5.0

m4a1mustang · 02-02-2012, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes

what's that suppose to mean? roads are as flat as it gets by where i live. brake dive is not part of handling?

more body roll "feel" gives drivers less confident, it is a negative no matter how you spin it. i don't care what the number says, significant seat time in both cars tell me Z handles better.

That's actually not true. It's personal preference. You might not be comfortable with it, but that doesn't mean someone else wouldn't be. For reference, just take a look at the varying spring and damper rates being run on the Z's here. Also look at the varying roll bar sizes.

There is no one perfect setup. Everyone likes their car setup a little bit differently. Driver A might like to run a super stiff rear bar to keep it flat, but Driver B might like to run less bar to get some more roll. It's entirely subjective.

ihatepotholes · 02-02-2012, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang

That's actually not true. It's personal preference. You might not be comfortable with it, but that doesn't mean someone else wouldn't be. For reference, just take a look at the varying spring and damper rates being run on the Z's here. Also look at the varying roll bar sizes.

There is no one perfect setup. Everyone likes their car setup a little bit differently. Driver A might like to run a super stiff rear bar to keep it flat, but Driver B might like to run less bar to get some more roll. It's entirely subjective.

i can assure you that majority of drivers prefer less body roll.

actually, given a choice i am sure all drivers prefer less body roll. i was given a ride in a friend's 302S, it had significantly less roll. why do you think ford did that?

jpritche · 02-02-2012, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes

i can assure you that majority of drivers prefer less body roll.

I love body roll.

Red__Zed · 02-02-2012, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes

what's that suppose to mean? roads are as flat as it gets by where i live. brake dive is not part of handling?

more body roll "feel" gives drivers less confident, it is a negative no matter how you spin it. i don't care what the number says, significant seat time in both cars tell me Z handles better.

Blindly setting your dampers to full stiff is not a ticket to performance. I've spent a lot of time in nj, and there's maybe a handful of roads where full stiff makes sense. The vast majority will cause you to experience all sorts of negative dynamics running full stiff

Brake dive is what allows the mustang to outbrake the z. Getting weight onto the front tires is crucial for both braking and turning. You'll notice many race teams spend a lot of time trying to allow for sufficient weight transfer while maintaining sufficient stability.

Like Steve said, much of this is subjective, to me (and many others) nose dive is no problem. You're entitled to your preferences, and perhaps should invest in some stiffer front springs.

m4a1mustang · 02-02-2012, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes

i can assure you that majority of drivers prefer less body roll.

If that was true then everybody would run the stiffest dampers, springs, and roll bars humanly possible. And guess what? The cars would handle like **** as there would be no suspension compliance and the tires would skip across the pavement.

My preference is the least amount of body roll possible while still retaining a compliant suspension. I want to maximize tire contact under all conditions. This means a little bit of roll is going to be required. I'm not going to run super stiff all the time for the reason I gave above.

I guess I'm not a "driver," though.

Honestly I feel like you're mixing body roll with roll rate. The Mustang is very flat in the corners, it just has a faster roll rate than the Z. I'm in the process of tuning that out myself.

Red__Zed · 02-02-2012, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang

If that was true then everybody would run the stiffest dampers, springs, and roll bars humanly possible. And guess what? The cars would handle like **** as there would be no suspension compliance and the tires would skip across the pavement.

My preference is the least amount of body roll possible while still retaining a compliant suspension. I want to maximize tire contact under all conditions. This means a little bit of roll is going to be required. I'm not going to run super stiff all the time for the reason I gave above.

I guess I'm not a "driver," though.

Honestly I feel like you're mixing body roll with roll rate. The Mustang is very flat in the corners, it just has a faster roll rate than the Z. I'm in the process of tuning that out myself.

I plan on learning from your experiences here

ihatepotholes · 02-02-2012, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red__Zed

Blindly setting your dampers to full stiff is not a ticket to performance. I've spent a lot of time in nj, and there's maybe a handful of roads where full stiff makes sense. The vast majority will cause you to experience all sorts of negative dynamics running full stiff

Brake dive is what allows the mustang to outbrake the z. Getting weight onto the front tires is crucial for both braking and turning. You'll notice many race teams spend a lot of time trying to allow for sufficient weight transfer while maintaining sufficient stability.

Like Steve said, much of this is subjective, to me (and many others) nose dive is no problem. You're entitled to your preferences, and perhaps should invest in some stiffer front springs.

i love how you just assume that i don't try other settings and you sound like you know about my car better than i do. it is on the most stiff setting because it is the best i could dial the car in after hundreds of miles of trial in each setting. you've spent enough time in nj to experience every road? that's funny, because i keep finding these great roads in NJ that are great for spirited driving.

if you like more body roll and break dive i guess you can say what you said. but "absolutely, disgustingly amazing" tells me you haven't experienced many real sports cars.

m4a1mustang · 02-02-2012, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes

i love how you just assume that i don't try other settings and you sound like you know about my car better than i do. it is on the most stiff setting because it is the best i could dial the car in after hundreds of miles of trial in each setting. you've spent enough time in nj to experience every road? that's funny, because i keep finding these great roads in NJ that are great for spirited driving.

if you like more body roll and break dive i guess you can say what you said. but "absolutely, disgustingly amazing" tells me you haven't experienced many real sports cars.

