replacing quad shocks with solid bar?

[GTOreturns]

Those above "performance mods" are all PURE BS!

1) It's STUPID to remove the dogbone on a car that isn't a PURE qtr mile car. It's another classic example of people who do NOT have a Engineering degree in that subject splewing PURE BS about "performance mods". Ford put it there for a reason!
http://www.tccoa.com/articles/tranny/transmission/page17.shtml
If you don't understand EVERYTHING on that page, then do NOT screw around with something you do NOT know about.


2) Only MORONS "adjust" the TPS. Yes,only MORONS can "adjust" a NON ADJUSTABLE PART! There is NO performance mod to be seen from the TPS as long as the EEC does not throw a TPS out of range code.
http://www.veryuseful.com/mustang/tech/engine/Mustang-TPS-FAQ.html
(I design/architect computer control/response systems for a living and taught control/response systems. What "qualifications" do those other people have? Grand Master of Nintendo?)

3) Removing the EGR coolant hose with a working EGR is again STUPID. Again, clueless people doing mods when they don't have the knowledge or education.
One thing the coolant hose does is to "cool" the intake because it can get hot from the EGR. It also "helps" in some Very Rare Very Cold conditions. But, now, it's been determined/shown that in reality, under real-life conditions it's much harder go get icing in the upper than the OEM's once thought. Also, with changes in the EGR set up, better computer EGR algorithms, and better intake designs to further reducing the possibility of icing, many OEM's no longer "heat up" the intake.



Last: The same is true for removing the Quad shocks without going to a new rear-end architecture. New UCAs and LCAs (without the quads) are NOT enough to keep the rear-end in alignment under heavy acceleration! Again, unless someone has some Mechanical Engineering background (I'm "3/4th's" an ME by course credits. But, I don't need the "official ME degree". I have a MS in CS/EE/CE along with some PhD work and 8 semesters of teaching Engineering.), then do NOT go around modifying a Ford design unless you're going by a WELL RESPECTED after-market company.

Although, "well respected company" does bring up a sore point with me on how Flaming River has MORONS working for them and how they should be sued massively for selling MORONIC designs that even a 2nd year ME would know is UNSAFE!. Do a search on the Corral for my name and Flaming River.

So, even "well respected" company's (Note: C&L is NOT respected!) can sell cr*p that is dangerous!

No degree here but I know for a fact that adjusting the TPS (black piece on top of TB) makes a difference in throttle response.

 

[Mustang5L5]

Those above "performance mods" are all PURE BS!

1) It's STUPID to remove the dogbone on a car that isn't a PURE qtr mile car. It's another classic example of people who do NOT have a Engineering degree in that subject splewing PURE BS about "performance mods". Ford put it there for a reason!
http://www.tccoa.com/articles/tranny/transmission/page17.shtml
If you don't understand EVERYTHING on that page, then do NOT screw around with something you do NOT know about.


2) Only MORONS "adjust" the TPS. Yes,only MORONS can "adjust" a NON ADJUSTABLE PART! There is NO performance mod to be seen from the TPS as long as the EEC does not throw a TPS out of range code.
http://www.veryuseful.com/mustang/tech/engine/Mustang-TPS-FAQ.html
(I design/architect computer control/response systems for a living and taught control/response systems. What "qualifications" do those other people have? Grand Master of Nintendo?)

3) Removing the EGR coolant hose with a working EGR is again STUPID. Again, clueless people doing mods when they don't have the knowledge or education.
One thing the coolant hose does is to "cool" the intake because it can get hot from the EGR. It also "helps" in some Very Rare Very Cold conditions. But, now, it's been determined/shown that in reality, under real-life conditions it's much harder go get icing in the upper than the OEM's once thought. Also, with changes in the EGR set up, better computer EGR algorithms, and better intake designs to further reducing the possibility of icing, many OEM's no longer "heat up" the intake.



