anyone interested in a new watts link and a 3 or 4 link in here

[Sundance]

You are right sundance....the thread has taken a turn for the heavy.

I prefer to flame or praise after I do the install. While I was bored waiting for the watts, I didn't have money or an undrivable car tied up waiting for it so I guess I in the minority. I simply got in on the pre-buy. Made a commitment to purchase and then paid for the item when it shipped.

It would be great if the 3 link is out before winter though cause than I can install it during the cold winter months here in the N.E. when I decided to stop driving the car because of a little icy road and truck incident a few years back.

In your situation it works out. I'd imagine that if need be you would be happy to use leaf springs if the three link never came to be?

In my case, and presumably for the others that dropped their pre-order, I'm in it for the three link. I see avoidance in that area and that honestly concerns me. I could speculate the reasons for not releasing pictures or information about the three link, but I digress.

 

[dodgestang]

ohhh I want the 3 link too

 

[Evolution]

OK, we were going to go through and post another long post and exhaustively go through each point, but that would probably create the need for another post, then another.

Basically, this is where we are at. We are designing a 3 link rear suspension for the vintage Mustang/Falcon/Cougar. It will be a bolt-in unit, that will require no modifications to the existing body structure of the vehicle, beyond a few drill holes….We are done with the watts link, now the next piece to complete is the Trilink, followed by the adjustable rear stabilizer bar.

When would we like this to be done? Now.
When do we plan on having it complete? TriLink – 10/06, Stabilizer Bar 11/06
When will it actually be done? Who knows, **** happens. We are a small company and any one of a hundred things can affect our bandwidth: production, website, race team, marriage, children, vacations, holidays, etc….Nevertheless, if we don’t meet our planned date it should be within a few weeks of the date.

We have heard the words like alibi, speculation and avoidance. What are we avoiding??? It's rather simple, the product is coming. We stated in our last post that we were waiting for the production watts to finish up the development of the TriLink, so nothing has been done as far as fitting items. The TriLink will consist of 2 lcas, an upper link, a cradle that mounts to the watts and a cradle that mounts to the diff. There are a host of ways to attach the cradle to the diff, we just need to arrive at the one that is most amenable to a bolt in application. We are deciding if we want billet lcas or tubular lcas…That is what we are looking into now. In the past we have posted pre-pre production photos of the things we cobble up during development. What happens is people take that as the gospel, then question every nook and cranny, which essentially derails our time. Then if that piece changes another round of questioning ensues. After, the release of our TriLink for the late model Mustangs we decided that would no longer occur. When we have a production prototype of the TriLink system it will be posted. Then it will be 4-6 weeks until production is complete.

We understand everyone is waiting. Hell I don’t even have the Watts for my Fastback. Believe me, this will be complete, my 66 Fastback is looking forward to it.

We are not sure what else to say. We are not dodging questions or whatever it is you think we are doing. We are simply developing a new product and balancing our time between the rest of the business and family commitments. It took us a year to bring the late model TriLink to market. It just takes time. We will not sacrifice build quality or performance to meet a date.


Thanks….Mike

 

[bnickel]

thanks for the update Mike!!! good luck, hope all goes well.

 

[Evolution]

thanks for the update Mike!!! good luck, hope all goes well.

thanks....

Mike

 

[Sundance]

Thank you for the reply.

 

[70vert]

quick note - FINALLY got the Watt's installed, and the tail no longer wags the dog. Car feels MUCH more solid - my original leafs with worn-out rubber bushings were allowing a lot of lateral movement. It really feels planted now - I couldn't be happier at this point with the handling. She don't go fast yet, but she handles sweet.

Pics to come . . .

oh, and I have no idea how one could fit an over-the-axle exhaust in there. You'll see in the pics.

 

[70vert]

here are the installation pics

The shop had nothing but praise for the design and quality of workmanship. It's a great piece.

http://web.mac.com/jbauder/iWeb/6970clutchpedals/Post-Watt%27s.html

 

[180 Out]

Looks good!

I have no idea how one could fit an over-the-axle exhaust in there.

I said that the first time I saw a pic of this kit. I don't think you'll have a problem on the passenger side, but the driver's side has the high transverse link in the way of the normal tailpipe, and the cradle gets in the way of routing it up high and next to the gas tank. Here's a pic of how you do it with the Fays2 kit:

The Fays2 has the high link on the passenger side (which is what you're seeing in this pic). There's a channel between the gas tank and the "frame" rail there, and that's where you run the exhaust. I believe the channel on the driver side is too narrow to use for a tailpipe. But in any event the Evolution's cradle gets in the way.

Here's what a normal tailpipe looks like on a Fays2 car, on the driver's side (which should be the same as the passenger side with the Evolution):

Because the transverse link is lower on this side it doesn't get in the way of a normal tailpipe.

