460 Ford Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,697 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
New Rear coil overs and track bar locator. My old coil overs were........ well........ OLD!! and non adjustable. Looking at the video, it seems that the rear coil overs were going into coil bind.

I did have a panhard bar that was on top of the rear end and located off the tube frame. I now have a track bar locator.

New shocks have 10 adjustments, I have it on 5 now. Moved the Instant Center forward a little more than I had it on my third and final run at the BBF Bash. I don't have the weights in front of me but when he scaled the car, each rear tire is holding nearly 700# (692# was one of the weights) and the total weight with my 180# is 3211#











Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,266 Posts
INstant center moving farther forward, bigger BITE, if it liked to lift em before, its going to want to lift em even more.

Coil bind, now that throws a differnt ball into the playing field. Increaseing rear squat, might enable that bite without pivoting the front end. Rather like the South-side bars did on the stock chasis stuff. Instead of lifting the front, it "DUG" the rear in. Allowing a little more squat before weight transfere, might prevent some of the harshness of the lift.


Could also add to the headache........ because as the rear squats, the instant center moves forward, even further. Its one of them catch 22 situations, where with the coils going solid, there was nothing for the car to do but PIVOT. But the pivot point was set, and you were comfortable.

With the added spring travel, the pivot point is moving, it might not lift the front tires at all.... allowing the rear to squat and absorb that engergy before a "pivot" is achieved. OR, with the now more mobile instant center, you might find the car likes to pick the tires up a little later, but is more difficult to control the amount of lift.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,697 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Whatever happens, it should get down the track a little easier this time. IC is also a TAD lower than it was before.

On my first run, I had my I/C fairly short and the top front bar was in the bottom hole. It's in the second from top hole now :shock:

With my camera, we could pause the video and move it frame by frame. Learned a LOT from just the video.

Secon run video from Tom's Camera.



I'm trying to upload the first run video from Doug's camera.



Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,266 Posts
Need a little more preload in that right rear too... Tends to want to really roll the chasis over on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,979 Posts
Did you scale the car while you were in it all decked out in race trim? That addition of the 180 in the left seat can make a difference.

What coil overs are those?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,960 Posts
Seeing where Damon's 4-link bars & brackets are situated in releation to the body/chassis sheds some light on it's fun to watch dead-hook powerstanding performance at the Bash. The front 4-link chassis bracket kinda looks like the style thats meant more for full chassis cars which have a lower center of gravity. Because of this the I/C length might not be the only thing to deal with here, the I/C height could be a bigger issue to work out. Using a bracket meant for a full chassis car in a back-half car could cause the I/C height adjustability to be limited as to how low you can set it to the ground.



Some brackets that are meant more for back-half cars have a larger number of the lower bar holes located below the 4-link crossmember centerline (than a full chassis bracket does), thus allowing more I/C height adjustment with a car that sits higher off the ground.



It's plausible that if the car's "closer to the ground" I/C height adjustment is limited, the car might need a much longer I/C length (than normal) to help compensate if the car needs the suspension calmed down (less "hit') to work more efficiently. In this situation the shock valving (front & rear) could play a much much bigger role than normal.

I didn't really see all that much body roll in the clip. But Kim's suggestion of more right preload to help compensate for body roll can be a helpful tool if there is body roll, (an anti-roll is the best way though). But be forwarned some cars don't have a very big adjustment window to work with when using more preload to fight body roll. Cranking in right side preload to fight body roll might also cause a car with good torque/power numbers to launch to the left, it's one of those "only small adjustments at a time" things untill you find out just how big the adjustment window is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,697 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
You guys have good eyes!!

Eric added 200# to the drivers side seat when he scaled the car and he added just a little right side pre-load to help the car scale evenly on the rear tires.

The 4-link brackets are a little high in the front and the car actually used to sit a little lower in the rear making the bottom bars parallel to the ground but I didn't like the way it looked so I raised the rear a little for more of a better looking ride height, it's all about style my man :lol: I could lower the rear ride height and subsequently have to lower the front ride height in order to lower the I/C. BUT it's hard enough getting the car on an off the trailer now :shock: However I'll accept donations if you guys wish to help me buy an enclosed trailer :p

So there really isn't any way to lower that IC any more than it is now, unless I go with a taller rear tire and then lower the shock mounts and rear ride height.

Shocks are single adjustable, trying to keep costs down. They will be a major improvement over the non adjustable shocks I had on the car before.

Thanks for all the input guys!



Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top