HEIDT's Rear 4-Link& sub-frame connectors

[project.65]

I never heard of this company. Are they new? Does anyone have these or does anyone have any opinions about them? They seem pretty kool.
(I think they're new)
http://www.mustangdepot.com/OnLineCatalog/Suspension/4_link.htm

...they make sub-frame connectors too!
http://www.mustangdepot.com/OnLineCatalog/Suspension/subframe-connectors.htm

 

[bnickel]

heidts has been around forever but they are primarily a street rod shop.

the 4 link looks really nice and i believe there are at least a few people here that have used it, though i'm unsure if any of those projects are finished yet.

the sub frames look very much like a copy of the TCP sub frames and their X-brace as well.

 

[reenmachine]

I never heard of this company. Are they new? Does anyone have these or does anyone have any opinions about them? They seem pretty kool.
(I think they're new)
http://www.mustangdepot.com/OnLineCatalog/Suspension/4_link.htm

...they make sub-frame connectors too!
http://www.mustangdepot.com/OnLineCatalog/Suspension/subframe-connectors.htm

There's nothing new about Heidt's but their 4-link kit is relatively new. K.A.R. put it in a '64-1/2 Mustang and took it to All-Ford Nationals and it drove and rode awesome. I experienced it myself. Two things you need to know:

1) It's not a bolt-in kit. Yes, it bolts to the car (after you drill a bunch of holes), but you need to weld all of the brackets to the axle housing.

2) If you're putting it in a '64-'66 Mustang with an 8" there are fitment issues. K.A.R. has custom adapters based on their experience with the kit that they sell with it (not separately).

A customer of mine installed it as well in his '65 with a 347 and says that the car hooks like nobody's business.

 

[68EFIvert]

Reen, I have heard that 4 links hook up well in a straight line from many people but how well did it handle the twisties? Would one be better off with a triangulated 4 bar like the TCP G-Bar (same as the Air Ride Technologies Air Bar but with coil overs instead of bags) setup for that type of application?

 

[reenmachine]

Reen, I have heard that 4 links hook up well in a straight line from many people but how well did it handle the twisties? Would one be better off with a triangulated 4 bar like the TCP G-Bar (same as the Air Ride Technologies Air Bar but with coil overs instead of bags) setup for that type of application?

It felt great to me. No, I didn't do any skidpad tests or use a g-meter or anything, but I liked the way the car rode & handled. The new owner is psyched on it as well. The car has the Ron Morris front on it and the two worked well together.

The triangulation of a triangulated 4-link is one way to control the axle's side-to-side motion. The Heidt's 4-link is a parallel 4-link, but it has a Panhard bar to do the same thing. It's basically equivalent in street terms. If you're interested in handling at 10/10ths, the Panhard bar doesn't quite perfectly control the motion, and the triangulated 4-link can bind, but those are things that shouldn't concern 95% of users.

I like the RRS 3-link. It's got a Watt's Link, which is the best way to control lateral axle motion, and a long torque arm to drastically reduce binding. Of course, it's expensive like any high-end thing is.

 

[68EFIvert]

The RRS is a very nice piece of work. I would do it as well but I have a convertible so it nixed that very quickly. I am running a Ron Morris front kit so maybe I should look at the Heidt's kit one more time. I pretty much made up my mind on using the TCP 4 bar kit. It now comes down to intallating costs. Is there much work on the Heidt's kit for labor. I know the G-Bar system has a small amount of welding. Are the brackets hard to align on the axle housing? Thanks for the help.

 

[reenmachine]

The RRS is a very nice piece of work. I would do it as well but I have a convertible so it nixed that very quickly. I am running a Ron Morris front kit so maybe I should look at the Heidt's kit one more time. I pretty much made up my mind on using the TCP 4 bar kit. It now comes down to intallating costs. Is there much work on the Heidt's kit for labor. I know the G-Bar system has a small amount of welding. Are the brackets hard to align on the axle housing? Thanks for the help.

There's a bit more welding on the Heidt's kit, but it's the same type of stuff. I believe that on the AirBar/G-Bar you just have to weld on the tabs that mount the triangulated links to the axle housing near the pumpkin. On the Heidt's 4-link you have to weld the main structure in the spring perch area instead of bolting it on. They're not hard to align, but you have to pay attention to what you're doing, especially pinion angle.

