Coil Overs

[coolcvi 11]

Going to put bolt on coil overs on my 69 sports roof. Any experience on either the Ron Morris or the Total Control Products(TCP) versions? Any help is appreciated. Dan

[rwcstang 201]

Going to put bolt on coil overs on my 69 sports roof. Any experience on either the Ron Morris or the Total Control Products(TCP) versions? Any help is appreciated. Dan

 

I have street or tracks coil over conversion, I haven't installed it yet but you can see his parts in action:

 

[Jimjific 23]

I have the TCP coil overs. I like them and they were easy to install. They also make taking apart the suspension easier once installed since you don't need a spring compressor. Just remember that you CAN'T adjust the spring height by compressing the spring compressing the spring only changes the pre-load. I just updated a post on my suspension where I show the install and how to do it without compressing the spring.

 

Jim

[cavboy78 28]

I like my Global West's but the TCP kit does have the Arning Drop built into the arms...which is nice.

[latoracing 256]

I thought about the TCP kit with the Arning drop built into the mount. Guess if one didn't want to drill more holes in their shock towers, it would be fine. I am a little leary of the design. IMO the transfer of stresses will do better in a straight line, the "drop mount" on the UCA could act like a "hinge". They have a lot smarter engineers than I could ever imagine to be, and testing to back it up, but it just seems funky. I went SOT, it is still in the boxes.

[69_Mustang 26]

I have RAE Racing front coilovers.

[69gmachine 15]

I thought about the TCP kit with the Arning drop built into the mount. Guess if one didn't want to drill more holes in their shock towers, it would be fine. I am a little leary of the design. IMO the transfer of stresses will do better in a straight line, the "drop mount" on the UCA could act like a "hinge". They have a lot smarter engineers than I could ever imagine to be, and testing to back it up, but it just seems funky. I went SOT, it is still in the boxes.

 

With a coil over design where the shock mounts to the LCA, the UCA carries no load. It is exactly as you stated, merely a hinge that allows the top of the spindle to go through a shorter arc than the LCA, which increases camber as the suspension is compressed. I did this years before TCP did, with excellent results. I took it one step farther though and adjusted the anti dive down by about 30% as the factory designed it for a much higher ride height and a much heavier load as it could potentially support an FE engine with all the accessories.

Edited May 10, 2013 by 69gmachine
spelling

[prayers1 153]

I just checked out the Street or Tracks coil over conversion and WOW was I blown away, $2399.00. It is really neccesary???? What is so bad about the front suspension if you were to rebuild it using stock replacement. I can't see the wasting all that money for something that already works. My 2 cents!

[latoracing 256]

I just checked out the Street or Tracks coil over conversion and WOW was I blown away, $2399.00. It is really neccesary???? What is so bad about the front suspension if you were to rebuild it using stock replacement. I can't see the wasting all that money for something that already works. My 2 cents!

 

Look at any aftermarket suspension systems, they are all expensive. Is it necessary, depends on the intended purpose of the car. Drive as a daily driver, you could drive it with a $2,399.00 front suspension, overkill, yes. Track and high performance, I wouldn't waste my time with a stock replacement suspension. The stock suspension is not adjustable, and does not work very well on a track IMO, and there is a place for both, that what makes these cars so popular. Build it the way you want, and if you want to spend $10,000.00 on suspension to go fast around corners, then so be it. It is all about FUN. My $0.02

[prayers1 153]

Latoracing- By highlighting my post, it looks as if you are singling me out regarding my opinion.

I personally do not care how much you spend on your car, it is your money and you do what you want. You can drive it in the dirt, on the street or at the track, it’s your money and your car! But really, how many people do you think, that spend thousands of dollars on these cars are going to push it to the limit at a racecourse , only a small handful compared to the thousands of owners that are doing a restoration and being driven as a daily driver, weekend cruiser or at the weekend drag strip.

