Suspension Recommendation ~$2,500

[TheLion]

@TheLion - doesn't Steedas kit do essentially the same thing, locking out the movement, but the stock bushings still help with nvh? It seems like either option accomplishes the same goal.

I was saying Ford should install solid rubber bushings in the diff and subframe of their PP1, PP2, and GT350 cars from the factory, giving up a little nvh for improved performance, which would probably not increase nvh much atall if the Steeda and BMR lockout kits dont hurt nvh much.

It does but at nearly twice the cost and headache. I'm not sure how heavy the Support Braces are, but I'd guess at least 2~3 lbs each given they are 4130 chrome moly steel, so it's either the same weight as the BMR kit or possibly a little heavier as you adding parts without removing others. With the Steeda solution you need BOTH the IRS bushing lockout collars that go over the tops and bottoms of the stock cradle bushings and the sub-frame to chassis support braces.

I have a hard time believing all of the IRS deflection is as well controlled by adding two steel tubes in their kit as it is with 4 thick aluminum collars, four 21mm grade 10.9 factory bolts + two DOM steel supports used in the BMR or Ford Performance (sans the supports as you re-use factory ones) kits. But I'm sure it does a decent enough job that IRS movement is no longer an issue.

However, the collars are a royal PITA to install (the aluminum collars that go around the bushings). I had a hard time on my EB when I used them and that was when I had the whole darn IRS off the car on my garage floor (did them when I swapped my diff). Then you have to also buy their sub-frame to chassis supports separately. The collars ONLY control vertical motion (up and down) of the IRS. They do nothing to stop lateral (side to side) motion. It's a two piece kit more or less.

BMR's kit (and Ford Performance) accomplishes the same thing but with fewer parts and at a lower cost. Steeda's solution is effective, but it's not as efficient in it's ratio of cost / performance / weight / ease of installation.

So to lock out the IRS going that route you need both of the following:

Steeda S550 Mustang Rear IRS Subframe Support Braces for $240 (steeda's pricing)

Steeda S550 Mustang Rear IRS Subframe Bushing Support System $140 (steeda's pricing)

Total: $380

BMR CB005 = $220 (BMR's pricing)

Sponsored

 

[TheLion]

@Roadway 5.0 and @BmacIL , did either of you use the entire Track Handling Pack as a whole (both sway bards, springs and struts with toe links)? Or did you just upgrade the springs and struts? You both agree on running the stock sway bars with Track Pack Struts and BMR springs after having tried the Track Pack Springs with Track Pack Struts, but I'm highly curious if either of you used the Track Pack Struts / Springs with the Track Pack Sway bars (I believe you also upgraded the toe links as well).

I know some one said the rear Track Pack springs are too soft. However I believe the rear sway bar is quite a bit stiffer on the track pack (proportionally to the increase in the front sway bar stiffness relative to the PP versions) and that will have a similar effect of increasing spring rate during corner, but still allowing for a tad more squat. So it will control roll similar to a higher spring rate, but allow for more throttle steering by allowing slightly higher weight transfer (sway bar won't affect forces acting relatively equally on both sides, such as squat, which is entirely dependent on spring rates and damping rates). I believe there's a reason they run softer rears but with a stiffer anti-roll bar front and rear than factory PP setup. Now that may be a different case when you run BMR springs and the factory PP sway bar ratio (biasing front to rear) may be far more optimal for that application.

At this point I believe what Ford Performance did was increase the anti-roll of the front and rear sway bars, but they increased the rear anti-roll more proportionally. So the anti-roll is biased more to the rear. Then they increased the spring rates in the inverse proportion. Front rates are increased more proportionally than the rears relative to the PP springs. Hopefully that isn't too confusing. That gives the car roughly the same anti-roll, but may allow for a little more throttle steering mid and on exit unless I'm not understanding something about vehicle dynamics. It's designed to work together, mixing PP sway bars with Track Pack struts and Springs will likely result in the very thing you noted,the rear is far to soft because there's not enough anti-roll in stock rear PP sway bars.

Neither setup will handle exactly the same (yours vs. the FP track pack), but there may be very minute differences in how the car steers mid corner and on exit as well as traction limits. I'm just playing devils advocate here, not suggesting your setups aren't good, but I want to see what was and was not tested as Ford Performance has access to a host of professional drivers and factory design engineers, usually their stuff is very well tuned and it is that way for a reason. I believe they actually have some of the team drivers do final testing as far as dynamics go before they finalize their suspension packages.

