Psydwaze said:Is there a substantial insurance policy involved?
mdjay said:Welcome back Lino...
Did Jim get a chance to mull over the issue I proposed?
Call me...
Jay
Route666 said:I think the rod-end strut rods are what should have been in the suspension originally. The part is meant to swivel with suspension travel, and to me, something that swivels should be on a joint, not be bending a rubber bushing.
____After becoming "intimately" involved with my front suspension, I agree that the stock setup leaves a lot to be desired__________
I'd go for the Street or Track ones too, they look better. The Globals appear to move only in a single plane, which would require aligning that plane perfectly, but it would never be perfect as the plane of movement changes as the suspension moves. The SoT ones look like they allow movement in every direction except back and forth through the rod, an ideal setup in my eyes; perfect freedom in every dimension you want, and absolutely no freedom where you don't want it.
_________I couldn't tell exactly how the GW units work due to poor-quality images, but the SoTs look like they have a good range of motion_________
Also, the pics (and website) global west has leave a lot to be desired. It doesn't give off a very good professional image, bad pictures, gawdy colours used here and there on the main page, it all adds up. I look at the SoT site, and they have a simple, easy-to-read layout, with BIG, CLEAR pictures, that inspires more confidence in the company and their product.
________I agree: GW's front page is very gaudy and annoying to scroll through while looking for the Mustang section._______
Just my opinions though
The Globals appear to move only in a single plane, which would require aligning that plane perfectly, but it would never be perfect as the plane of movement changes as the suspension moves.
For whoever posted the pictures of the strut rod mounted with a single bolt between the OEM drilled holes in a stock lower arm. PLEASE USE A DIFFERENT DESIGN. I would not trust the safety of myself, my passengers or anyone else in my path to a 1/2 inch bolt mounted in single shear. I highly suggest finding an alternate set of components or better mounting method.
Not even. She can outdrive a lot of the guys on the track. I'll put her driving skill up against anyone. Our friends have asked her advice on the right line to take around Thunderhill. She knows her way around a race track, engine compartment and suspension too. That is her car. A '65 coup with a Cleveland motor, Toplader 4-speed, 4-wheel discs and a ton of other stuff. It's way fast. She loves taking it to work.Is there a substantial insurance policy involved?
Opentracker said:She knows her way around a race track, engine compartment and suspension too.
bnickel said:have you read any of his previous posts? he is always cramming his "theories" down peoples throats whether or not they ask for his opinion. if someone asks his opinion because they want to keep the car legal for a certain class or whatever, that's cool. but when the originator of the thread clearly states in the original post "I definitely want some sort of joint where the rod connects to the frame, rather than the current bushing-style setup" then what he is doing is just not acceptable to me and many others on this board, no offense to you route66 and if i do offend you i apologize i really don't mean too.
bud4660 said:I went with the G/W because I liked the design. They are indexed where they mount so the plane stays where it should be. This was a concern for me. I have a drag car not a road racer. So I didnt want to worry about that turning when the wheels were off the ground. My lower control arms also use rod ends where they bolt to the frame. I ran the control through the full range of movement when I bolted all this together before I put the spring in to see how it was going to work and act. I can tell you that the bind problem isnt from the strut rods. Its from the upper ball joints. The arm drops so far and the ball joint stops it. This is also before the upper arm comes in contact with the frame too. The lower arm and strut rod tied together had a full range of movement that you would never be able to use because of other things. Now the thing I did see that I dont know how this is going to effect handling. Is as the control arm drops the strut rod swing down pulls the lower arm to the front of the car. However this is not alot, since the upper arm limits movement. But it does move the arm front to rear as it goes through the range. But for what I need the front end to do, this is going to work great on the launch. Its the landing I am worried about.....lol
There are pictures of the car and stuff in the link below. And I have used G/W stuff on the last car and it is top notch stuff.
Thats my .02
Bud
Hack said:One thing I've never seen addressed regarding strut rods is the location of the swivel point. The kits that I've seen use the stock mount and they appear to move the strut rod swivel point - not sure how far, perhaps an inch or more.
I'm no expert on suspension design, but what I do know is that caster changes on rebound are not a good thing. Ideally, you would want the swivel point to be located so that there is no change in caster through the suspension's travel. Now I understand that when the lower arm is adjusted for proper camber, the ideal strut rod swivel point also moves. The lower arm adjustment isn't a huge range, so I would think someone would know how to tackle this.
Has anyone seen a study on this subject? Where exactly is the best place to locate the strut rod swivel point?
It was an optional upgrade i did said:Sounds like they def. made a difference, dodge. I decided to go with new struts after dis-and reassembling my front suspension several times, and in the process saw how my stock struts worked, how the rubber compressed and stretched, which essentially lengthens the strut adjustment and nullifies whatever settings have been dialed in.
I want something that will give me a bind-free, predictable range of motion, without the slop inherent in rubber bushings.
It seems like both GW and SoT will give me the same results, but SoT is a few coins cheaper....
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?