They don't share a single component with a Mustang II suspension, but they still carry the name due to their heritage I guess. There's no more strut rod, and no more conventional spring/shock combo.
I don't think it's misleading at all. The crossmember doesn't come from the MII. The presence of a crossmember does, but the crossmember itself is totally different. Same story for the upper A-arms and R&P. You missed the whole point of what I was saying, which was that the general configuration and geometry are the same but the actual components are completely different. Heidt's even repeatedly acknowledges the Ford engineering in their catalog.This is a bit misleading. The crossmember, upper A-arms, R&P steering, spindle geometry, basic design, etc all come from the Mustang II. I'm quite sure Heidt's didn't design this; it was the engineers at Ford in the 70's.
As for the eliminated strut rod, I'll contend that is the single biggest design flaw in the *aftermarket* Mustang II suspension. Every time I hear of a FatMan, Heidt's, etc MII suspension failure it has to do with the lower A-arm collapsing in the back.
It is hard to trust the engineering behind aftermarket parts labeled with the customary "Off road use only" warning much less an entire suspension system.
but they still carry the name due to their heritage I guess.
The only stuff I could dig up had to do with the lower A-arm bolts failing on Fatman MII suspensions, not because of a design flaw but because he supposedly supplied undersized Grade 5 bolts with the kit.
Well I think this illustrates my point. How much testing did Fatman put into their design? I bet Ford put a lot more testing than he did - and they determined you had to have a strut arm. I'm not an expert but when I'm running my car around the track I don't want to end up sucking food out of a tube because somebody used me as a crash dummy for their aftermarket suspension system.
So I ask again: will anyone with a MII suspension go to a track and gather some data for comparison? I might try to go to the Shelby Mid America meet in Oklahoma next year if that would put me in range of someone with a MII suspension to run with.
You know, this kind of scares me unless you can put my mind at ease. What qualifications do you have to be designing and building suspension systems? There's a hell of a lot more to ensuring something's safe and reliable than going out and running some laps. Do you understand how to calculate and design for all of the static and dynamic loads? Fatigue? Oscillating bearing loads? Material compatibilities? Thermal considerations? The list goes on and on.My designs are not for sale (yet) and I won't sell them until I've thoroughly track tested them... unless of course I can get a volunteer crash test dummy! I'll provide a lifetime supply of Gerber's if anything goes wrong
However, it has nothing to do with the MII conversion since the front and rear sidepans are retained.
Doing so wouldn't yield any scientifically valid information unless the cars were identical in every other way and the same highly-skilled driver did all of the driving. There are just too many variables in play for it to mean anything otherwise.
You know, this kind of scares me unless you can put my mind at ease. What qualifications do you have to be designing and building suspension systems? There's a hell of a lot more to ensuring something's safe and reliable than going out and running some laps. Do you understand how to calculate and design for all of the static and dynamic loads? Fatigue? Oscillating bearing loads? Material compatibilities? Thermal considerations? The list goes on and on.
I'm not saying you don't, I'm just asking. If you reply saying you're a Mechanical Engineer with x years' experience in machinery design and have done such-and-such in the past I'll be the first to show interest in what you've got up your sleeve.
I agree that you certainly don't need to prove anything to me, but that does it anyway. I apologize for my tone, but your post made it seem like you planned "A subjective ride through the countryside" for your test program. It now sounds like you know what you're doing, and, most importantly, you know what you don't know and subcontract accordingly.As far as pedigree goes I have a bachelors degree in Physics, not machinery design. I also have 18 years experience as a design engineer in multiple fields. I am now a manager, the head of the Engineering department, including fatigue, stress, structures, dynamics, hydraulics, wiring/electrical, Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3), Avionics and Vehicle Managment Systems. As far as suspension design goes, yes, I am self taught. However, I don't feel compelled to "put your mind at ease"... you do what you do and I'll do what I do: design stuff.
My fabrication skills are limited, and generally I pay for the expertise to have my parts fabricated by reputable qualified shops that specialize in whatever widget I'm working on (e.g. the control arms were made by a company that makes control arms for race cars, etc.).
A few years ago when Global West and TCP were just about the only choices around, I took a look at their stuff and decided for the price, I would rather design it myself. The only other R&P available was Randall's. He's a really nice guy, but again, I didn't like the way he designed parts of it, so I continued with my own. The TCP stuff also weighs a ton, providing absolutely no benefit. I've derived immense satisfaction by designing everything myself, and my goal has always been to eventually enter the market with a much more reasonable price than the competition by utilizing off the shelf parts and simpler designs. For the moment though I will be content to run with the big dogs on the track (in a similarly prepared street car). I'm not planning to quit my day job anytime soon.
I agree that you certainly don't need to prove anything to me, but that does it anyway. I apologize for my tone, but your post made it seem like you planned "A subjective ride through the countryside" for your test program. It now sounds like you know what you're doing, and, most importantly, you know what you don't know and subcontract accordingly.
When I cut out my shock towers I followed their curve as closely as I could. While I don't think the lowest part interferes with the upper control arm; do you think I should increase the opening (at the bottom at the frame)so that it is as wide as the control arm? Pete (Reenmachine) seems to have his more open, judging from his pictures on his website.
interesting, In order to remove the arm once the panel is in place, I'd have to remove the part that holds the top of the shock. I hadn't thought of that. I'll be able to adjust it without problem. Why would I need to remove the arm?
Thanks for the feedback.
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?