That is the key I believe and sway bar tuning is just as important as spring rates and damping rates on struts, we all agree on that. I'm wondering if the BMR springs worked better (mostly the rears) because of a lack of rear anti-roll in both front and rear, but more so in the rear due to using the factory PP sway bars.

The Track Handling Pack is designed to work as a whole, not independently. Leaving out the sway bars could create some very negative handling attributes. I'm just curious if you ever test the package as a whole or if you reverted back to the stock sway bars after having used the track pack ones then changed the springs also for further refinement. This very thing is what I warned about with mixing and matching vendors. Can it be done with stellar results? Yes, but there's a lot variables at play and most of the time we don't do as good of a job at making a complete system that functions well together as Steeda or Ford Performance or BMR can due to lack of time, resources, instrumentation and even exposure to driver capabilities that help us achieve a well tuned system.

Learning to drive a well tuned car is one thing, but tuning a car is something entirely beyond that. Some times a handling attribute we perceive as "faster or better" may not actually result in a faster track time. It's a bit like fire arms. Not all grips, holds or stances that are comfortable necessarily produce the best balance of accuracy vs. speed. Many people fall into habits because it's "more comfortable" or "feels better" to do it this way but in reality it's actually slowing them down or causing them to throw shots. Shooting isn't about "comfortable", it's about balance and economy of motion and that does not necessarily equate to comfortable. I'm not saying that's the case here, just questioning your choices, method and reasons to see which configurations will give the most balanced car that I can focus more on driving skills than figuring out handling quirks I introduced because I didn't tune the suspension optimally.

I love driving and cars, but not so much that I'm willing to buy a whole second suspension setup. I expect my PP struts to last 30k~50k miles (already at 20k) before needing replacement and that point I'll switch over to a more aggressive setup and I'm just front running that so I know what I want to move to when the time comes in a year or two.

 

[Bluemustang]

Out of curiosity what did you not like about the FP springs? I have BMR SP080's now and have no problem accepting BMR might have better springs than FP or Ford's OE. In fact, I think the SP080's or the minimal drop versions with PP struts should have been at least the stock springs on the base model.

I'm just curious as to what handling dynamic specifically you felt improved the cars handling with the SP083's over the FP Track Springs in the FP track package and why you don't think there would be any benefit to the slight increase in roll control with the FP sway bars. I suppose the safer bet would be to just do the struts and springs first with the stock PP sway bars. If I need more anti-roll I can always add it in later.

It's about the same price to piece together a mixed package from FP and BMR as it is to buy the whole track package so that's not an issue. I already have a CB05 cradle lockout and FP outer toe link spherical bearings and those are here to stay. And, I gotta say it, I'm a huge fan of the BMR raked stance. SP083's are listed as having the same 1.2" drop front and 0.5" rear unless I'm reading something wrong.

I do know FP's rear springs are progressive and not linear, but their fronts are obviously linear. I'm wondering if their progressive rears are due to manufacturing limits from their supplier in what they can offer or if it's just how they had them set up.

Also I'm curious as to the sway bars as well. Track Handling sway bars do have an increase in anti-roll. But are you suggesting they make the car edgy? Absolutely 0 body roll will make an edgy car, it creates an extremely defined edge between hold and breaking loose. Just a hair, a smidge of body roll can make a car much easier to drive. My old MX-5 M-Edition with the stiffer springs and bilsten dampers had just a hair of roll and it made the car very easy to drive fast but not so edgy it was un-predictable or took an extremely experienced driver to tap into it's potential. That car was on rails.

My PP GT with current mods has drastically improved, but I wouldn't say the car yet feels like it's on rails. Then again I'm also on the stock Pirellies which are far from a "on the rails" type of tire as well. Once they are burned up this year I'll switch over to some Pilot Sport 4S's next year or Conti's, haven't decided yet which. And yah, I type a lot, get over it.

Take a look at my build thread for more information. But basically 1) It has a less drop (the new version is 7/8” drop front and 3/4” drop rear 2) favorable ride frequency ratio front to rear 3) linear rate. The handling feel is far better. More predictable as to what the car is doing. Better road feel and more consistent reactions of the chassis. Less geometry change from lowering and the stiff rate keeps the body flat and level in corners, keeping geometry mostly in check. You won’t need much sway bar because the springs take away most of the body roll.

The setup is very much like the GT350R without the magneride. Monotube dampers. The rear spring rate is a little higher than the GT350R but the front rate is very similar.