The point is that I had no idea how much those suspensions cost until I looked today. I must admit I was taken back. I agree if you are going to go excessive speeds around tight turns, then for safety reasons, yes the stock suspension should be upgraded. If that type of driving is, your hobby and you are always doing it, then go for it! It only takes one failure to kill yourself. I am not trying to put anyone down who does it that way, to each his own. IMO, I try to scrape up any dollar I can to finance my build and $2399.00, can go a lot further somewhere else. I guess I always try to justify cost.

Right now I’m looking at an easy 15000 on my build, which far from being finished and I am going to rebuild the stock brakes and suspension. That is the reason why I questioned, “Is it really necessary?”

Maybe there should be a thread just for that particular coil over suspension

Edited May 11, 2013 by prayers1

[latoracing 256]

Mr. prayers1,

 

In no way did I mean to offend you by quoting your post. I was giving the other side of the "coin" look into coil over suspensions, and their intednded purpose. That being said, I am sory if I made you mad, and I apologize for any comments that you didn't like. The OP wanted to know about coil overs and who has used them. I will NEVER quote you agean!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Mike Walker

[prayers1 153]

Mike,

I was not mad just offended, lately there has been a lot of crap going on with this forum and I did not want that happening with me. Maybe I spouted off more than I should and I apologize as well. I do appreciate your sincere honesty and approach on this forum and wish more members would act as you do.

The truth of the matter is that there are all types of builds for these cars, which make them more versatile, and easy to change especially for suspensions. Therefore, there will always be different opinions. I am always learning each time I log and I don’t claim that I know it all and I am thank full that this website exist especially for the fact that it’s specific to 69/70.

Sorry, to all that this thread took a different turn and if I could afford the luxury of a coil over suspension, I think I would do it, but my build has a long way to go so I am just sticking to the basics.

John

[jonwen 10]

i run the sot in the front it is a little firm for street use and the total control rear 4 link car handels great never worried about hitting a corner to fast

[rwcstang 201]

I did this conversion because I disliked the way the old suspension handled even after doing some mods, you could probably go with a roller spring perches with some Adjustable strut rods.

 

it will still cost an extra penny but its worth it from what others have told me.

[69_Mustang 26]

You pay high quality, you get high quality.

 

if you want 44 year old suspension, even if upgraded with new stock parts, it won't handle or feel as safe, even as a daily driver, compared to most modern day equals.

 

Now, stock type stuff is plenty and definitely safe enough for a DD and pushing it a bit for fun, I'm just taking from a stock is stock and performance is capable of a lot more than just handle road courses.

 

I look at coilovers for more than performance, but safety as well.

 

To each their own, just my opinion.

 

I rather spend my money on something better so if there is a bad driving experience, its my driving, not my poor suspension settings (not enough camber, not wide enough wheels/tires, etc). And I'm pretty sure all well made coilovers will net more room in the wheel wells to fit bigger wheels and tires, again more than performance, its a nice added bonus of safety. More meat/sticker tires on the ground means a better stopping distance.

 

Again, just my .02 on the subject of stock vs coilover suspension.

[Jimjific 23]

I agree with 69_Mustang. I have owned over 10 Mustangs and they just don't handle well. Remember, ford sold 2 million of these cars by mid-68 and was going to make them as cheap as possible. This is why we don't have things like jointed strut rods. Unless you are going for a trophy winning car, I would say upgrading the suspension only makes sense. Even if it is a daily driver, why not make the suspension better since you will be using the car a lot? I recently had a chance to be a passenger in a award winning stock 67 coupe that even had bias ply tires and it rode like crap. The guy only drives it to shows and I can see why. The other cool thing about the coil overs I got are that they are adjustable. I can easily reach in and change the settings for a stiffer or softer ride in seconds.

