Mustang Suspension

I'll post the rules again and please discuss how what we did illegal, stating what and how I broke a rule. Please don't hide behind the IIDSYCDIYC or what ever. Sometimes you must interpret rules. I'm really not trying to twist them to fit my needs. I read these rules below and thats how we came up with what I did for the adjustable spring seats.

Spring seat ride height
location may be altered from stock. Spacers,
including threaded units with adjustable spring seats,
may be used with coil springs.

It says I can do it. It makes no specific mention of how to mount it. In fact I beleive the old rules said something about them or coil overs not being welded but it looks as though that verbage was dropped. The rules do state that there shall be no reinforcement of any suspension component. That was not my intent or do I beleive we have accomplished that in any of our changes. I still don't get how you can veiw what I have done as illegal.

What is a little confusing is that in one section of the rules it says we can cange the spring seat ride height location and another part of the rule states that they must be installed in the original location using the the original system of attachment. And then again in the same rule it states that spacers including threaded units with adjustable spring seats my be used with coil springs. Is this what has you questioning what I have done.

And as for the grinding of the spindles I will stand firm on that in that the small amount of material removed is insignificant and should be a nonissue. We can agree to disagree on that one.

And I stated that I have changed the rear sway bar to meet the rules, I missed that one. [/b]
Click to expand...

Ron,

I don't want to get into a pissing match. IIDSYCTYC is nothing to hide behind. It's part of the rules:

"<span style="color:#231f20">Other than those specifically allowed by these rules, no component or part normally found on a stock example of a given vehicle may be disabled, altered, or removed for the purpose of obtaining any competitive advantage."</span>

And this info is worth what you paid for it - nothing. It's MY interpretation.

</span></span>
 
I'm not changing the K-member or the control arm. I'm modifying the spring seat, that's it.
Read the rule and see they do talk about the spring seat. How would you mount an adjustable spring seat? The rules say I can do it, how else can you read this? If I completly rebuilt the K member to fit the spring than yes, but all we touched was the original seat!

That is what I mean by interpret the rules. It's like a brake duct, there is no description of how it should only cool the rotor or the caliper, or how you can attach the brake duct. One must read into the rule to realize that the duct is going somewhere on the brakes and the rest is left up to the builder. Does it then mean I can't use a tie wrap to clamp it to the car because it does not say.

And you can change the LCA, change bushing material and even spot weld them in. I realize that that is different than the spring seat but you see the point that ther is some degree of modification there. I'm not using that rule to wend on my spring seat it's just that there is some expectation of a change.
 
I'm not changing the K-member or the control arm. I'm modifying the spring seat, that's it.
Read the rule and see they do talk about the spring seat. How would you mount an adjustable spring seat? The rules say I can do it, how else can you read this? If I completly rebuilt the K member to fit the spring than yes, but all we touched was the original seat!

That is what I mean by interpret the rules. It's like a brake duct, there is no description of how it should only cool the rotor or the caliper, or how you can attach the brake duct. One must read into the rule to realize that the duct is going somewhere on the brakes and the rest is left up to the builder. Does it then mean I can't use a tie wrap to clamp it to the car because it does not say.

And you can change the LCA, change bushing material and even spot weld them in. I realize that that is different than the spring seat but you see the point that ther is some degree of modification there. I'm not using that rule to wend on my spring seat it's just that there is some expectation of a change. [/b]
Click to expand...

Ron,

If you weld to the K-member or LCA, you are altering it. Alternate methods of attachement are not called out for this allowance...and SPECIFICALLY called out as illegal in the quoted part of the GCR I bolded.

You are right about the LCA and bushings - all called out as legal by the GCR and Fast Tracks. Before the clarification, it was NOT legal to spot weld alternate bushing material in place. Hence the expense of some of the designs out there.

Brake ducts can be ADDED. It's different than REPLACED. You have to read each word to understand what you can do. When something is allowed to be replaced, it doesn't then give you any freedom to get something done - it allows you to remove, and replace in the same manner.