IMO the FRPP sway bars are too stiff and many other members have felt the same based on responses I’ve seen. Through talking with @BmacIL who helped me a lot, this car doesn’t need a lot of sway bar IMO. The goal I think is to minimize body roll while still keeping the suspension more independent. Too much sway bar and it becomes too edgy and almost like a solid axle.

 

[BmacIL]

@Roadway 5.0 and @BmacIL , did either of you use the entire Track Handling Pack as a whole (both sway bards, springs and struts with toe links)? Or did you just upgrade the springs and struts? You both agree on running the stock sway bars with Track Pack struts and BMR springs after having tried the Track Pack Springs.

But I don't recall either of you saying you tested the track pack as a whole system first. I know some one said the rear Track Pack springs are too soft. However I believe the rear sway bar is quite a bit stiffer on the track pack (proportionally to the increase in front stiffness) and that will have a similar effect of increasing spring rate during corner, but still allowing for a tad more squat. So it will control roll similar to a higher spring rate, but allow for more throttle steering by allowing slightly higher weight transfer (sway bay won't affect forces acting relatively equally on both sides, such as squat). I believe there's a reason they run softer rears but with a stiffer anti-roll bar front and rear than factory PP setup. Now that may be a different case when you run BMR springs and the factory PP sway bar ratio (biasing front to rear) may be far more optimal.

Neither setup will handle exactly the same, but there may be very minute differences in how the car steers mid corner and on exit as well as traction limits. I'm just playing devils advocate here, not suggesting your setups aren't good, but I want to see what was and was not tested as Ford Performance has access to a host of professional drivers and factory design engineers, usually their stuff is very well tuned and it is that way for a reason.

That is the key I believe and sway bar tuning is just as important as spring rates and damping rates on struts, we all agree on that. I'm wondering if the BMR springs worked better (mostly the rears) because of a lack of rear anti-roll in both front and rear, but more so in the rear due to using the factory PP sway bars.

The Track Handling Pack is designed to work as a whole, not independently. Leaving out the sway bars could create some very negative handling attributes. I'm just curious if you ever test the package as a whole or if you reverted back to the stock sway bars after having used the track pack ones then changed the springs also for further refinement. This very thing is what I warned about with mixing and matching vendors. Can it be done with stellar results? Yes, but there's a lot variables at play and most of the time we don't do as good of a job at making a complete system that functions well together as Steeda or Ford Performance or BMR can due to lack to time, resources, instrumentation and even exposure to driver capabilities that help us achieve a well tuned system.

Learning to drive a well tuned car is one thing, but tuning a car is something entirely beyond that.

No I never purchased the entire package. Just the dampers from it. The dampers match the GT350 monotube damping curves. The BMR handling springs are very, very close to the ride frequency balance F/R of the GT350, just a bit stiffer all around. They are an impressively matched set. I think you're significantly overthinking the swaybar piece of that. Swaybars are a tuning aid, and shouldn't be used for primary roll stiffness. I've spoken with Ford's vehicle dynamics engineers for Mustang (not the Ford Performance ones who sell these packages) about the suspension geometry change with static height, overall wheel rates and roll stiffness contributions from bars vs springs. There's a reason I have what I have, and I've checked it all against my experience in race car suspension design (every time @Norm Peterson posts something from RCVD I smile a bit). Remember that Ford Performance is selling to a wide customer base and is going to put some inherent compromises in its package, and knowing that chose a soft dual rate rear to improve straight-line and low-speed ride, for instance. They also chose nominal ride heights that were set to please the looks crowd, too. I don't want to take away from it, though; it is a very nice package and a big improvement over what the car comes with. But to think that it can't be improved upon (for ride and handling) for the same or nearly the same price is foolish.

Careful with big rear bars on a RWD car, especially without an equal or larger increase in front roll stiffness. Lifting the inside rear under power is bad for going fast!

 

[TheLion]

That answers my question then. I have no issue with the reality of the ride frequency balance F/R, the damping rates being so very similar to the GT350 which is one heck of a car. I like this route better because 1. It's cheaper, FP Track Struts and BMR SP083 springs cost what? $750 ish? 2. It's less work as I don't have to dick around with snaking out the front sway bar and 3. If it handles close to a GT350 it's more car than I will ever probably be capable of taking advantage of, which allows me to focus on driving skill rather than questioning my suspension.