Thing is, you won't want to run a rear exit exhaust on one side and a turn down on the other. You might run the driver's side *under* the axle, like the Fatman airshock kit does: http://www.fatmanfab.com/07page20.htm . Personally I think that's pretty hokey. I'd go with side pipes myself. In fact, Dr. Gas has these NASCAR style mufflers for a single exhaust setup that I'd try on my own Mustang if I didn't have frame connectors in the way:

I might do it anyway, and just have the exhaust dump inside the frame connectors.

One more Fays2 comparison is that the Evolution has those braces running from the center chunk to the axle tube mounts for the transverse links. The Fays2 doesn't have those. More bracing is usually better than less.

 

[CochinoFilipino]

Every time this thread come up I think there's new news on the 3-link.

But Glad to hear that you like your watts link

 

[70vert]

good stuff.

Great photos and explanations - that really shows what it's like to get the exhaust up in there. I took it down to a local shop with a great reputation for a Magnaflow exhaust install and he just couldn't do it with 2.5" pipes. There are other problems since this is a convertible, but he said he could probably do 2" pipes, provided I didn't lower it any more than 1". Stock ride height.

So it seems like most of us doing this kit (I am assuming that a lot of people want to lower the stock ride height) will probably have to dump before the axle or do a side-exit exhaust. Unless you like small exhaust tubes and a stock height on the rear. I may go to another reputable shop here to get a second opinion, but it looks like Magnaflow = no go.

That's an interesting Nascar-style exhaust. I haven't seen those before, would have to see them on a car. I also have subframes in the way of a side exit exhaust, so I will probably have to turn down before axle.

Note to everyone involved: If you want an exhaust nightmare, do an X-pipe in a convertible with a Watt's link on the rear. Tons of fun!

Looks good!


I said that the first time I saw a pic of this kit. I don't think you'll have a problem on the passenger side, but the driver's side has the high transverse link in the way of the normal tailpipe, and the cradle gets in the way of routing it up high and next to the gas tank. Here's a pic of how you do it with the Fays2 kit:

The Fays2 has the high link on the passenger side (which is what you're seeing in this pic). There's a channel between the gas tank and the "frame" rail there, and that's where you run the exhaust. I believe the channel on the driver side is too narrow to use for a tailpipe. But in any event the Evolution's cradle gets in the way.

Here's what a normal tailpipe looks like on a Fays2 car, on the driver's side (which should be the same as the passenger side with the Evolution):



Because the transverse link is lower on this side it doesn't get in the way of a normal tailpipe.

Thing is, you won't want to run a rear exit exhaust on one side and a turn down on the other. You might run the driver's side *under* the axle, like the Fatman airshock kit does: http://www.fatmanfab.com/07page20.htm . Personally I think that's pretty hokey. I'd go with side pipes myself. In fact, Dr. Gas has these NASCAR style mufflers for a single exhaust setup that I'd try on my own Mustang if I didn't have frame connectors in the way:



I might do it anyway, and just have the exhaust dump inside the frame connectors.

One more Fays2 comparison is that the Evolution has those braces running from the center chunk to the axle tube mounts for the transverse links. The Fays2 doesn't have those. More bracing is usually better than less.

 

[dodgestang]

With a lot of help from my Bro we were able to install the evolution motorsports new vintage mustang Bolt in Watts link into the 65. We were in there anyway cleaning up the mess from the track break so it seemed like the right time.

Installation wasn't too complex and it really is a bolt in unit, that suprisingly enough fit right into my beat up old 65 without a problem. Here's a couple shots so you can see it installed. I can't wait to get the rest of the car buttoned up so I can test drive it now

 

[bnickel]

very nice Nick, let us know how it works out!!!!!

 

[70vert]

heh, wish I had a lift to get pics as good as that. Great work, can't wait to hear how it handles. Looks like you have those leafs under control!

It looks like it's time to ping Mike at EvM again - I was composing an email to him and thought I would check the thread for more news first. I'll let everyone know if there's any news.

 

[Evolution]

Everyone,

We had a few quick questions as we wrap up development on our three link rear suspension system.

1. We will be offering two LCA options, steel and aluminum. The Aluminum LCAs will have the option to go with urethane or spherical bearings, and the steel will only have the spherical bearing option. Is there any need to offer the urethane for the steel links? If so, will you pay extra (it is more expensive to produce)? We are assuming most people would opt for the aluminum links. Nevertheless, should we offer an option for urethane in the standard LCAs.

2. We are trying to determine if we should maintain and protect the suspension clearances for a vehicle at stock ride height. Is that necessary? Right now we have assumed the average enthusiast will lower their car approximately 1 ½”. If you are installing this suspension, would you run at stock ride height? If not what are the standard drops?

3. Would you weld or bolt in this system? The system is 99% bolt-in. Just one bracket for the rear mount will be weld on. We can do a bolt in bracket, it is just a bulkier piece. Is the weld in bracket for the upper link a major issue?

4. Quick question related to axle housings. Does anyone know if there is a dimensional difference between the 8" and 9" Ford axle housings? Specifically, is the pumpkin section of the 9" housing taller and/or deeper that the 8" housing? We are working on the rear mount for the three link and just wanted to make sure we account for any variations if they exist.