Last: The same is true for removing the Quad shocks without going to a new rear-end architecture. New UCAs and LCAs (without the quads) are NOT enough to keep the rear-end in alignment under heavy acceleration! Again, unless someone has some Mechanical Engineering background (I'm "3/4th's" an ME by course credits. But, I don't need the "official ME degree". I have a MS in CS/EE/CE along with some PhD work and 8 semesters of teaching Engineering.), then do NOT go around modifying a Ford design unless you're going by a WELL RESPECTED after-market company.

Although, "well respected company" does bring up a sore point with me on how Flaming River has MORONS working for them and how they should be sued massively for selling MORONIC designs that even a 2nd year ME would know is UNSAFE!. Do a search on the Corral for my name and Flaming River.

So, even "well respected" company's (Note: C&L is NOT respected!) can sell cr*p that is dangerous!

I wish i could put all that in my siggy.









As for the SN95 spindle myth, the dimensions of track increase are widely misquoted. The common myth that 94-95 spindles DO NOT increase track is incorrect.

The track increase is APPROX 3/8" or about 9.5mm (not officially confirmed yet)

The difference between the 94-95 spindles and the 96+ spindles is 5mm, so that gives you a total of 14.5mm increase over Fox track if you use the 96+ spindles.

The 3/8" number is not confirmed yet, but CAD drawings overlayed have confirmed that the 96+ spindles are 5mm more than the 94-95's.

All this info comes from a Ford engineer who designed the spindles. There was a good thread over on corner-carvers.

 

[Mustang5L5]

Although, "well respected company" does bring up a sore point with me on how Flaming River has MORONS working for them and how they should be sued massively for selling MORONIC designs that even a 2nd year ME would know is UNSAFE!. Do a search on the Corral for my name and Flaming River.

I couldn't find the thread, but i'm curious as to why it's a dumb design. I've never seen the setup so I have no idea what would be wrong with it. Can you give me a quick rundown? I am a full ME BTW

 

[stang&2Birds]

No degree here but I know for a fact that adjusting the TPS (black piece on top of TB) makes a difference in throttle response.

The space aliens want to go probe you again! You are FULL OF IT! If you COULD READ, and you READ my TPS FAQ, you would know why you are FULL OF IT!!

 

[stang&2Birds]

I couldn't find the thread, but i'm curious as to why it's a dumb design. I've never seen the setup so I have no idea what would be wrong with it. Can you give me a quick rundown? I am a full ME BTW

I'm looking... I'll post the link when I find it.

The screws on Flaming River design can come loose.

 

[GTOreturns]

The space aliens want to go probe you again! You are FULL OF IT! If you COULD READ, and you READ my TPS FAQ, you would know why you are FULL OF IT!!

Ahhhhhh,yeah. Dude is your TPS bored so its at .95? So if you looened it,turned it down all the way your saying you couldnt tell the difference? SOTP?

 

[stang&2Birds]

I couldn't find the thread, but i'm curious as to why it's a dumb design. I've never seen the setup so I have no idea what would be wrong with it. Can you give me a quick rundown? I am a full ME BTW

Found it.
Here is the thread with the updated info:
http://www.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=833174

Here is the start of my install.
Note: Do NOT tack weld anything!
http://www.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=828645

I confirmed everything in the "http://www.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=833174" thread with the ME's at work (Aerospace, Defense, Satellite, fighters, etc) . One of the ME's is going to put a Flaming River in his ?67? Stang. He's using safety wire!

 

[stang&2Birds]

Ahhhhhh,yeah. Dude is your TPS bored so its at .95? So if you looened it,turned it down all the way your saying you couldn't tell the difference? SOTP?

I have a FEW THOUSAND dollars or REAL test equipment. I don;t go by moronic clueless Teenager "SOTP" performance. Also, I can READ! READ the Ford Strategy doc. READ the assembler code. Unless you can read assembler, STFU!

 

[Mustang5L5]

Found it.
Here is the thread with the updated info:
http://www.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=833174

Here is the start of my install.
Note: Do NOT tack weld anything!
http://www.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=828645

I confirmed everything in the "http://www.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=833174" thread with the ME's at work (Aerospace, Defense, Satellite, fighters, etc) . One of the ME's is going to put a Flaming River in his ?67? Stang. He's using safety wire!