I didn't think of the fact that too much anti-roll makes the car more "live axle" which is a reality. Roll bars are load transfer tools and if you ran a super heavy anti-roll bar it would certainly cause the rear to behave like a solid rear axle. I'll go this route when the time comes to replace the factory PP struts.

 

[BmacIL]

That answers my question then. I have no issue with the reality of the ride frequency balance F/R, the damping rates being so very similar to the GT350 which is one heck of a car. I like this route better because 1. It's cheaper, FP Track Struts and BMR SP083 springs cost what? $750 ish? 2. It's less work as I don't have to dick around with snaking out the front sway bar and 3. If it handles close to a GT350 it's more car than I will ever probably be capable of taking advantage of, which allows me to focus on driving skill rather than questioning my suspension.

I didn't think of the fact that too much anti-roll makes the car more "live axle" which is a reality. Roll bars are load transfer tools and if you ran a super heavy anti-roll bar it would certainly cause the rear to behave like a solid rear axle. I'll go this route when the time comes to replace the factory PP struts.

It certainly does. I spent a lot of time in a friend's GT350 this year, some on track, a lot on the street. I was pretty surprised getting back in my car how similar they felt.

 

[TheLion]

Come to think of it, that's actually what I don't like about the BRZ (well that and it has no balls). It has too much anti-roll and it tends to break loose quite easily. Sure, it's a "drift car" that's actually a characteristic you want for drifting but drifting isn't the fastest way around a track unless it's on dirt and certainly not something I want to do on back roads lol.

It's kinda like a 4 seater hard top MX-5 but a little overly stiff that makes it edgy.

But what are your thoughts on the rear sway bar? You say stock, Roadway 5.0 says adjustable. Both of your are running the same springs and dampers and both I believe are on stock front sway bars.

 

[Roadway 5.0]

@Roadway 5.0 and @BmacIL , did either of you use the entire Track Handling Pack as a whole (both sway bards, springs and struts with toe links)? Or did you just upgrade the springs and struts? You both agree on running the stock sway bars with Track Pack Struts and BMR springs after having tried the Track Pack Springs with Track Pack Struts...

@TheLion , I run a Steeda setup and have not tried the Ford Track package or any of its components.

I will say that you are 100% correct that sway bars, springs, and dampers all need to work as one; what “right” looks like contains so many variables that it allows multiple avenues to obtain a balanced and well performing ride.

I personally like having a stiff rear sway bar with my setup, but my setup also entails staggered wheels, -2.0 rear camber all around, and 225F/880R springs. How different does my vehicle react in corners compared to cars with stiffer springs, less rear bar, a squared tire setup, and less aggressive camber? Only a solid mathematitian would know, and that is certainly not me, but I would dare to say the difference is not that much.

I think a fair conclusion is that the higher spring rate you choose, the less bar is needed (and vice versa). If you do decide to get bars, get adjustables so you can dial-in the settings to taste.

 

[BmacIL]

Come to think of it, that's actually what I don't like about the BRZ (well that and it has no balls). It has too much anti-roll and it tends to break loose quite easily. Sure, it's a "drift car" that's actually a characteristic you want for drifting but drifting isn't the fastest way around a track unless it's on dirt and certainly not something I want to do on back roads lol.

It's kinda like a 4 seater hard top MX-5 but a little overly stiff that makes it edgy.

But what are your thoughts on the rear sway bar? You say stock, Roadway 5.0 says adjustable. Both of your are running the same springs and dampers and both I believe are on stock front sway bars.

The heaviest I would go on rear bar without changing the front is the GT350 bar or Strano bar. This is the hot ticket for FS class autocrossers who can only change one bar, and who are required to keep the factory wheel sizes and springs, and thus have some stagger (if not by tire size, by fit and thus contact patch on the road). The front of this car is heavy and is well-suited to more bar, provided you can get enough tire on the front so that it doesn't understeer mid-corner.

Roadway is running very different springs and dampers at different ride height and different alignment. Everyone is different in what they like. Without driving his car, I really couldn't comment on how it feels. A stiffer rear spring with a lighter bar is easier to drive and is less sensitive to midcorner imperfections, while still retaining good balance. It allows you to put power down better because the inside and outside are more independent. Springs also control dive and squat in addition to roll. Remember: if you have a car that is fully neutral or slightly oversteering mid-corner, you're not going to be able to get on the throttle anywhere near as soon or as hard on exit. If you have a car that has just a little bit of understeer and a predictable rear-end, you can get on the power with confidence.