Any info would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks...Mike

 

[dodgestang]

1. Aluminum
2. 3 link, watts, if you are running stock ride height you are wasting money on this setup (IMO) however, I do know alot of people that aren't into the whole 'lowered' thing that still might want to upgrade to this type of assemble. From a purely marketing standpoint you will have a larger target audience for a setup that works on stock and lowered
3. I don't mind welding in one peice...but having a truly modular system that is easy to take with me from car to car if I happen to say...drive under an 18 wheeler and wreck my car again....does have a certain appeal to me. One welded bracket is easy enough to move though.
4. When I had my 8 and 9 next to each other I saw no perceptable differences....but I also did not measure.

Question...with your 3 link, will I be able to set ride height side to side? I have a slight tweak in my frame rail that causes one side to sit about 1/4 inch lower that I would like to be able to dial out without breaking out the cutting torch and welder since it is more of an annoyance than anything else to me.

 

[Evolution]

Question...with your 3 link, will I be able to set ride height side to side? I have a slight tweak in my frame rail that causes one side to sit about 1/4 inch lower that I would like to be able to dial out without breaking out the cutting torch and welder since it is more of an annoyance than anything else to me.

Thanks for the comments. They are greatly appreciated.

As for setting ride height side to side, you will be able to do that through the coil-overs. So, you won't need to break out the torch.

Thanks...Mike

 

[bnickel]

Mike, i would think that not offering the steel LCA with a poly bushing wouldn't make a huge difference but it wouldn't hurt to have as an extra cost option for someone that maybe would rather replace the urethane bushing with maybe a Delrin bushing or possibly even offer that as an extra cost option for both aluminum and steel instead of urethane in both versions, that would be something i definitely wouldn't mind paying extra for. just a suggestion, but as far as having an option for a poly bushing in the steel arm, No, i wouldn't think it would be necessary.

most people that install this system would want a lower ride height for sure but as Dodgestang pointed out there are always those hold outs and it would be nice to have the option to go either way. i could really only see one othe reason for wanting a stock ride height with this system and that would be if someone lived in a place with bad roads, the roads here where i'm at are not all that great and it would be nice to have the car at stock or only slightly lower height to avoid tearing up the underside of my car, but also be able to lower it down if i take it to the track. for the most part i would probably want my car lowere by about 1-1.5" even in normal driving around town though. again, just trying to look at this from different perspectives and play the devil's advocate a bit.

as far os having only weld in weld in bracket i don't really see that as being a problem for most people that would be looking at this type of suspension but again there would be those hold outs who wouldn't want to do it if it is in't a total bolt in. personally, i don't mind having to do a bit of welding, i mean pretty much everyone that installs this kit would probably have subframe connectors anyway and most would probably weld those in as well, so No i don't think that's a big deal.

ok last one, the diff. the housings are basically not a lot different other than the 9" is a bit taller than the 8" for gear clearance but the center section is a different story, the 9" pumpkin is physically bigger in all dimensions than the 8' chunk, big enough that in most cases swapping an 8" rear for a 9" necessitates a 1" shorter driveshaft so that is somthing that needs to considered.

 

[Evolution]

ok last one, the diff. the housings are basically not a lot different other than the 9" is a bit taller than the 8" for gear clearance but the center section is a different story, the 9" pumpkin is physically bigger in all dimensions than the 8' chunk, big enough that in most cases swapping an 8" rear for a 9" necessitates a 1" shorter driveshaft so that is somthing that needs to considered.

That's the dimension we need (how much taller)? The 9" will be worst case. Our mockup car and my Fastback are both 8" rears, so we need to track down the housing dimensions of the 9"....

Thanks for all of the other comments as well.

Thanks...Mike

 

[bnickel]

That's the dimension we need (how much taller)? The 9" will be worst case. Our mockup car and my Fastback are both 8" rears, so we need to track down the housing dimensions of the 9"....

Thanks for all of the other comments as well.

Thanks...Mike

no problem, i'm pretty sure the 9" is about 1" bigger in all dimensions but the bolt pattern on the for bolting the case to the housing are also different for the 8" and 9"

oh yeah, one more thing, there are also a couple of different 9" housings as well, there is the standard duty housing like the 60's cars used and what a lot of people refer to as the heavy duty housing or late model housing. the difference is that the on the early housings the housing necks down really quick to where it meets the axle tubes and the late model housing has more af a straight angle, in other words it doesn't neck down to the axle tubes but just angles down to the tubes in a straight line, for instance most aftermarket housings are like this and the very popular versailles swap also has this style housing. it may not make much difference to your design but i thought i would at least let you know about. also the late model housing has larger axle tubes as well. late model has 3" axle tubes and most mustang housings have 2.5" or 2.75" axle tubes (can't remember for sure on this one)

i'll see if i can find pics showing the difference between the housings so you can see what i'm talking about.