Is there anything that improves the suspension a lot but doesn't destroy ride quality?

[95opal]

You'd think actual race cars would have airbag suspension then, which none do!

Same kind of logic the 'fully built SRA' crowd seems to harp on all the time, with wild claims that their fully built SRA will outperform anything they encounter on-track. When you ask them if true supercars and hypercars ever use "fully built SRAs" you never get any reply.

The SRA has its place and it is only on a drag strip. I'm not discounting its ability on a road course but the fact is that a 'fully built IRS' will always outperform the 'fully built SRA'.

It's the same logic with suspension. You will never find the best performers using airbag suspension. I'm not discounting its utility; but a car with airbags can never hope to outperform a car with a properly engineered suspension system not using airbags.

Bruce Griggs will tell you otherwise.

 

[shovel]

But they did talk about the 4x4 look of the stock height on some of the SN95's.

Last time I changed what I was going to do based on what other people were going to complain about was elementary school, it's just not productive to give other people the keys to your life.

I personally do not now and will not ever see what peoples' problem is with the ride height on these cars. You're imagining that somehow because a completely normal for the era air gap exists between the fender and tire it's a huge problem that desperately needs to be solved for the survival of mankind.

You literally can't even see it while doing the thing the car was built to do.

What I think is weird is how many people own sporty cars, cars with the letters "GT" on them of which "T" means "Touring" and then don't go on Tours with them. You can drive the length of California and count on your fingers how many sporty 2-door cars are being driven between cities. Half of every middle class driveway or garage has a car made for driving pleasure yet when the owner needs to drive a few hours they pick the SUV & if just 10% of the people with track-modded compromise cars actually ever went to track days, tracks wouldn't be closing down would they?

To me that's a whole lot weirder than how a car from before the days of traction control was built with room for chains.

 

[cobrajeff96]

Bruce Griggs will tell you otherwise.

Of course he would, he specializes in SRA Watts Links!

Ask Bruce why Koenigsegg, Ferrari, Rimac, Bugatti, etc., etc., haven't caught on? Man, they're missing out on the SRA performance bandwagon.

 

[95opal]

Of course he would, he specializes in SRA Watts Links!

Ask Bruce why Koenigsegg, Ferrari, Rimac, Bugatti, etc., etc., haven't caught on? Man, they're missing out on the SRA performance bandwagon.

Griggs sells IRS upgrades.
Those cars are mid engine which benefit more from an irs than a front heavy mustang. There's way more to the irs debate than you would imagine. Went down this rabbit hole when I tore this car down and sold off the cookie cutter suspension that I had put on it the first build.

 

[cobrajeff96]

I believe in the might of an SRA, used to have a Watts Link/Third Member SRA myself and loved it. Went IRS and it's just better. That's just my own experience.

And so since you bring it up, I wonder why so many front-engine cars like any BMW, Audi, Mercedes, Corvette, Viper, etc. aren't using SRA then. If SRA is even at parity with IRS kinematic capability in general, surely it would be used since it's a cheaper design and therefore more cost-effective to implement. And yet it's nowehere to be found in the world anymore except for trucks and 90s-era pony cars.

 

[95opal]

I believe in the might of an SRA, used to have a Watts Link/Third Member SRA myself and loved it. Went IRS and it's just better. That's just my own experience.

And so since you bring it up, I wonder why so many front-engine cars like any BMW, Audi, Mercedes, Corvette, Viper, etc. aren't using SRA then. If SRA is even at parity with IRS kinematic capability in general, surely it would be used since it's a cheaper design and therefore more cost-effective to implement. And yet it's nowehere to be found in the world anymore except for trucks and 90s-era pony cars.

You keep comparing super cars designed around a IRS to a mustang that has been built around an sra forever. Apples and oranges.
building an irs to compete with a built sra in these cars you will be in for double if not more than a well built sra and still wind up with sub or maybe equal performance.

 

[Terrorist 5.0]

I think airbags have the potential to perform better than conventional springs. The issue at hand I believe is that they are heavier, and their response time to changes in settings (kind of like the idea of a progressive/dual rate spring) is not instant like a conventional spring.

I like the stiffer suspension I have though. As long as you aren’t on rough roads, it’s fine.

 

[cobrajeff96]

You keep comparing super cars designed around a IRS to a mustang that has been built around an sra forever. Apples and oranges.
building an irs to compete with a built sra in these cars you will be in for double if not more than a well built sra and still wind up with sub or maybe equal performance.

The kinematics of an IRS will always win over the kinematics of an SRA, that you must understand first.
Second, almost the entirety of the SRA's mass is dead weight. Third, is there any camber gain to be had in an SRA? And no, the super expensive cambered-drive SRAs from outfits like Cortex don't count as dynamic camber gain (and BTW the cost of a Cortex SRA will definitely be more than a built IRS.....and still lose out!).

Audi is not a supercar, neither is BMW, or Mercedes. These are passenger cars and by your logic these OEMs should've gone with SRA instead of IRS. Why isn't this the case?

 

[bennylava]

Last time I changed what I was going to do based on what other people were going to complain about was elementary school, it's just not productive to give other people the keys to your life.

I noticed you posted a pic of the refresh, aka the "New edge" mustang. It was much less pronounced in those cars. I don't think I would feel the need to lower one of those. I might do it because I like the look, but I wouldn't feel a need.