 

Jim

[Pakrat 1,043]

I'll take the other side of the coin for just a quick second, I have 3 other cars, all of various specifications, a truck, an SUV and a gas sipper, the oldest is still a 2000. For me and my weekend warrior I enjoy it because it doesn't feel like all my other cars. I like the timewarp feel, like I am driving a giant gocart, for me that is part of the appeal so even with the budget available unless I suddenly required something different from it for any variety of reasons or I was facing a complete front end rebuild anyway I wouldn't find it necessary, just my $.02. I have looked at and drooled over many of them though from time to time, they are purty and you do get what you pay for. That's not what this thread is about though and I didn't really chime in to tell you that anyway. :beta1:

 

I was more curious about a different statement prayers made "lately there has been a lot of crap going on with this forum". I was only aware of a recent minor speed bump in the bump steer thread so if there are others please reach out to me via PM and elaborate. The last thing I want is for this forum to loose its brotherly kinship and I don't get to read every thread or always spot a spammer at the first post so I need to rely on others to bring things to my attention so I can attend to them ASAP and keep this the kind of place we all enjoy coming back to regularly.

[buening 63]

One must keep one simple thing in mind, many (not all) aftermarket coilover suspension still utilize the stock control arm lengths and same LCA/UCA mount locations on the shock tower....so the geometry is pretty much the same as the stock setup. The keys to these kits are IMO ride height adjustability, better shocks, roller bearings, and slightly less weight. If the suspension can move as intended without the stock binding bushings, the shock absorbers can do their thing as intended. Doing the UCA/LCA spherical bearing mod and roller perches from Opentracker frees up the suspension. When moving the shock to the LCA, the suspension benefits from an increased motion ratio and thus a weaker coil can be used. On the street, most will never notice the difference between a stock motion ratio and increased motion ratio as long as the wheel rate is the same.

 

My two cents, there are mustangs out there with beefed up stock-style suspension components with roller bearings that beat some later model racecars....so you don't need fancy tubular arms to make your car handle. Beef up the arms, install roller bearings where bushings were, and drop as much as you can on some quality shocks (and I'm not talking KYB Gas Adjusts or GR-2) and you will have a car that handles quite nicely on the track. To really get a well handling mustang, you really need to change where the UCA and LCA mount to the frame and alter arm lengths.....precisely what the Griggs suspension does (as well as Art Morrison full frame kits). There are a few builds on Corner-Carvers that also do just that.

 

For packaging purposes and ease of install for the common buyer, companies like SoT, TCP, and Global West keep the same LCA/UCA mounting locations (with exception to UCA Arning drop)...... and I think SoT and Global West change arm lengths slightly to help with camber gain.

[69gmachine 15]

The first thing I want to say is that if anyone is happy with the old suspension design, that's wonderful. Paying for anything more would be a waste for them. But it is disengenous to claim they are comparable to a well designed coil over suspension (which means the shock has to mount near the end of the LCA, not the middle of the UCA). This is not just my opinion. It is simple physics (and math).

 

Buening, please don't take the following as a personal assault. It's not meant to be at all. However, I feel it is important to address the various issues you brought up. I would gladly buy you a beer or even let you drive my car if I ever had the pleasure of your company.

 

My two cents, there are mustangs out there with beefed up stock-style suspension components with roller bearings that beat some later model racecars....

 

Can you elaborate on this claim? I'm not aware of any road racing series or autocross series where classic Mustangs (with ancient suspensions) compete with modern Mustangs and are competitive. That's not to say there aren't any, but I'd love to know where they are and who is campaigning them. I looked for racing venues where vintage cars race and they are either relegated to using the rulebook from yesteryear in vintage racing or they have completely modernized the suspension to be competitve (e.g. NASA). I am interested in sponsoring anyone racing a 67-70 Mustang or Cougar in any competitive series if they will compete in every single race of the season, and have at least 1 year of racing experience.

