• Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech

lowering vs. 1/4 mile times...

  • Thread starter Thread starter stangliter04
  • Start date Start date Mar 27, 2006

stangliter04

New Member
Apr 4, 2005
185
0
0
Port St John, Florida
Mar 27, 2006
#1
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #1
Do you guys think with the suspension mods I have in my sig it will hurt my 1/4 mile times??? (not that they are fast anyway but just wondering)
 

ToplessStang

Member
Mar 7, 2004
591
0
17
Montreal, Canada
Mar 27, 2006
#2
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #2
Your setup is pretty much like what I have on my car. I run on the stock GoodYear tires. Didn't change my 60ft to much. My best with stock suspension was 2.037 and my best with the suspension change is 2.042. It's worth it in my book.
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Mar 27, 2006
#3
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #3
Any time you lower, or stiffen your suspension, you're going to hurt your quarter mile times. It may be a little, it may be a lot. How much, depends on how extreme your set up is.
 

tonys5.0

New Member
Sep 17, 2004
122
0
0
Jacksonville, FL
Mar 27, 2006
#4
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #4
Gearbanger 101 said:
Any time you lower, or stiffen your suspension, you're going to hurt your quarter mile times. It may be a little, it may be a lot. How much, depends on how extreme your set up is.
Click to expand...


Why does lowering or suspension stiffening hurt your quarter mile times?
 

DocG

5th graders > me. They're not bant
Sep 25, 2005
8,297
1,358
194
Cincinnati area
Mar 27, 2006
#5
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #5
My best guess would be you want soft suspension in the back so the weight will transfer more.
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Mar 27, 2006
#6
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #6
tonys5.0 said:
Why does lowering or suspension stiffening hurt your quarter mile times?
Click to expand...
DocG2828 said:
My best guess would be you want soft suspension in the back so the weight will transfer more.
Click to expand...
Exactly....soft in the rear end, so the car "squats" on launch and loose in the front end, so the springs extend and it comes up when you nail it. If it's too stiff all the way around, you get neither of these and the car does nothing but buff ash vault.
 

Jackie Chan

I didn't read this.
Founding Member
Oct 17, 2002
2,507
4
48
Orlando, FL
Mar 27, 2006
#7
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #7
it all depends on the dynamics of the suspension. weight transfer to the extreme doesnt always mean better 60's. I have cut mid 1.8s on street tires in my cobra with a slammed susp.
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Mar 27, 2006
#8
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #8
Jackie Chan said:
it all depends on the dynamics of the suspension. weight transfer to the extreme doesnt always mean better 60's. I have cut mid 1.8s on street tires in my cobra with a slammed susp.
Click to expand...
Just think about how much better you could have done with softer springs.
 

tomustang

Psychotic Member
Founding Member
Jun 8, 2000
3,434
2
78
McLean Hospital
Mar 27, 2006
#9
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #9
Gearbanger 101 said:
Just think about how much better you could have done with softer springs.
Click to expand...
it's more about the shocks, the rear springs don't have too much of a difference since it's a live axle in the back, some rear springs run progressivly lower than stock springs, up to around 300lb

stock: 210
steeda sport: 200-250

you can't really get alot stiffer in the rear
 

DropTopPony

Noob Slayer
Founding Member
Aug 13, 2002
2,570
3
48
south jersey
Mar 27, 2006
#10
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #10
tomustang said:
you can't really get alot stiffer in the rear
Click to expand...

you keep your stiffness away from my rear!
 

steveb24

New Member
Nov 28, 2005
555
0
0
wilmington, DE
Mar 27, 2006
#11
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #11
would lca's solve any of this problem..jw cause i have the h&r ss setup with lca's..which i love
 

steveb24

New Member
Nov 28, 2005
555
0
0
wilmington, DE
Mar 27, 2006
#12
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #12
and i know lca's are supposed to "plant" the rear more on the ground
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Mar 27, 2006
#13
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #13
Contrary to popular belief, going with a set of LCA's don't necessarily translate to better 60ft times. Truth be told, LCA's are actually going to hurt you in the first 60ft on street tires. Great for use on a car running a stiff chassis and slicks, but not so great on your average stocker.