Honestly I don't think you can take that comment at face value. Look deeper and it's disgustingly amazing because the car is a Mustang. A Mustang is not supposed to drive like this. A GT Mustang shouldn't even be within five seconds of an M3 at Willow Springs let alone a tenth of a second. Popular car culture has had us believing for years that at first sight of a corner the Mustang should plow straight off the road into a barrier.

To me, that is why it is so impressive. It's unexpected.

m4a1mustang · 02-02-2012, 12:04 PM

ihatepotholes, I think you'd be well served by the Fays2 Watts Link. Much lower rear roll center (which you can fine tune) and much better rear body control. The axle articulates more like a multi-link rear than a panhard bar live axle.

Pharmacist · 02-02-2012, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes

i don't know what you drove, but my Boss 302's handling is far from absolutely, disgustingly amazing even with adj dampers on the hardest setting. my Z handled better than my boss, not only it did not have the brake dive it had far less body roll. Z's steering is just on another level compared to the Boss; far more direct, precise and sensitive.

yes, Z has slight bump steer. however, mustang has far worse than bump steer to deal with. have you ever hit a bump while corning in your mustang? let me tell you it is not a good feeling, regardless what ford did to hide the SRA's characteristic it is still there, and you'll know that when you get on a bumpy road.

unless you think 5.0 GT out handles the Boss 302 i find that review slightly biased.

+1 rep

ihatepotholes · 02-02-2012, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang

If that was true then everybody would run the stiffest dampers, springs, and roll bars humanly possible. And guess what? The cars would handle like **** as there would be no suspension compliance and the tires would skip across the pavement.

if cornering ability is whats most important, then yeah. if my car was strictly track dedicated i would have stiffest coilovers and thickest roll bars and -3 degree cambers all around. just like 302S and 302R.

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang

Honestly I feel like you're mixing body roll with roll rate. The Mustang is very flat in the corners, it just has a faster roll rate than the Z. I'm in the process of tuning that out myself.

i'll make myself a little easier to understand... mustang has too much lateral movement during cornering for my liking. it is not as flat as Z or some other vehicles that i have driven.

ihatepotholes · 02-02-2012, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang

ihatepotholes, I think you'd be well served by the Fays2 Watts Link. Much lower rear roll center (which you can fine tune) and much better rear body control. The axle articulates more like a multi-link rear than a panhard bar live axle.

i am in the process of choosing between Fays2 and Steeda Watts link. thank you for the recommendation. right now im just waiting for FRP release to their Boss specified springs.

m4a1mustang · 02-02-2012, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes

i am in the process of choosing between Fays2 and Steeda Watts link. thank you for the recommendation. right now im just waiting for FRP release to their Boss specified springs.

I think the Fays2 is probably the better unit.. It's a little heavier than the Steeda unit but it doesn't compromise clearance on the passenger side like the Steeda does. It's also what, $400 less?

Mine should be here either Friday or Monday. Planning on installing it next Friday.

Pharmacist · 02-02-2012, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang

I think the Fays2 is probably the better unit. It's a little heavier than the Steeda unit but it doesn't compromise clearance on the passenger side like the Steeda does. It's also what, $400 less?

I just wanted to say how unreal the feeling is to see people talking about Watts linkages on a performance car in the year 2012. Perhaps the next gen Mustang will have people discussing which carburettor to maximize horsepower

*runs away and puts flame shield on*

m4a1mustang · 02-02-2012, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pharmacist

I just wanted to say how unreal the feeling is to see people talking about Watts linkages on a performance car in the year 2012. Perhaps the next gen Mustang will have people discussing which carburettor to maximize horsepower

*runs away and puts flame shield on*

This has been an exciting day for you! First you learn about toe and then you learn what a Watts Link is! Thank goodness for Wikipedia!

02-02-2012, 12:04 PM	#2544 (permalink)
m4a1mustang A True Z Fanatic Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Northern VA Posts: 55,385 Drives: on two wheels Rep Power: 6962	ihatepotholes, I think you'd be well served by the Fays2 Watts Link. Much lower rear roll center (which you can fine tune) and much better rear body control. The axle articulates more like a multi-link rear than a panhard bar live axle. __________________ - Steve Zs & Coffee - Saturdays at 10AM in Fairfax, VA and Columbia, MD (Click the banner!) LIKE us on Facebook!