 

I've been to the track and seen the times that the old cars with old suspensions turn in and what newer cars on the same track on the same same day turn in, and the newer cars put them to shame. Generally speaking, the newer cars are heavier and have inferior strut suspensions that aren't nearly as good design-wise as the SLA. So what makes the late models "superior". Tires! They run much wider tires on much taller wheels (18x10 vs 15x8 typically). They also have much better rear suspension designs than leaf springs.

 

With my coil over design, on my first successful completion of an autocross race (last October at the Autocrossers Inc. venue at Blue Crabs Stadium in Waldorf, MD) I turned in a best time that was within a couple of seconds (57.4 vs 55.3) of the C-prepared classic Mustangs average which are fully sponsored, gutted race cars with roll cages and open headers (but choose to run ancient suspensions for whatever reason). My car has a complete interior, a working radio, and everything but a compressor to have working AC. Plus I was running on street tires (P275s on 17x9s). The other classic Mustangs were running 15" wheels with P235 Hoosier slicks all around. I drove my car home at the end of the day. The other classic Mustangs were trailered. The late model C prepared cars turned in much faster times around 52 to 54-something. They were on P315 Hoosiers. They were also trailered.

 

It's possible that at an open track event a classic suspension car "beat" a modern car, but since there are no rules, and so many levels of drivers, and they're not actually racing, that's not a meaningful comparison.

 

so you don't need fancy tubular arms to make your car handle. Beef up the arms, install roller bearings where bushings were, and drop as much as you can on some quality shocks (and I'm not talking KYB Gas Adjusts or GR-2) and you will have a car that handles quite nicely on the track.

 

Agreed, there are many improvements to be made without changing the UCA design. However, it's not the tubular arms that make the big improvement. It's the design of a shock mounted near the end of the LCA, and then taking advantage of that design by using a lower spring rate and softer shock valving.

 

To really get a well handling mustang, you really need to change where the UCA and LCA mount to the frame and alter arm lengths.....precisely what the Griggs suspension does (as well as Art Morrison full frame kits). There are a few builds on Corner-Carvers that also do just that.

 

I guess this depends on your definition of well handling, but have you actually driven a classic Mustang with a coil over suspension? There is a night and day difference in my car from when I had the typical shelby drop, Eibach springs and modified arms (same basic mod that juit did to his UCAs). My front suspension is not harsh at all (but right now the rear is), and yet it stays amazlingly flat in "high" speed turns. I can't make an assesment of anyone else's design, but I would expect very similar results.

 

For packaging purposes and ease of install for the common buyer, companies like SoT, TCP, and Global West keep the same LCA/UCA mounting locations (with exception to UCA Arning drop)...... and I think SoT and Global West change arm lengths slightly to help with camber gain.

 

I will say 2 things:

1) sometimes a small change in location can make a large change in the roll center, instant center, and/or camber curve so just because the change doesn't appear to be physically much, it doesn't mean it won't have a noticeable impact. The small difference in UCA length is adequate and compliments the "shelby" drop. Too much of a good thing will just cause more problems elsewhere.

2) The original design had several major flaws; the location of the UCA pivot point relative to the upper BJ pivot point was too high, the shock mounts 1/2 way on the UCA requiring an excessively stiff spring to control wheel rate, the ride height was too high, the anti dive angle is excessive, the anti sway bar was too small and generally the springs were too soft. All but one of of these issues can be addressed without resorting to coil overs. However, the UCA to LCA ratio is quite good, and making a radical change to the length of the UCA will come at a price; prematurely worn tires. I believe that price is unnecessary and expensive.

[buening 63]

No offense taken. Exactly what this forum is for. My comment on vintage mustangs beating modern cars wasn't intended for high caliber drivers. I've been out of it for awhile, but was thinking the NASA AI/SOLO/American Auto Cross didn't involve heavily modified suspensions but incorporated vintage and modern cars with modified-but-similar-to-stock suspensions. I could be wrong though. From what I've seen, the lower tier classes end up being more on driver experience than tweaks in the suspension design anyways. Tires do play a huge role in handling, but that goes without saying. Precisely why you see these classic racecars with huge fender flares and 12" wide front tires ;)

 

 

I have ridden in a coil over suspension car, and I can tell you based on my experience the majority of that night and day difference is in your shock selection. On the track, yeah it'll shave some time off your laps. On the street? It wasn't earth shattering compared to a roller bearing suspension.