 

[bnickel]

hmm, as far as the welding goes i think i'd rather have something that requires less welding, the TCP kit would work great for me except they don't make it for a cougar

 

[68EFIvert]

As usual Reen you are a great source of information. I think I will stick with my original plan and go with TCP. Less things to screw up during installation.

 

[ron67fb]

I like the RRS 3-link. It's got a Watt's Link, which is the best way to control lateral axle motion, and a long torque arm to drastically reduce binding. Of course, it's expensive like any high-end thing is.

The long arm actually promotes binding thanks to their no-plunge front bushing. Those three arms swing at a different arc and it is geometrically impossible for the axle to move freely, so something has to give.

 

[68GT500KR_Vert]

http://www.rcmotorsports.net/RearCoiloverKit.html

R&C has a bolt on kit that's real nice. I bought it and it's real strong and well built. You can also swap the coil-overs and air bags whenever you wanted. He's sell you the kit with out the coil-overs

 

[bnickel]

The long arm actually promotes binding thanks to their no-plunge front bushing. Those three arms swing at a different arc and it is geometrically impossible for the axle to move freely, so something has to give.

Ron, RRS has changed the design of torque arm and the way it mounts, it has a link similar to the TCP pushrod rear suspension's link now and they have also redesigned the way it mounts to the rearend, so that should take some, though probably not all, of the bind out of the system.

 

[bnickel]

http://www.rcmotorsports.net/RearCoiloverKit.html

R&C has a bolt on kit that's real nice. I bought it and it's real strong and well built. You can also swap the coil-overs and air bags whenever you wanted. He's sell you the kit with out the coil-overs

sorry, no way in hell i'd use that system on any car. that upper link mount on the rear diff looks absolutely hokie, please tell me they aren't putting all that of that suspension load through those three 3/8" studs on the diff housing.

 

[C0V3R]

sorry, no way in hell i'd use that system on any car. that upper link mount on the rear diff looks absolutely hokie, please tell me they aren't putting all that of that suspension load through those three 3/8" studs on the diff housing.

+1

 

[Cobra5.0Jeep]

Martz chassis is better

 

[reenmachine]

The long arm actually promotes binding thanks to their no-plunge front bushing. Those three arms swing at a different arc and it is geometrically impossible for the axle to move freely, so something has to give.

Interesting and true, but we're talking small numbers here. Not having the kit in front of me but having a car to measure, I estimated that the torque arm is 61" long and the trailing arms are 22". With those numbers, when there's 4" of vertical suspension movement (that's a lot, but not unreasonable), there's less than a quarter inch of difference in where the long and short links want to place the axle from front to rear. An eighth of an inch for each bushing to absorb on a big hit. Hmmm. That's not that unreasonble, but not a tiny amount either. Obviously under normal street/track conditions the numbers would be smaller, but still not warm & fuzzy.

I sent them an email to see if they can clear it up better.

 

[reenmachine]

Martz chassis is better

Now there's an info-packed post. Thanks!

 

[bnickel]

Now there's an info-packed post. Thanks!

well if it's a comparison of the Martz 4 link to the R&C 4 link, you don't need much more info than that, really.

 

[mikethebike]

Reen, I have heard that 4 links hook up well in a straight line from many people but how well did it handle the twisties? Would one be better off with a triangulated 4 bar like the TCP G-Bar (same as the Air Ride Technologies Air Bar but with coil overs instead of bags) setup for that type of application?

The problem with the triabgulated 4-link is the binding. That's why Ford and Chevy quit using them and went to the 3-link and torque arm. I've looked at the Heigdts 4-link and I LIKE IT. If I don't use their IRS I may go that route.

 

[68GT500KR_Vert]

well if it's a comparison of the Martz 4 link to the R&C 4 link, you don't need much more info than that, really.

Another intelligent post with backed up info. Have you looked at the unit? Did you talk to R&C?

I talked to Heidts and looked at the unit, I sent it back. The quality was not even close. The R&C unit had much higher grade components and it built to a high standard. I also chose to weld mine in for added strength. I was also impressed with R&C's front end which is why I choose them after seeing the quality of the Heidt's unit.

Now Reen said he drove in a car with this unit and he liked it, but no one has driven in the a car with the R&C unit; so I'd wait until others check it out before you rip it.