Ford 8.8 swap into G-body

[James Bond]

how will that short of an uca effect the pinion angle during suspension travel? seems like it'll be about 5" long and the bottom is 19". with the lca level to the ground, as the rear end drops, the pinion is going to angle up at a higher rate than with the stock upper arm. will this configuration require that the pinion angle be set more negative to compensate for this higher gain?

 

[KEVINS]

how will that short of an uca effect the pinion angle during suspension travel? seems like it'll be about 5" long and the bottom is 19". with the lca level to the ground, as the rear end drops, the pinion is going to angle up at a higher rate than with the stock upper arm. will this configuration require that the pinion angle be set more negative to compensate for this higher gain?

The UCA's are shorter but only about 2". The change in PA isn't affected enough to upset the suspension at all b/c the AS value stays neutral. The Mustang UCA's are 7.25" (LCA's at 18.5" long) and there is little affect b/c the rearend doesn't move up/down enough to alter the PA due to the Antisquat value achieved. The change in PA has been a non-issue.
Lift Bars also affect the PA when the suspension moves but Lift Bars can drastically raise the rearend when launching b/c of the high Antisquat value. With this kit the AS stays around 100% so the rearend stays pretty neutral during the launch thus the PA doesn't move much either.

ks

 

[James Bond]

Kevin, thanks for the reply. I agree with your point about the pa not moving much during launch due to the 100% AS value. I was thinking about this effect more during regular use, not so much on launch. I was concerned the excess gain may be harsh on the u joint. i created two quick plots for one inch of suspension travel to compare the two scenarios. it appears that the shorter uca's will double the PA change when compared to the stock length uca's. considering the reduced amount of rear travel my car has i don't think this will add up to much. maybe a range of -6 to +4. i'm really starting like these brackets. keep us updated.

here's the drawings i made.

 

[elsky79]

I'm getting really intrested in this topic!! I just want to know how hard it's gonna be to fix the four lug problem and stuff...I've heard i can grab axles out of a ranger to get th 5 lugs, but then it's gonna be a ford lug pattern...who wants that haha.

Guess i'm afraid of thinking im getting out really cheap when i'm really gonna wind up spending the same amount of money and having somthing like mix matched wheels and stuff.

Any words of advice for the young punk kids like me counting their pennies haha??

 

[KEVINS]

Kewl Graphs! Yea, for driving around town, etc the suspension shouldn't move around a lot plus if you think about all those Monster trucks with 8" lifts the pinion angle on those things can be outrageous at the transmission end.

I believe if you want 5-lugs the Ford Ranger trucks use 5-lug axles and are a bolt-in. I'm not 100% sure on this but there is info on switching to 5-lugs on the BB's just go to www.corral.net and search it out.

Got to review a few more sample parts yesterday but needed to make minor changes before lazer cutting them.

KS

 

[James Bond]

just realized that i'm looking at this in a 2d view but didn't use the true 2d length's for the ca's. the lowers are probably very close to the actually lengths. but the uca's are drastically angled toward the center of the car. the 2d length for the uca's may be an 1" to 1.5" shorter from this perspective. i'm going to have to graph it again. :-k

 

[Norm Peterson]

From some measurements I made a long time ago . . .

LCA true length 19.10"
LCA side view projected length 18.97"
UCA true length 10.96"
UCA side view projected length 7.75"

Feel free to correct me if they're off.


Norm

 

[James Bond]

norm, thanks for the info. i had used that 7.5 uca dimension and worked from there. so i don't need to recreate the graph.

how do you feel about the shorter uca?

 

[Norm Peterson]

Assuming that the upper arms are horizontal at static ride height, it looks like there's a mild advantage for the dragstrip even if you aren't up around 100% antisquat. If anything, the shorter arms allow you to gain more antisquat faster as the rear begins to squat, which would call a halt to the squatting action a little sooner.

As you might expect, it's not such a good thing when seen from the 'cornering' side of the street. You end up with slightly more rear axle roll steer, and there's already too much of that as it is. I'm not at all saying it'll make the car undriveable, but it would become a little clumsier to maneuver through a slalom and a little sloppier about making sudden lane changes.

Most drivers probably wouldn't ever notice the differences; you've got to be pushing it pretty hard either way for much change to show up.


Norm

 

[Anonymous]

I am here in Lincoln Kevin, would be real interested in the 8.8 swap kit.