And I would never say you were cheating. A cheater is someone who knowingly does something they know is illegal. You have an interpretation of the rules, and so do I. These rules are written in such a way as to sound like this: You can't do ANYTHING unless it says you can. Some people read it like this: I can do ANYTHING unless it tells me I can't. And that ain't the way the SCCA works...maybe NASCAR, but not the SCCA.
 
Ron, the rules alow the spring seat height to be changed, and allows the use of adjustable collars to do so. However, it's not "Hiding" behind the IISYCTYC basis of the rules to say that the welding of them is clearly not kosher.

The rules draw lines in the sand. Sometimes those lines are arbitrary, or seem arbitrary to those reading them.

To you, the welding is insignificant, but the rules have to have a finite limit, and in this case, it doesn't allow for any means of attachment. Essentially, what you have done may, or may not reinforce the part it has been welded to. By not permitting the welding, the need to determine the effect is eliminated.

I think if you ask any number of people familiar with the rule book and it's basic premis, you'll find that nobody would see the welds as appropriate.

That's not to say I would protest you for them, or that anyone would either, but by the rules, I feel strongly they would fail a protest.

The same thing is true about the machining operation. The rule doesn't say, "No machining unless you think it's not too much"....That sounds sarcastic, but you can see that the rules need to be clear whenever they can. So again, by allowing no modifications, the need to determine the effect is eliminated.

Now, I've seen guys lose protests for silly stuff, and I felt bad that somebody would actually protest them over it. Protests like those are not about the car though...they're usually about somethig bigger, like a championship. Still, when i see protests like that (protests over non performance enhancing things, like a turn signal/marker lens that is MIA, or whatever) I lose all respect for the protester.

Of course, we all decide which side of the rules we fall, and I generally try to read the rule and exploit what the rule allows, using the words the rulesmakers chose. In each case I can defend my actions, but until it goes to appeal, I'll never really know if my reading is truly accurate. But when it comes to black and white things, which I feel this is, I try to errr on the side of caution. I keep spare marker lenses...;)
 
I'm not changing the K-member or the control arm. I'm modifying the spring seat, that's it.
Read the rule and see they do talk about the spring seat. How would you mount an adjustable spring seat? The rules say I can do it, how else can you read this? If I completly rebuilt the K member to fit the spring than yes, but all we touched was the original seat!
[/b]
Click to expand...

Ron, here you say you're not changing the K member, but then you say all you touched was the original seat. Ist the seat part of the K member? Does the K member come from the factory with the mods you preformed? No, it doesn't. So in some way you have changed it. On my car, the adjustable seat is captured, both front and rear, and isn't attached in anyway.

That is what I mean by interpret the rules. It's like a brake duct, there is no description of how it should only cool the rotor or the caliper, or how you can attach the brake duct. One must read into the rule to realize that the duct is going somewhere on the brakes and the rest is left up to the builder. Does it then mean I can't use a tie wrap to clamp it to the car because it does not say.
[/b]
Click to expand...

When mounting brake ducts to the brake assembly, I mounted my attachment tabs to the strut, as the stut has been called out as free in the rulebook.


And you can change the LCA, change bushing material and even spot weld them in. I realize that that is different than the spring seat but you see the point that ther is some degree of modification there. I'm not using that rule to wend on my spring seat it's just that there is some expectation of a change.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Right, and that allowable change has been called out and defined. It says "You can", and by "this much".


Again, I'm not trying to be a jerk about this, but when we race we need to understand the premise that we race under....your mods might not be performance enhancing in anyway, but the rulebook is clear on them, I think. I certainly don't think that you've chosen to cross the line and are looking for advantages where there aren't any, and I doubt I'd ever even consider a protest over such issues, but it's still important for you to know what is and what isn't allowable. Knowledge is power, LOL
Also, I'd hate for you to have somebody seek some cheap points with a protest, and you thinking you're fine. Of course, that's hopefully hypothetical, and it will never happen.
 
