Quad shock,that weight on the rearend ?'s

I don't think that 9lb dogbone on the rear diff. housing serves any useful purpose except to provide a jacking point. I removed mine long ago with no ill effects. If you've upgraded the rear lower control arms, you can get rid of the quad shocks with mounting brackets and save a further 5lb.

yeah, just an undercarriage ornament to me

lincoln+ford said:

Okay i know the quad shock really isnt worth a damn having on there from what i hear.

Click to expand...

IMHO, stop listening to ricers.

Hmm, I guess that many people never realized that the Fox cars have only 4 studs holding on the wheels. Yet, the same people say that the EXTRA COST and weight that the Ford engineers added for the quads and diff weight are "a total waste". Thank goodness that NONE of those people are design engineers.

They *both* serve a purpose. Otherwise, the bean counters at Ford never ever in a zillion years would have allowed the EXTRA COST!! Uhm, does that makes sense? If not, I strongly suggest that people learn about the real world and what's involved in having a successful real world product.


The quads help prevent wheel hop when accelerating quickly. Yes, it's really that simple! From a "bean counter" justification, the quads help to prevent wheel hop in quarter mile runs.

*** In the real world, quarter mile times sell cars like the Stang! ***
Uhm, let me repeat that:
In the real world, quarter mile times sell cars like the Stang!


So, although the quads may be of limited or no use in regular daily driving, like the reason for going with the E7 heads and different EFI upper (from the '86), the 5.0 HO Stang is designed for better quarter mile times, even if it's at the expense of a "better" car for daily use.

BTW: For a daily driver setup, the E6 heads and '86 intake are better because they provide more HP and torque at the low-end and mid-range. Also, better idle quality, better gas mileage, and lower smog emissions. But, again, quarter mile times sell cars like the Stang. And, even with the 87+ setup (E7 heads and intake), the 5.0 has plenty of low-end and mid-range power.




The weight on the diff is another topic. It's similar to how clueless people talk about lowering a car. Most people don't have a clue about tolerances in the real world. Or, suspension considerations. So, they repeat ricer BS that "sounds good".

The weight on the differential is there to reduce the harmonics in the drive-train that SOMETIMES exist. Again, this deals with real world issues, tolerances, and differences. Something, that ricers clearly don't have the slightest clue about.

If you go to an aluminum drive shaft, then the harmonics and setup of the drive-train change.


BTW, the following article has math, science, and facts. So, ricers should stay FAR FAR AWAY from the article or their brain will explode!
TCCoA Transmission Article - Page 17


BTW: Although I did love my '86 engine, for many reasons, I went with an 87+ setup when I did my rebuild. For one thing, I have only one more smog inspection for my car before it gets smog check exempt because of it's age (25+ years in Conn).

Bullitt95 said:

I don't think that 9lb dogbone on the rear diff. housing serves any useful purpose except to provide a jacking point. I removed mine long ago with no ill effects. If you've upgraded the rear lower control arms, you can get rid of the quad shocks with mounting brackets and save a further 5lb.

Click to expand...

The upgraded rear control arms and bushings don't effect the need or use of the dog-bone.

However, upgraded rear control arms and bushings may allow for the removal of the quads. However, there are issues with possible bushing binding with poly bushings, along with the additional stress put on the POS torque boxes. IMHO, don't even thing of going to poly bushings or better control arms until the torque boxes get reinforced. Especially on these 20+ year old Fox bodies!

Put the quad shocks back on if you took them off or don’t have them installed.

The quad shocks are a roll of the dice. No matter what the combination of tires, control arms and shocks, some cars will wheel hop without quad shocks and some won't. There are so many variables in 28-13 year old cars with wear, misalignment and combinations of suspension components and tires that one unchanging answer won't work for everyone.

I personally would install them, and make sure they are in good shape. I do know this, that Ford is cheap. If they could have made changes in some simple component like bushings or control arm construction and saved $10, they would have done it. Multiply $10 times all the Fox body Mustangs ever made and you would be almost as rich as Donald Trump. That's a lot of $$$, and good incentive to engineer something to do away with the quad shocks.

I would have the torque box plates welded in for the best results. you can get them from 50resto..
Products - Latemodel Restoration Supply

I have an upgraded rear suspension, braces, aluminum DS, and totally rebuilt rearend and I left the dog bone on and rear quads. Don't know about the dog bone didn't fidle with it but I was not going to roll the dice on wheel hop. Like already mentioned some cars do it some don't but wheel hop isn't good and loss of control could be the result. My next upgrade is a mms panhard bar. Just leave them on IMHO.

+1 with green svt...wheel hop can result on some cars depending on the condition of the car. my buddy took his off...wheel hop with control arms...if your looking to lose 3lbs from your car go on a diet...that stuff is there for a reason.
Posted via Mobile Device

The "dogbone" is there for NVH only. (noise vibration harshness) I have removed more than 75 of them over the years with only 1 person complaining about it. And he did not complain until 6 months later when he noticed it missing. I put it back on to make him happy. If you have modified the car at all, then the "dogbone" is really not doing its job anymore, because you changed the dynamics of the car that it was "tuned" to. The "quad" shocks are there because Ford was to cheap to set up the rear suspension right from the beginning, and it was cheaper to band aid it with a quad, than actually design the rear suspension geometry correctly. I have also removed the quads many times with no ill effects, if the rear is set up right. The other benefit of removing the quads is added wheel and tire clearance, let alone the weight savings.

I removed my dogbone many years ago with no ill effects even when I had stock gears (minus 8 or 9 lbs.). I have 3:55's along with an aluminum drive shaft and quads and it's all good.

put the quads back in upside down and that will give you more clearance. I have a set of police/taxi upper control arms as well as edelbrock lowers and springs for a little bit of nothing.

stang&2Birds said:

IMHO, stop listening to ricers.

Click to expand...

LOL, ricers. I didn't realise that our Mustangs were made in Japan.
Anyway, I have a 3.73 rear end and an aluminium driveshaft so, for me, the dogbone is just a 9lb paperweight.
I have MM lower control arms and Edelbrock uppers (both sets have spherical bearings at one end, 3-piece poly bushings at other) so there's NO BIND and they won't tear up the torque boxes. I agree that torque box reinforcement is essential on older cars especially if there's likely to be rust. Quad shocks are no use if you have good control arms, and the factory only fitted them to suppress wheel hop because the stock control arm bushings flex too much.