The problem being, is that there is next to no flex because of their rigid construction and hard durometer rubber, urethane or solid bushings. This is great for consistency and getting all of the power to the pavement, but getting all of that power to the pavement right off the bat isn’t always a good thing. Unfortunately the power soaking stock arms that are often responsible for unpredictable 60ft times are also great for absorbing that initial "shock" that's realized through the rear end when one comes off the line and often breaks the tires loose. Without the springy stock arms in place to do this, the forgiveness that you would normally get, isn’t going to be there.

Bottom line…..if you’re going to build your rear suspension for drag racing, then actually build it to drag race. Many have tried the multi purpose route, or putting in the odd part here and there because some buddy of theirs said it would help, but in the end the only real winners at the strip are going to be the ones that were purpose built to do just that.
 

Black Stang 97

the guy on top of me is funny
Nov 11, 2004
483
0
0
Los Angeles, CA
Mar 27, 2006
#14
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #14
droptopponynj said:
you keep your stiffness away from my rear!
Click to expand...


LMAO!!!!!
 

Mike97gt

it doe snot
Founding Member
Jan 26, 1999
10,633
7
89
the people's republic of massachusetts
Mar 27, 2006
#15
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #15
Gearbanger 101 said:
Contrary to popular belief, going with a set of LCA's don't necessarily translate to better 60ft times. Truth be told, LCA's are actually going to hurt you in the first 60ft on street tires. Great for use on a car running a stiff chassis and slicks, but not so great on your average stocker.

The problem being, is that there is next to no flex because of their rigid construction and hard durometer rubber, urethane or solid bushings. This is great for consistency and getting all of the power to the pavement, but getting all of that power to the pavement right off the bat isn’t always a good thing. Unfortunately the power soaking stock arms that are often responsible for unpredictable 60ft times are also great for absorbing that initial "shock" that's realized through the rear end when one comes off the line and often breaks the tires loose. Without the springy stock arms in place to do this, the forgiveness that you would normally get, isn’t going to be there.

Bottom line…..if you’re going to build your rear suspension for drag racing, then actually build it to drag race. Many have tried the multi purpose route, or putting in the odd part here and there because some buddy of theirs said it would help, but in the end the only real winners at the strip are going to be the ones that were purpose built to do just that.
Click to expand...


Agreed. when I have the money I will build up the rest of my suspension. in fact I considered waiting to install my control arms untill I get some sticky tires, build the rear end and springs.
 

Chili

New Member
May 2, 2005
174
0
0
Euless, TX
Mar 27, 2006
#16
  • Mar 27, 2006
  • #16
My best with my stock suspension, last October, was 8.64.. Over the winter I went to Sportlines with CC plates and the bumpsteer kit, and switched from the stock 8" wheels in the rear to 10.5". No other changes were made (see mods in sig). I went out yesterday, in warmer weather and higher humidity, and pulled an 8.71 with a comperable 60 (1.89 in October, 1.90 yesterday).

The drop didn't have as much effect as I expected it to. I expected to be stuck in the 8.8's to 8.9's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
Strange steering/brake issue
  • Haxmaster
  • Jun 2, 2026
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
1
Views
74
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Jun 3, 2026
squeak93
F
For Sale 03 Redfire Cobra Convertible
  • FastFox5oh
  • Tuesday at 4:34 AM
  • SN95 Mustangs For Sale (1994-04)
Replies
0
Views
26
SN95 Mustangs For Sale (1994-04) Tuesday at 4:34 AM
FastFox5oh
F
M
4.10 gears = 200,000 miles ?
  • michaelleewebb
  • Apr 1, 2026
  • SN95 V6 Mustang Tech
Replies
5
Views
210
SN95 V6 Mustang Tech Apr 2, 2026
michaelleewebb
M
S
Engine 2003 Mach 1 Automatic Upgrades assistance
  • SJK1417M1AT
  • Sep 25, 2025
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
3
Views
291
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Dec 21, 2025
01SVTvertt
0
Suspension Setting Front Alignment - Do I care about the rear's thrust angle?
  • dan50
  • Nov 27, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
5
Views
320
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Nov 28, 2025
Kid wita 5oh
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?