I am a little confused. I can put adjustable spring seats in but I can't alter anything? How are you expected to install them? If you install adjustable perches on any car that did not come with them from the factory you have just modified the car.

If you look at the install I think any semi educated person would agree that the adjustable perches in no way enhance the performance of the K-Member or the LCA.
 
Then just tell mw how I am allowed to use an adjustable spring perch but not weld it in. With that another mustang is running 2 1/2 in springs instead of 5 inch. I think the rules allow that but how am I to make new seats. Please rules nerds tell me how to do it and not break the rules. Oh, i would like to use adjustable perches. It must be legal but how?

The rule says " seat may be altered from stock" what does that mean? when I spoke of welding the seat that is what rule I looked at. I changed the seat by welding in an adjustable perch. Did I not follow the letter of the rule. Why is welding them in the problem If I cut the seat in some way would that be illegal? what does alter mean to you, painted?
 
I am a little confused. I can put adjustable spring seats in but I can't alter anything? How are you expected to install them? If you install adjustable perches on any car that did not come with them from the factory you have just modified the car.

If you look at the install I think any semi educated person would agree that the adjustable perches in no way enhance the performance of the K-Member or the LCA.

[/b]
Click to expand...
Maybe we are talking about the same thing here. On most strut cars, you have a threaded shock body with an adjustable spring pearch. The lower pearch spins and raises and lowers the ride height. Because the units are all called out in the GCR as legal to replace, you can do so. You can NOT, change mounting points or method of attachment. When it is said that the adjustable pearch is welded to the K-member, if that is different than stock, it is simply not legal. To go one step further as Jake eluded to, how much welding would be acceptable until someone considered it 'strengthening' of some other part? Just an example...

Maybe a picture of what we are talking about is in order. I must be missing the need to weld here...
 
Remeber, the spring seat HEIGHT is free...if you use adjustable collars. It doesn't allow modifications to the stock part. On my car the rears are 5", and the adjustable collar is merely loose, but held captive when the car is loaded. If it's a concern that the car will become unloaded, and the spring/collar assembely will shift, it is easy to limit suspension travel. Some guys use the shocks for that purpose, as shocks are essentially free.
 
Andy, and others....

I might be able to shed a little light on the problem, having raced one of these ODD configurations for a few years.

Mustangs of the III variety use a strut suspension...not the typical McPherson variety. The strut is actually only the shock unit, with the spring separate. The spring resides on the lower arm, and is resisted by a separate section of the "K" member...(a sub frame) that has upper spring mounts. In service the spring actually just sits there, held by the cups of the upper and lower mounts.

This is another case of a vehicle which varies in design such that it cannot use products that are actually written for in the rules...Koni shocks are not made for this car, and in reality, cannot be modified to fit. Other hardware such as the adjustable springs perches that are made for McPherson style struts, are not able to be used here.

Good racing,

Bill :024:
 
Thank you Billf!!! At last someone posted that has seen the under side of a Mustang. You rule book pros really should "look before you leap" don't you think.
 
Yes Bill, thanks.

Dick - not a big leap from machining spindles and cockpit adjustable sway bars to assume we are talking about someting fishy here. A response like Bill's would have been great a day ago.

I will still wait for the picture to help us all understand. I found this one on the web.

COP-2.jpg



So why aren't we using 'regular' coilover conversions? A quick trip through the Interweb finds stuff like this:

http://www.maximummotorsports.com/

Bolt on front and rear coliover kits for Koni's - no mods required to anything no specifically mentioned in the GCR. They sell the shocks - will revalve them for you and they sell the appropriate upper camber/caster plates as well.
 
Thank you Billf!!! At last someone posted that has seen the under side of a Mustang. You rule book pros really should "look before you leap" don't you think.
[/b]
Click to expand...


I'll await pictures for final judgement, but I really don't think there's been any "leaping" here.