Holy crap!! Drill dimples!!!! WOuld you want to dive into a 100MPH hard sweeping turns with DIMPLES holding your steering shaft to the manual rack!

You are right, they are really leaving themselves open to a lawsuit. I wonder what PE signed off on that design.

 

[GTOreturns]

I have a FEW THOUSAND dollars or REAL test equipment. I don;t go by moronic clueless Teenager "SOTP" performance. Also, I can READ! READ the Ford Strategy doc. READ the assembler code. Unless you can read assembler, STFU!

I'd be careful with the personal attacks son. I give you alot of credit having the knowledge of reading/operating some of the equipment they use. But stating SOTP feeling moronic is just inexperience on your part. Yes,its not a valid test.But its "real" and has some minor to go by evaluation meaningness!

 

[Daggar]

Lets keep posts on the Discussion/Technical level. We have no need whatsoever for:

Personal Attacks
Name Calling
Abrasive Behavior

Thoughts and opinions can be expressed just as completely without the addition of these things.

I urge members to PM me or other staff members when this type of behavior has been found.

Once again, this is a DISCUSSION FORUM. Inability to conduct youself in a civil manner will result in your account being removed or suspended.

--Daggs

 

[stang&2Birds]

I'd be careful with the personal attacks son. I give you alot of credit having the knowledge of reading/operating some of the equipment they use. But stating SOTP feeling moronic is just inexperience on your part. Yes,its not a valid test.But its "real" and has some minor to go by evaluation meaningless!

"Personal attacks". Hmm, calling SOTP stupid, UNSCIENTIFIC, MEANINGLESS, is in MY view FACT!

It's FACT that you did NOT read my TPS FAQ page and you DID NOT understand what was written!!

It's a FACT that computers just execute code and do NOT think for themselves.

It's a FACT that the Ford SPEC, the ASSEMBLER CODE, and ALL REAL LIFE DATA PROVES that the TPS is zeroed out at start-up.

It's a FACT that SOTP is often BS!!

I design by FACTS! I teach by FACTS!

Maybe you'd like a missile flying around that some person designed by their SOTP feel?

It's clear that you're talking about a TECHNICAL aspect and you do NOT have ANY knowledge or experience in that field. AND, you're going against ALL OF THE FACTS AND DOCUMENTS!

WHAT degree do you have? Is it even in Science?

BTW: I've designed and done architecture on a NUMBER of real-life control systems. I also worked on and raced cars before there was dataloging available for cars and before there was EFI! So, do NOT tell ME about "SOTP" feel.

Last: The assembler code was put on the web over 10 years ago. Today, ANYONE can download and read the code from their EEC! It costs you a WHOLE ~$50. So, instead of continuing to splew ricer BS myths, how about doing some REAL science!

 

[BlackBaer5.0]

Since this is a tech forum I will keep it short...lol

Why so angry there buddy?
I dont normally get in on discussions when one person starts to froth at the keyboard, but buddy you've got it bad. This thread started out with a simple question..and then your going off about bad designs and your many degrees and experience . I believe Daggar was refering to you telling people, that if they are not as smart as you, to shut the f**k up. Did you have a bad day at you science job? Dont take it here.

And one other thing there spanky that your just wrong about. as you said..."I don;t go by moronic clueless Teenager "SOTP" performance.... What about the clueless idiots like Chuck Yeager, Ralp Depalma or Junior Johnson or Don Gartlis or yunick and yarborough.....all these people are pioneers in there achevements using nothing more than a stop watch and SOTP....are they all idiots too?
Granted some Seats or Pants are more calibrated than other seats or pants.
not a sermon, just a thought..

oh and lighten up , you;ll live longer..
However I do respect the information that you provide with your website...

 

[Mustang5L5]

Back on topic here....


Telll your buddy to forget the solid bar idea and to put quads back on. If he's running wider tires, flip them around..otherwise if he needs to ditch them he will NEED to get UCA's and LCA's but even them he may still have wheel hop

 

[GTOreturns]

 

[bstrd86]

It's been tried before, there was a thread on corner-carvers a few years ago about this. He either removed the stock upper control arms completely or ran without bushings in them (because rules dictate you have to run the arms). The car actually did ok, they were trying to copy the z-link used in dirt track cars. It seems like there would be alot of goofy stuff going on throughout the suspension's travel but what do I know.

