OP
OP
unterstutzung87
Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2023
- Messages
- 127
- Reaction score
- 77
Good videos thanks !
Tracking an sn95 ?
- Thread starter unterstutzung87
- Start date
OP
OP
unterstutzung87
Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2023
- Messages
- 127
- Reaction score
- 77
So it looks like most Mustangs run in cam c? Also where can I find your videos?
Frank.JD.Perez
Legend
cam c used to be where 79-04 was placed, but new rules i think have moved them to cam t
correct me if im wrong @white95 @Warhorse Racing
just go to youtube and search me or click my website link below
correct me if im wrong @white95 @Warhorse Racing
just go to youtube and search me or click my website link below
Warhorse Racing
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2019
- Messages
- 266
- Reaction score
- 252
79-04 Mustangs are classed in CAM-T with a minimum weight of 3,180 lbs. with driver, but they can run in CAM-C if they meet the minimum weight with driver (3,480 lbs.). They can also run in CAM-S, but that isn't very common (you'd want to get the car down to 2,680 lbs. with driver).
CAM is for heavily modified cars. There are other places our cars fit. Your Category/class depends on your mods. If you have subframe connectors welded into the car, you will probably fit best in CAM-T. If they have a Novice Class, you will register in Novice CAM-T.
OP
OP
unterstutzung87
Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2023
- Messages
- 127
- Reaction score
- 77
I just have bolt ons gears and a tune, tires are only slightly wider than stock. 255's all around.
Warhorse Racing
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2019
- Messages
- 266
- Reaction score
- 252
The specific bolt-ons could matter. The SCCA goes to great lengths to try to level the playing field. These days, most 79-04 Mustangs tend to end up in CAM-T, just because common mods put them in that class. For your first event, I think Novice CAM-T is the right place. The autocross community is generally very welcoming, but the CAM drivers are especially helpful. Don't worry about competing with anyone at your first event. Your goal is to be able to find the course, improve your fundamentals, and improve your times.
If you decide that you want to do more autocross events, you can dive into the SCCA Rules to see where your mods put your car. You'll be tempted (and probably told) to make a bunch of mods. My advice would be to fix anything that might be a safety issue, then don't change anything until you've done a season of events. Most importantly, have fun!
If you decide that you want to do more autocross events, you can dive into the SCCA Rules to see where your mods put your car. You'll be tempted (and probably told) to make a bunch of mods. My advice would be to fix anything that might be a safety issue, then don't change anything until you've done a season of events. Most importantly, have fun!
CobraRGuy
Member
I do stand by my earier post. As far as the stock 4-arm rear suspension, it's khrapp, plain and simple. 6+ inches of lateral axle movement is not okay. Bind is not okay. The rear axle in my car now has only 1/4" of lateral movement (the arc of the end of the bar) and no bind. A Watts Link is even better (I was told up to 1/2 second per lap at Sonoma) but in the case of Griggs requires giving up your spare tire carrier. Ford eliminated that rear setup for a good reason, and the Camaro has used a Panhard bar for many years. I've tried the stock 4-link and Griggs Panhard bar rear suspensions on the same car. The difference is clear and very noticable.
CobraRGuy
Member
You're welcome. I'm glad I was able to motivate you! 8^)
CobraRGuy
Member
To be clear, I do not auto-x my car. If you say that Mustangs can be great auto-x cars, then I believe you. I stand corrected on that...
The key to success is eliminating the bind in the rear suspension. This totally transformed the way my car handled. The change to 315/30-18’s at each corner further augmented the setup.
CobraRGuy
Member
Are you still running the upper arms?
No sir! The torque arm negates the upper control arms and the panhard bar centers the rear end laterally.
CobraRGuy
Member
So that's very similar to what I have. My lower arms may be longer than what you have. Griggs welds new forward mount points and uses arms that are Heim jointed at each end and 11" longer than stock.
CobraRGuy
Member
I'd love to know how you managed to get 315 tires all the way around on your car. That's what mine needs, more tire. I can't tell from your picture if you rolled your rear fenders. I suspect you have. Also, what wheel size (diameter, width and offset) are you running?
Frank.JD.Perez
Legend
josef out here showing off
Rear fenders haven’t been rolled just yet. I have flared front fenders patterned off of Bruce’s laser red Cobra to clear the 315’s.