 

[Eritas]

Sort-of. Solid axle cars still have rear swaybars.

 

[BmacIL]

Sort-of. Solid axle cars still have rear swaybars.

Yeah, works a bit different than an IRS though.

 

[Eritas]

Yeah, works a bit different than an IRS though.

Still affects weight transfer.

 

[BmacIL]

Still affects weight transfer.

Of course.

 

[iTutn]

@Eritas

Spoiler

, I am a bit partial to BMR's approach to managing sub-frame movement with their CB005 kit. It's a very similar concept to the aluminum bushings offered by Ford Performance. However with the Ford Performance offerings, your removing the factory bushings all together and replacing them. It's permanent and provides no NVH isolation. But to be fair, 90% of noise is transmitted through the drive train (differential), not the sub-frame (IRS). Very little NVH is passed through the IRS itself.

The Ford Performance solution of using aluminum bushings is the lowest in weight, virtually no weight gain, provides the least movement and is of similar cost. However it's much more involved labor wise, cannot be reversed if you sell the car and reducing IRS deflection by 90% is more than enough to eliminate it as an issue for all but pure off-road racing applications or maybe on FI cars. Quite a few FI cars do run the CB05 very successfully as well however, so it's good enough for all but the most extreme applications. At some point a gain in performance may be so minuscule, even if real, it's of not practical value.

BMR's solution not only locks out the sub-frame, but also centers the sub-frame on the chassis mounting holes via their sub-frame to chassis braces which double as centering guides, but because the factory rubber bushing is still in place, it does provide some harmonic dampening, NVH increase is more or less non-existent as far as I can tell.

There's a less direct path for noise to travel using this method of locking collars over the top of crowned bushing center tube and the IRS frame tube it's attached to (via the rubber). Their CB05 kit weighs just 6.5 lbs on my food scale at home, and your removing 2.5 lbs (the stock sub-frame to chassis braces which weighed in at 1.25 lbs each), so your net gain is only 4 lbs. Not enough to matter. If your really after minimal weight gain, their CB10 kit is the CB05 kit sans the sub-frame to chassis braces. You could combine that with Steeda's delrin IRS centering shims and re-use the stock sub-frame to chassis braces. Net weight gain would probably be about 1~1.5lbs.

Each company has some good offerings in certain areas where in other areas their offerings might improve upon the car, but may not be as highly tuned as other offerings from another vendor. The trick it know which offerings are the best from brand x and y. And if they are inter-related (such as struts and springs), do they offer the best combination.

Brand x might offer better quality or more critically tuned struts while brand y offers higher quality and more consistent springs (due to material, production and testing), but when combined do they provide the best function? Some times it MAY be better to compromise absolute function or quality for the sake of how everything works together. Other times you can mix and match to get the best of both. Running BMR SP083's with FP Track struts is one such example.

This post is so spot on, I never understood why some people are stuck to one brand in their suspension parts.

PS if you buy the Steeda parts as a kit it ends up being cheaper while adding an imo well thought out part, the subframe alignment kit. (referring to your post below this one that I'm quoting)

My contribution if anyone reads this and is considering... don't get ST STX coilovers if you want comfort lol.

 

[Bull Run]

My armchair quarterback forum talk and background doesn't mean anything because i'm not selling anything.

Actually, it does since you're giving out advices as if you knew things and someone who doesn't know better may actually take them. Because if you did, you would've known that better tires make the most difference in regards to the wheel hop, then the cradle bushing lockout, followed by verticle links if the first two weren't enough. Did you honestly think that you can just throw on a set of vertical links and expect to see a noticeable difference by itself? BMR verticle links with spherical bearings didn't make any noises while I had them on and if noises were common, you'd expect to hear more about them on the forum.

If money's the only thing that Steeda cared about, why did Mike talk me out of purchasing a set of adjustable shocks and struts ($799.96) and recommended polyurethane vertical links ($149.95) for my issue? I gave it a shot since it's cheap and much easier to swap out than the struts, and it calmed the rear end enough for my liking so I'm happy with it.

So who cares Ford uses stock verticle links? They can't even get their spark plug gapped correctly on their cars and even the "performance pack" Mustangs came with cheap tires and cheap soft bushings so that it gets beat by Camaros stock for stock. Have you ever driven any of the Ford race vehicles to tell us how they handle on the street? Are their suspension forgiving enough for non-professional drivers on uneven roads? Are their suspension going to break the first time it hits a pothole or dip?

Sponsored