 

Have you ridden in a car with the roller bearing suspension components to compare? The ride to me was a bit harsher, but that was in my opinion due to the limited shock selection we have and the higher spring rate. Simply going from a stock bushing suspension with balljoint angle correction and shelby drop to a coilover isn't a fair comparison IMO. Until you eliminate the rubber bushings and get a good shock, it will definitely drive like a tank.

 

In a highly modified class involving these cars, you will see much more Griggs suspensions than you ever will stock-style coilover cars (again, from my limited experience). This discussion is all basically moot since 99.9% of the people on this forum will never find the upper limits of these suspensions, and a modified stock suspension will most likely handle their needs. I've yet to see a question on here about someone trying to shave time off their lap times.

 

One must balance the price to benefit/performance ratio and how they will use the car. Many people have 45yr old worn out shocks and suspension and drop $3k on a coilover suspension and are amazed at how well the car handles now, without ever knowing that a third or so of that could have gotten them something that handles very similar on the street

 

Merely my opinion though, I'm not exactly spewing out cold hard numbers and facts... as this isn't exactly Corner-Carvers environment :p

[69gmachine 15]

No, I haven't driven a car with roller perches. When I started my conversion they weren't available.

 

If the coil over car you drove didn't take advantage of the ability to use a softer spring and shock, then I'm not surprised you weren't impressed with ride quality. People sometimes get caught up in a numbers game and think they have to have a higher rate to have a performance suspension. The best spring and shock are almost always the softest one that will still adequately control body roll. Not only will the ride quality be better, but they will react faster.

 

And that is one of the inherent flaws of the shock on the UCA design. In order to control body roll you must sacrifice ride quality with a very stiff spring.

 

There was a very competitive 69 or 70 Mustang in NASA a few years back (around 2005-06) no doubt because the wheel wells in our cars allowed them to run the spec tire which had to fit in the stock wheel well. The car was no where near stock. It stretched the rules to the limit and was virtually outlawed by rules changes the next year. That class doesn't exist any more (they said there weren't enough entrants to justify it). At that time NASA didn't allow any changes to the shock tower shape or firewall location, but it was a full on race car with nothing in the suspension steering or brakes even remotely resembling stock and could not possibly be driven on the street.

 

I don't want a dedicated race car because i want to enjoy it more often than dedicated track days. You are absolutely correct in that 99% of the forum members here aren't hard core racers interested in shaving 1 or 2 seconds off a lap time (although I hope I can start a trend). But that's not what I designed my suspension for anyway. If you could take your full on street car, drive in comfort and style to the track while listening to the radio, then run comparable numbers to the guys who trailer their full blown race car with race tires, how could you not feel some satisfaction? To me that is having my cake and eating it too.

 

Glad your cool. I'm serious about buying you a beer sometime.

[prayers1 153]

There is an article in this months Mustang Monthly "CoilOver Front Suspension guide".

[jandj1970 13]

69gmachine can I ask what front suspension are you running on your mustang? Iam not interested in coilover design, this thread has me thinking about my front suspension iam looking at buying soon.

[69gmachine 15]

jandj1970, PM sent.

[buening 63]

Nah the coilover-on-lca car had I think 350lb springs. It was the shock-on-UCA car that had the higher spring rate, something upwards of 700-800lb (track car).

 

I agree, I don't want a dedicated track car and these modified suspensions really are getting your cake and eating it too. I love what you did with the ProSpindle. It really has me thinking outside the box on my suspension build.

 

I'm always down for a beer!