An independent rear suspension.What is going in exactly?
Are you new to this forum? If so, you should make a post in the Welcome Wagon.
There is no upper front mount needed with an IRS.
Last edited:
An independent rear suspension.What is going in exactly?
You probably used too many words when originally talking about that part of the plan.....Noobz don’t like it when you use too many words.An independent rear suspension.
Are you new to this forum? If so, you should make a post in the Welcome Wagon.
There is no upper front mount needed with an IRS.
No, thank you for your input.My honest suggestion is- Backhalf the Booger. Then you would have all kinds of room from the irs,a fuel cell,tail pipes etc.
There.... I said it.... Let the berating begin..
He’s talking about me.Fwiw-the berating comment was not directed at you Dave (my bad.), was for the few who find my suggestions unwarranted.. But I do tend to have that effect on people-I suggested back halving booger cause you where talking about all the close clearances and removing mounts etc.. I’m sure you will figure out what you wanna do with the irs etc. and make it look damn nice.
100% agree , from time to time my ideas are overly excessive. My brain outruns my common sense sometimes. So I do apologize for that. Sadly it’ll happen againHe’s talking about me.
Its not that your comments aren’t appreciated Raggedy, it’s just that they are sometimes a little too “reach for the moon”, when the problem exists here on the Earth.
I really think you need not apologize nor explain yourself to anyone.100% agree , from time to time my ideas are overly excessive. My brain outruns my common sense sometimes. So I do apologize for that. Sadly it’ll happen again
For real though Mike, wasn’t a jab at you or Dave, sadly I’ve agitated more than just you guys- Unfortunately it came out that way. Cutting the rear rails outta the car was definitely overkill for a suggestion-but I still kinda stick with altering the rails and floor to make room for all the irs stuff.
I was looking at that thread about the full fox frame and it got me thinking. Not about getting one of those, mind you. I just kept looking at it and the different parts.
I was thinking about stress areas in my coupe. Since I’ll have coil overs in the rear, I thought more about that upper shock mount.
Maybe replacing it with a new box that welds deeper into the subframe wouldn’t be a bad idea? Much heavier gauge than factory too. I‘m strongly leaning towards replacing the shock mount. Plus an additional tube between the upper mounts since the full weight of the car will rest upon those and transfer a bit of twist under hard acceleration? Since I’ll be replacing the uca mount with tubing, I don’t know if that’s really necessary. It’s just a few inches away from the shock mounts. Yet the new X-brace inside the cabin will have a strut going to the shock mounts.
I luckily came across some heavy gauge flat steel that I can make gussets, backing plates, rear upper shock mounts maybe out of.
I’m thinking the IRS adds a crapload of lateral support for the subframe as long as I do a hard tail and maybe a hard nose on it. @Hoytster didn‘t you do something with the front mounts of your IRS? It seems to me that to eliminate all bushings from the IRS to frame couldn’t be anything but good.
Help me think here guys. Tomorrow the IRS will be out and disassembled and the rear mods really begin. I’m starting by removing the factory upper control arm mount and replacing it. Speaking of that, do y’all think I need more than just a tube welded between the rear subframes? Like angle supports welding from the tube to a lower are on the subframe. Would that Just be a waste of material and add weight, or be helpful?
I’m taking a hard look at those dang torque boxes too. Remember, there won’t be any movement of the lower IRS mount like there would be with a control arm. Maybe it could be redone, maybe completely?
Did you consider leaving the backing plate of the upper uca mount for attachment to the floor?The main point of adding the bar after removing the upper control mounts was to add support to the floor since that was removed with the upper control arm mounts.
Since my ex won’t be driving this car I don’t have to worry about the 1.2g cornering force being exceeded.The whole point of hard mounting the front of the cradle in my situation was to reduce the amount of deflection that occurs in the IRS cradle at the point it bends to engage the torque boxes. This only seemed to occur when corner forces exceeded 1.2g's in my simulations.
You and Chris and your suggestions......Have you considered putting an IRS in this car?
Gonna do it before Noobz does it:You and Chris and your suggestions......