Close



Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 36 of 36
  1. #26
    FEP Power Member qtrracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by radartek View Post
    Ok, thanks for that. Makes sense that some binding would occur if using the panhard rod to move the axle housing. So what's needed then is a torque arm? If a torque arm was installed then that's a 3-link system correct (both UCA's removed of course)? Could the panhard rod then be used to center the axle housing? Also currently I have both UCA's still installed. Without a torque arm, do I have to remove one UCA to create a poor man's 3-link, or it ok to leave both UCA's installed with a panhard bar? I've read some info on this, and clarification would be much appreciated.
    So I have some experience with both the PM3L and the MM TA.

    If you go PM3L one upper has to be removed or fixed so it doesn't perform as intended (a fix would be to keep the car legal in some class requiring both uppers to be in place). In my case I just removed the DS upper and replaced the PS upper with a rod-ended piece. This was a custom one-off I bought from a C-C.com member. The PHB was already on the car and had been for several years. With a PM3L as I configured it, I also had to increase rear spring rate to something like a TA requires - I went with H&R Super Race rears. This mod transformed the car (already had C/Os on the front). Turn in was more predictable understeer and corner exit had much more traction. Mid-corner oversteer was easier to control. Most important for me was the ride quality so dramatically improved it was a night and day difference. But that rod-ended upper did transmit a lot of gear noise into the cabin. And you could center the axle with the PHB since the one upper was rod-ended.

    And the rod-ended upper put a lot of stress on the upper chassis mount. It never failed or cracked during the 3 seasons I ran the car in this configuration, but the concern led to the MM TA. I put the T/A on and just for G&Gs, added the MM K member at the same time. The TA was even better than the PM3L and with a lot less NVH. I also had to increase the rear spring rate again since the TA allowed the rear axle to articulate much better. Here is where I went with an H&R TA spring of 375-420 IIRC. Ride quaity was even better due to reduced NVH and much more peace of mind not woring bout the rod-ended PM3L ripping out the upper mount.

    All in all, either option works wonders for the car's handling and ride quality. A note of caution. If you go with a rubber bushed stock upper instead of a rod-ended upper, watch the bushing material. There is so much twisting and stuff going on that it won't take long for those rubber bushings to tear.

  2. #27

    Default

    Thanks. Any recommendation on which UCA to remove? Drivers side or passenger side?

  3. #28
    FEP Power Member qtrracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by radartek View Post
    Thanks. Any recommendation on which UCA to remove? Drivers side or passenger side?
    I removed the DS after some research indicated the choice has to do with the way the PHB is designed (I used MMs) and axle torque from the engine. The guy I bought my rod ended PM3L also removed the DS.

  4. #29

    Default

    If you ever watched the SCCA TA class you will notice all of the R-S designed cars run a off set 3 link offset to the drivers side . you car fine tune your launch by moving the top link side to side foe a str launch On a 4 link car the axel housing becomes part of the sway bar. OB
    LIFE IS ONE LONG WEEKEND

  5. #30

    Default

    If you want to learn more about the advantages of an offset 3rd link, see the website below. There is LOTS of good vehicle dynamics information on it. It does however require a moderately high baseline knowledge level of statics and dynamics to understand some of the stuff on it.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20180802...ntentsDrag.htm
    Jack Hidley
    Maximum Motorsports Tech Support

  6. #31

    Default

    Thanks Guys for all the info and recommendations. I ended up removing the driver side uca. Also relocated my passenger side brake union to a center mounted configuration so I can put dual exhaust in. Cut and flared my own brakes side and that was an adventure. Looking at things upside down and trying to visualize for the brake line bends was very difficult but got it done. Had time to make my new disc brakes look pretty too.

    Attachment 135398

  7. #32
    FEP Power Member qtrracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,849

    Default

    Brakes look good but the splash shield is on backwards. The flanged side is supposed to be on the disc side allowing the lip to partially cover the disc. Or at least that is the way Ford mounted them on my '01 Cobra.

  8. #33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by qtrracer View Post
    Brakes look good but the splash shield is on backwards. The flanged side is supposed to be on the disc side allowing the lip to partially cover the disc. Or at least that is the way Ford mounted them on my '01 Cobra.
    Thanks qtrracer. I swapped the shields around facing the right way. One more question. Reading some other posts should I be increasing the spring rates on my coil springs since I went PM3L by removing the driver side uca? I'm not using coilovers and have the Eibach ProKit springs paired with their Eibach ProDampers.

  9. #34
    FEP Senior Member Patrick Olsen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Where the Navy sends me...
    Posts
    680

    Default

    I'm sure qtrracer can tell you better, since he's actually run the PM3L (whereas I have not), but the answer is YES. You've removed a great deal of bind from the rear suspension as a result of removing one UCA; that bind made the rear end act like it had stiffer springs. Now that you've freed up the rear end, the Eibach springs (which are only a little bit stiffer than stock) won't be firm enough.

    As I recall, qtrracer has said in the past that he ran some Maximum Motorsports torque arm rear springs with his PM3L. Those are up in the 400+ #/in range, while the Eibachs are probably in the 200-250#/in range.
    '89 GT convertible - not a four-eye
    '82 Zephyr Z7 - future track car

  10. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Olsen View Post
    I'm sure qtrracer can tell you better, since he's actually run the PM3L (whereas I have not), but the answer is YES. You've removed a great deal of bind from the rear suspension as a result of removing one UCA; that bind made the rear end act like it had stiffer springs. Now that you've freed up the rear end, the Eibach springs (which are only a little bit stiffer than stock) won't be firm enough.

    As I recall, qtrracer has said in the past that he ran some Maximum Motorsports torque arm rear springs with his PM3L. Those are up in the 400+ #/in range, while the Eibachs are probably in the 200-250#/in range.
    You're right. I reread qtracers earlier post and he said he went with H&R Super Race springs with his PM3L initially. He went with the Maximum Motorsports 375-449 in/lb after pairing them with a Maximum Motorsports TA. I'll order the H&R Super Race springs and go with those for now. Also should I be replacing both front and rear springs or just the rear for the PM3L configuration? Thanks everyone for all their help.
    Last edited by radartek; 05-02-2021 at 04:02 PM.

  11. #36

    Default

    So I installed the H&R Super Race Springs in the rear. They do the trick with the higher spring rates. Thanks to Qtrracer for that tip. One problem I had was when I removed the LCA axle end bolt to lower the LCA. I had difficulty lining the LCA axle end holes back up after changing out to the new spring. Tried to man handle it for a while, and finally remerbered something I had seen on a Youtube post about changing LCA's. The guy put a jack on the pinion end of the differential and jacked it up to rotate the pinion angle. This rotated the LCA axle end holes back into proper position and the bolt went in no issues. Lesson learned. I also had a chance to chat with Maximum Motorsports about the PM3L and what spring would be ok to replace the Eibach Pro-Kit springs that were on the car. Bounced and rocked the car around for five minutes to somewhat settle the suspension. Readjusted the Panhard rod with the new springs loaded. It has a good stance and ready for next step - Stifflers FIT System Chassis Kit
    Last edited by radartek; 05-16-2021 at 01:57 PM.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •