TKOPerformance wrote:

Any more information available?  Website you can link us to?

From that pic it doesn't look any different than the factory setup.  The strut rods bolt to the LCAs anyway.  It looks like a stronger setup because it isn't stamped steel, and looks like its done away with the rubber bushings, but what is that really worth?  What's this setup cost? 

hello TKO, 

this set up comes from pacific thunder performance . They drowed and made this during this year.
right and left are priced more or less 550 usd ( as i remember ) not so far from renforced oem LCA + STRUT.
i am thinking about this as a stronger lower with benefit of eye bearing instead of gum bushing .

until now for my stang upgrade i bought UCA with roller bearing and saddle with roller ( from opentracker ) and i thought it will be a nice match with this strut arms . 
thanks !

yes , i think that hard ride is something to take note . 
Do you think , with adjustable shocks , to make this  ride more confortable with this strut arm ?
I haven't already buy the LCA  and  i can decide which one is better for my ride . But i still believe the oem system is obsolete .
thanks 

No shock absorber is going to relieve the clanking from the strut rod bushings.  I agree with TKO there is really no reason to mess with the original design other than to strengthen the parts and do the Shelby drop.
I have issued this challenge for years with no takers yet. Show me your high dollar front suspension is substantially better than a modified stock setup and I will buy one.  So far, I have driven one, a Fat Man conversion, and I found it very slow to react to driver stimulus. In other words, it was worse than stock, and it even had a R&P included.  I just think your hard earned modification dollars can be better spent on something else.

Yep, coilovers and tubular control arms look real sexy, but they still use the factory pickup points so what are you really changing?  You can sink $6,000-$8,000 into one of these setups and get beat around a track by a properly setup car with mostly stock parts.

X-3^^^^
If you do the Shelby drop/Arning drop... Larger sway bar...Monte Carlo bar...one piece export brace... and new shocks..I promise it will corner like it is on rails!(I like the rollerized spring perches too)
Waaay cheaper than what you are looking at.
6s6 

6sally6 wrote:

X-3^^^^
If you do the Shelby drop/Arning drop... Larger sway bar...Monte Carlo bar...one piece export brace... and new shocks..I promise it will corner like it is on rails!(I like the rollerized spring perches too)
Waaay cheaper than what you are looking at.
6s6 

 
Regarding Shelby drop i must use a negative wedge kit or not ?  I am thinking about a street driving \ cruising not race or track .
As 1 inch drop i think is enough for me ,  for what i read about  , i dont Need a wedge kit .
Or i did some misunderstood ?
By now i got all dismantled and make two holes is really a job to do now .
Thanks !

TKOPerformance wrote:

The negative wedge kit is designed to mimic the camber curve improvement of the Shelby drop, so if you do the drop there's no need for the kit. 

Man now I'm really corn-fused.  I thought the neg wedge was to change the upper ball joint angle so as not to have it over-traveling on jounce on a very lowered car.  If that's the case, I don't see how that could have anything to do with the camber curve.  Please straighten me out.  Thanks.

BB

There are issues when you drop it over 1", because the balljoint angle changes enough that the balljoint can bind causing rapid wear.  On the race cars Shelby used to drop them like 1-1/4"-1-1/2" and they took the balljoints and machined part of the housing down to prevent contact with the stud.  I guess that's what the negative wedge kit is doing, but you can use a stock type balljoint.  I always found that name misleading, because camber is widely called wedge in racing circles, so the implication is that it gives the suspension negative camber. 

If one were to NEED the wedge kit because the UCAs were moved more than 1", it would make more sense and cost a ton less to just pie cut the UCA right inboard of the balljoint, bend the end of the UCA downward and then reweld it and add some strengtheners.  It accomplishes exactly the same thing but with zero cost.  Also, bolts don't like being run through angled wedges.  It just gives more places for something to come loose.  Angling the UCA outboard end is free if you can weld.

MS wrote:

If one were to NEED the wedge kit because the UCAs were moved more than 1", it would make more sense and cost a ton less to just pie cut the UCA right inboard of the balljoint, bend the end of the UCA downward and then reweld it and add some strengtheners.  It accomplishes exactly the same thing but with zero cost.  Also, bolts don't like being run through angled wedges.  It just gives more places for something to come loose.  Angling the UCA outboard end is free if you can weld.

I have the 1 3/4" drop on the Mach, been that way for 20 years and I have been running the Negative Wedge Kit as well. Never hurt my tires, Alignment is no problem, I have taken the stuff apart several times for spring swaps and such. Always bolts back together just fine...nothing has ever come loose. That's just my $.02

Last edited by Mach1_Ron (11/08/2016 7:27 AM)

MS wrote:

If one were to NEED the wedge kit because the UCAs were moved more than 1", it would make more sense and cost a ton less to just pie cut the UCA right inboard of the balljoint, bend the end of the UCA downward and then reweld it and add some strengtheners....

I ran the wedge with a 1 5/8" drop for about 15 years without an issue. When I decided to upgrade some other components, brakes, steering etc.. around the UCAs I had I did exactly this. Took maybe an hour to do both sides and eliminated the wedge. Opentracker had a good write-up on this a few years back

Has anybody tried putting 67 Mustang V8 front suspension arm strut that is adjustable on a 66 Mustang V8?