18x11 16mm with a 5mm spacer to clear the coil over
Warhorse Racing
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2019
- Messages
- 266
- Reaction score
- 252
I just want to add some clarity about upper control arms, because the OP and others reading this thread will benefit from having more information. For 30 years, I've been told that Mustangs can't handle with the rear upper control arms in place. I've seen countless posts/comments about how these cars can't be used for performance driving with all 4 rear control arms on the car, because of quadra-bind. Quadra-bind is a real thing; I'm not denying that. But the issue has been blown out of proportion over the years because it's a great marketing tool, and because many popular mods make our cars handle worse. If your Fox or SN95 Mustang has the original OEM rubber rear upper control arm bushings in place, they are well past their prime. It's going to handle poorly when pushed to the limit. If you put stiff 1- or 2-piece poly bushings in the UCA location, lower the car too much, and install stiffer aftermarket shocks and struts, your car is going to oversteer like crazy on an autocross course. All too often, a maintenance or modification issue gets referred to as a "quadra-bind" issue. This results in cars that have a handling issue most people can drive around being labelled "undriveable" in performance settings.
Why is this important? Because the idea that you need to completely rebuild your rear suspension to even attempt performance driving in a 79-04 Mustang makes it incredibly hard to get people to autocross their Mustangs. And you can't remove the UCAs or install a Torque Arm in some SCCA Categories. Many Mustangs have been autocrossed in Street Category over the years with OEM upper control arms and rubber bushings. In SCCA Categories/classes with less restrictive rules, it is 100% possible to autocross a Fox or SN95 Mustang with all 4 rear control arms in place. I've used aftermarket rear control arms with 3-piece poly bushings and spherical upper differential housing bushings for years, and I've never experienced quadra-bind.
Installing a rear suspension system that removes the UCAs will improve the handling of your Mustang (provided your other mods and adjustments are correct). Unfortunately, that has become the first piece of advice most people get when they say they want to try autocrossing their Mustangs. It was the first piece of advice I got. I was told my whole setup was wrong. While that didn't deter me, I know for a fact advice like that has deterred others.
I'm not trying to dissuade anybody from sharing their experience with their suspension setups. There's a wealth of information on this forum about all sorts of handling mods. I just wanted to balance out the conversation about upper control arms.
Why is this important? Because the idea that you need to completely rebuild your rear suspension to even attempt performance driving in a 79-04 Mustang makes it incredibly hard to get people to autocross their Mustangs. And you can't remove the UCAs or install a Torque Arm in some SCCA Categories. Many Mustangs have been autocrossed in Street Category over the years with OEM upper control arms and rubber bushings. In SCCA Categories/classes with less restrictive rules, it is 100% possible to autocross a Fox or SN95 Mustang with all 4 rear control arms in place. I've used aftermarket rear control arms with 3-piece poly bushings and spherical upper differential housing bushings for years, and I've never experienced quadra-bind.
Installing a rear suspension system that removes the UCAs will improve the handling of your Mustang (provided your other mods and adjustments are correct). Unfortunately, that has become the first piece of advice most people get when they say they want to try autocrossing their Mustangs. It was the first piece of advice I got. I was told my whole setup was wrong. While that didn't deter me, I know for a fact advice like that has deterred others.
I'm not trying to dissuade anybody from sharing their experience with their suspension setups. There's a wealth of information on this forum about all sorts of handling mods. I just wanted to balance out the conversation about upper control arms.
weendoggy
Active Member
- Joined
- May 31, 2019
- Messages
- 637
- Reaction score
- 729
WR, agree with UCA's being crap if original (20+ yrs) and my advice is to replace them. I use stiffer LCA bushings and PB but use brand new stock UCA bushings. In fact, brand new stock UCA arms too. The rear needs to rotate, even ever so little or you get what you explain with stiff upper and lower bushings, and even "snap oversteer". I've driven my buddies car with UCA Heim's and they work as well, just make a lot of noise. btw: I don't auto-x, just HPDE now. Gave up auto-x about 15yrs ago.
You won’t dissuade me a bit 
The beauty of a web forum lies within the multitude of opinions on the same subject. Even better when data supports the claim and it allows the member to make an informed decision based on it.
(Ie; we love helping people spend money)
The beauty of a web forum lies within the multitude of opinions on the same subject. Even better when data supports the claim and it allows the member to make an informed decision based on it.(Ie; we love helping people spend money)
Frank.JD.Perez
Legend
*Jon's*