The rulebook doesn't say, "Do this in this certain way, unless your choice of car makes it a pain in the ass, or impossible, in which case you can do something close that you think is OK", does it? If there is no way to capture the adjusters that is satisfactoy to Ron, then he must choose to modify the part by welding to it, come up with anohter solution such as shims or spacers, or go without.

Sometimes certain cars can't use the same bits and parts that other cars can. My car doesn't get to have any rear camber, for example, that others dial in to their hearts content. Thats one of the things I needed to consider when i made my choice.

And I think I understand that the front suspension uses springs that are NOT concentric with the strut/damper, correct? In that case, I think Andys example is a non starter, if I understand things correctly.
 
Andy, and others....

I might be able to shed a little light on the problem, having raced one of these ODD configurations for a few years.

Mustangs of the III variety use a strut suspension...not the typical McPherson variety. The strut is actually only the shock unit, with the spring separate. The spring resides on the lower arm, and is resisted by a separate section of the "K" member...(a sub frame) that has upper spring mounts. In service the spring actually just sits there, held by the cups of the upper and lower mounts.

This is another case of a vehicle which varies in design such that it cannot use products that are actually written for in the rules...Koni shocks are not made for this car, and in reality, cannot be modified to fit. Other hardware such as the adjustable springs perches that are made for McPherson style struts, are not able to be used here.

Good racing,

Bill :024:
[/b]
Click to expand...

What do you mean .....Koni shocks are not made for this car......? They are made for the V8 Mustangs in multiple flavors and can be custom vlaved. You can also run rod end circle track shock on a mustang and stay well within the IT rules. All you do is add a stud to a double shear UB Machine shock mount and run the stud through the factory shock mount on the body.

For what it is worth I ran adjustable spring spacers on my Solo II FOX Mustang for years. They were not welded or tacked into place in the front or rear. Unlike Ron I mounted the rear adjustable spacer on top of the spring not on the arm because I didn't want to add the weight to the arm. Anyway I never had an issue when them coming out.

Now, that said I think you should be able to tack them in place because it would make them easier to adjust I would request a clarification and get this added to the book.
 
Yes Bill, thanks.

Dick - not a big leap from machining spindles and cockpit adjustable sway bars to assume we are talking about someting fishy here. A response like Bill's would have been great a day ago.

I will still wait for the picture to help us all understand. I found this one on the web.

COP-2.jpg

So why aren't we using 'regular' coilover conversions? A quick trip through the Interweb finds stuff like this:

http://www.maximummotorsports.com/

Bolt on front and rear coliover kits for Koni's - no mods required to anything no specifically mentioned in the GCR. They sell the shocks - will revalve them for you and they sell the appropriate upper camber/caster plates as well.
[/b]
Click to expand...

We cannot use these because of the rule that states the shocks must stay in the stock location. I wish we could use them! If we did I believe it would be called cheating.

I will take some pictures of my set up tomorrow. I only have adjustable perches on the rear at this time.
 
What do you mean .....Koni shocks are not made for this car......? They are made for the V8 Mustangs in multiple flavors and can be custom vlaved. You can also run rod end circle track shock on a mustang and stay well within the IT rules. All you do is add a stud to a double shear UB Machine shock mount and run the stud through the factory shock mount on the body.

For what it is worth I ran adjustable spring spacers on my Solo II FOX Mustang for years. They were not welded or tacked into place in the front or rear. Unlike Ron I mounted the rear adjustable spacer on top of the spring not on the arm because I didn't want to add the weight to the arm. Anyway I never had an issue when them coming out.

Now, that said I think you should be able to tack them in place because it would make them easier to adjust I would request a clarification and get this added to the book.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Sure, there are V8 shocks available but it requires slight grinding on the spindles for them to fit. The early V8 cars face this same issue. If you have an early V8 you must shave the spindle in order to install the shocks that are made now ~or~ install the newer V8 spindles which is what everyone does outside of the SCCA to include circle track racers. Bottom line is if you want competitive performance shocks for the Mustang you will need to remove a small amount of material to install them. If Ron had not said anything No One would have known any better.

I agree. I think the rules need to clarify.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top