I think the ones most people are complaining about are the 94-98 cars. It's sheer unpopularity is likely why Ford wisely chose to minimize this on the 99+ SN95 cars.

 

[bennylava]

hardcore racing? No it is not the place for them but if you spend the majority of your time on the road then having it an inch with in its life for best track performance also isn't the best idea. As the topic says though a good bagged/performance system is a nice bridge between the two although it is certainly not the cheapest. It only hurts when you write the checks and it is smiles for miles after.

So even though bags aren't the very best for racing, would you still say that your handling improved a good deal by switching to them?

Next question - How is their reliability? Do you find that you have to repair the system more than you'd like? You hear horror stories about how bag systems are unreliable.

 

[ttocs]

yes they are better than stock for sure with handling but I think you will get better performance reliability from a coil over, or at least ridetech might seem to think so as the cars they put on the track use them. Now for streetcar comfort I would also say they are better than stock of course depending on how high you have them set I mean if you have it aired out and driving something is either going to scrape or there just isn't much room for the suspension to work. As for longterm performance I was told they are completely rebuildable and by luck their headquarters is less than an hour from me. I actually picked my kit up there and saw some of the build process on them.

 

[joemomma]

It was def less pronounced on the New Edge. My base '99 GT (which had 16" wheels) looked fine without any suspension work. It would have looked better dropped or with the optional 17" wheels, but it was fine as it came. My '94 (which had the optional 17" wheels) definitely needed the drop.

 

[shovel]

I noticed you posted a pic of the refresh, aka the "New edge" mustang. It was much less pronounced in those cars. I don't think I would feel the need to lower one of those. I might do it because I like the look, but I wouldn't feel a need.

I think the ones most people are complaining about are the 94-98 cars. It's sheer unpopularity is likely why Ford wisely chose to minimize this on the 99+ SN95 cars.

The SN95 wasn't unpopular and zero people were complaining about the wheel gap in the 90s because it was and is completely normal for the era. I own a 94 and my wife owns a 02.
Both are at stock ride height and a pleasure to drive long distances; we usually take my wife's 02 on the longer trips only because it has an automatic transmission and she doesn't like driving manual.

Just got back tonight from our 3000 mile road trip taking all the scenic routes.

 

[ttocs]

I was gonna say 94 gt was car of the year and saved the mustang as they were going to replace it with the probe if it didn't sell like it did. I know the general mustang community as a whole looks at the sn era almost like they do the mustang II era but that doesn't mean it was not a good car or popular. Mustang owners are just funny people....

 

[Daryl]

I went through all the same iterations over and over in my head when doing the suspension on my ‘95 Cobra, of which all components are from Maximum Motorsports. My mindset was based on what I see in race cars: lower, lower, lower; stick to the ground; aerodynamics; etc etc

So I called MM and spoke with them, citing a “floating” sensation at 80+mph. Felt very unstable. The guy said that was the air trying to get out from under the car. Essentially, the volume of air was “lifting” the car. I asked what was a good height for our cars ? He directed me to a photo of their (ie, the MM built) track car on their website. It has roughly a 1-1.5” gap in front and 1.5-2” in back. So that’s what I did!
Ok, I did add a small (2-3”) air dam in front ;-)

This isn’t the yellow SN95 I saw a handful of years ago, but you’ll get the idea…

 

[bennylava]

The SN95 wasn't unpopular and zero people were complaining about the wheel gap in the 90s because it was and is completely normal for the era. I own a 94 and my wife owns a 02.
Both are at stock ride height and a pleasure to drive long distances; we usually take my wife's 02 on the longer trips only because it has an automatic transmission and she doesn't like driving manual.

Just got back tonight from our 3000 mile road trip taking all the scenic routes.

View attachment 45600

No no, I wasn't talking about the car itself. They were of course very popular. I mean the sheer unpopularity of the wheel gap in the 94-98 cars. This thread and the other members' replies are all you need for proof of that. Plus I was there when the cars were new, had one as a teen, heard all the complaints. You're definitely in the minority on this one, but again nobody is talking about your car because it was definitely less noticeable on the new edge.

 

[bennylava]

I was gonna say 94 gt was car of the year and saved the mustang as they were going to replace it with the probe if it didn't sell like it did. I know the general mustang community as a whole looks at the sn era almost like they do the mustang II era but that doesn't mean it was not a good car or popular. Mustang owners are just funny people....

Yeah those guys are goofballs, and in the end I'm sure they'll be proved wrong and their opinion will suddenly evaporate as if by magic once the cars get old enough. Give it another 10 years for all of the cars to be solidly into classic territory and you won't even hear people say that anymore. Do they even say it about the mustang II anymore? People talk about the old hate, but now all those people would gladly buy one if it were in decent shape for a decent price.

Plus there will always be a ton of SN95's everywhere, they made way more of them than they ever dreamed of making Mustang II's

 

[cobrajeff96]

Not only the wheel gap vertically but the rear wheel gap horizontally. It's like 10" rear wheels are a must for SN95. And like a 295 rear tire at minimum.

 

[shovel]

Not only the wheel gap vertically but the rear wheel gap horizontally. It's like 10" rear wheels are a must for SN95. And like a 295 rear tire at minimum.

Plus you need oval wheels because lowering the car only reduces the gap at the top of the tire, you still have 100% of the gap in front of and behind the tire. So you need wheels and tires that are (American) football shaped to fill in the gap all around.

 

[cobrajeff96]

Sure