the CCP set up will have more caster change.

  20. both!!! with the suspension at full compression the lower ball joint actually moves forward i think, at full drop it moves it backward. i can't remember for sure but it does go both ways and add hard braking into the mix and it changes yet again.

    the strut rod changes length as it goes through the arc (relative to the control arm), the bushing also compresses again changing the length and the stock upper control arm moves fore and aft on it's screw-in metal bushings so again more caster changes. all of these changes also effect the camber and the toe as well. by changing the LCA to a true A-arm and changing the UCA to a different style bushing minimizes these changes. if you also do an UCA drop at the same time (assuming more than 1" is possible with the CPP UCA's or by using a different UCA) you again take some of those changes out of play, mainly camber and toe with the UCA drop. combine that with a drop spindle that will give you more clearance for deeper wheel offsets and a lower CG but still allow for full suspension movement i don't see how you can go wrong with this type of setup.

    and while i do see some small issues with the CPP kit (or something like it) i still see far more advantages than disadvantages. the Griggs kit also changes to a true lower A-arm as well, though it's way more advanced than the CPP kit but also way more expensive and more invasive as well.