 

[jrichker]

The space aliens want to go probe you again! You are FULL OF IT! If you COULD READ, and you READ my TPS FAQ, you would know why you are FULL OF IT!!

I have no doubt that you are a smart fellow. You make some well informed arguments. However, your communication style leads people to disregard some of the very good ideas you have. A little less heat and emotion and a little more reserve will make your revelations more widely accepted instead of being written off. It's a lot like Hellfire & Brimstone preaching, in that it doesn't go over very well, and causes people to tune you out and turn you off.

 

[sunil6784]

"Personal attacks". Hmm, calling SOTP stupid, UNSCIENTIFIC, MEANINGLESS, is in MY view FACT!

It's FACT that you did NOT read my TPS FAQ page and you DID NOT understand what was written!!

It's a FACT that computers just execute code and do NOT think for themselves.

It's a FACT that the Ford SPEC, the ASSEMBLER CODE, and ALL REAL LIFE DATA PROVES that the TPS is zeroed out at start-up.

It's a FACT that SOTP is often BS!!

I design by FACTS! I teach by FACTS!

Maybe you'd like a missile flying around that some person designed by their SOTP feel?

It's clear that you're talking about a TECHNICAL aspect and you do NOT have ANY knowledge or experience in that field. AND, you're going against ALL OF THE FACTS AND DOCUMENTS!

WHAT degree do you have? Is it even in Science?

BTW: I've designed and done architecture on a NUMBER of real-life control systems. I also worked on and raced cars before there was dataloging available for cars and before there was EFI! So, do NOT tell ME about "SOTP" feel.

Last: The assembler code was put on the web over 10 years ago. Today, ANYONE can download and read the code from their EEC! It costs you a WHOLE ~$50. So, instead of continuing to splew ricer BS myths, how about doing some REAL science!

I don't usually get involved in your posts, but I will in this one.

No doubt you have a good understanding of the EEC and how it works. But the manner in which you communicate your information needs some desperate help. No, I don't have a "science" degree. No, I did not design Ford's EEC, and no, I did not read all of your TPS page. What I do have is an degree in education. I seem to recall that you yourself are a teacher. So you must know that belittling, criticizing, and mocking students not only is insulting to the person, but also disinterests them in the subject. Both big no-no's in education. But you must know that...you are a teacher. I'd hope not only for your non internet life, but also for your students sake that the way that you communicate your information online is not how you present yourself in person. I don't know how old your students are or how you treat them, but I'd hope that you don't treat them like the way you treat people on here.

We all come on here to learn about Mustangs. Young or old, it doesn't matter. We all have things we can learn from other people on here. But treating each other with respect will promote intelligent, meaningful discussion. Especially in the 5.0 tech forum (I don't know about those 5.0 talk people sometimes though )

 

[Flavadave4]

We should all stay away from your friends dad's shop......what next replace the Struts and Shock with billet bars?

LOL......i think with a sloid piece there you would have some torn quad shock mounts after a few sideways launches

 

[Shakerhood]

I wish i could put all that in my siggy.









As for the SN95 spindle myth, the dimensions of track increase are widely misquoted. The common myth that 94-95 spindles DO NOT increase track is incorrect.

The track increase is APPROX 3/8" or about 9.5mm (not officially confirmed yet)

The difference between the 94-95 spindles and the 96+ spindles is 5mm, so that gives you a total of 14.5mm increase over Fox track if you use the 96+ spindles.

The 3/8" number is not confirmed yet, but CAD drawings overlayed have confirmed that the 96+ spindles are 5mm more than the 94-95's.

All this info comes from a Ford engineer who designed the spindles. There was a good thread over on corner-carvers.

I could not agree more, the 94/95 Spindles DO increase the Front Track Width over Stock Fox and 96+ increase more. Knowing how Liberal Ford is on Tolerances, I am sure that number can increase or decrease over the CAD Dimensions.