Torque Arm on an S197

[SoundGuyDave]

Why hasn't anyone made LCA relocation brackets that work with the stock/GT500 LCAs?

All of the ones I've seen say they require aftermarket LCAs.

Simple packaging... The stock LCAs are shaped like a dog-bone, with bulbous ends and narrow middles. When installing the brackets, you need to use a bolt in the stock position to hold them in place (unless welding, but even then, you need SOMETHING in there to keep the bracket and mount from torquing or collapsing inward). That bolt, then, prevents any part of a LCA from occupying the same space.

Really, all you're looking to do is move the arm mounting point down an inch or so, but if the radius of the end of the arm is greater than that, it will interfere with the hardware used to attach the bracket to the car.

 

[Sharad]

Why hasn't anyone made LCA relocation brackets that work with the stock/GT500 LCAs?

All of the ones I've seen say they require aftermarket LCAs.

My two cents:

Because the factory LCAs are awful. Awful awful awful. Even just for street driving on street tires, but even more so for racing on the drag strip or road course.

 

[kcbrown]

My two cents:

Because the factory LCAs are awful. Awful awful awful. Even just for street driving on street tires, but even more so for racing on the drag strip or road course.

Even the GT500 ones that Ford Racing appears to sell? As far as I know, they are identical to the ones that come with the GT track package. But maybe the ones that come with the GT track package have different bushings.

Regardless, as a side effect of being incompatible with the stock LCAs, the relocation brackets are also incompatible with the Ford Racing GT500 LCAs.

 

[csamsh]

Even the GT500 ones that Ford Racing appears to sell? As far as I know, they are identical to the ones that come with the GT track package. But maybe the ones that come with the GT track package have different bushings.

Regardless, as a side effect of being incompatible with the stock LCAs, the relocation brackets are also incompatible with the Ford Racing GT500 LCAs.

GT500 arms just have different (but still soft rubber) bushings.

The 302R and 302S arms are very nice though.

 

[BMR Tech]

Why hasn't anyone made LCA relocation brackets that work with the stock/GT500 LCAs?

All of the ones I've seen say they require aftermarket LCAs.

Simple packaging... The stock LCAs are shaped like a dog-bone, with bulbous ends and narrow middles. When installing the brackets, you need to use a bolt in the stock position to hold them in place (unless welding, but even then, you need SOMETHING in there to keep the bracket and mount from torquing or collapsing inward). That bolt, then, prevents any part of a LCA from occupying the same space.

There are hundreds of people out there running our relocation brackets with factory LCA. We were recently doing some NVH testing for a new compound bushing in the works, and were running the stock LCA for a little over a month:



Here is a good idea of the clearance. You cannot run the upper most position of the BMR brackets, due to the "through" bolt that Dave was speaking about. Now, if you weld the brackets in, you can remove that through bolt. You can also use the upper most position, if you modify the factory LCA - I have road course customers who do this.

Really, all you're looking to do is move the arm mounting point down an inch or so, but if the radius of the end of the arm is greater than that, it will interfere with the hardware used to attach the bracket to the car.

It is not possible to drop down 1" from the stock position, without serious modification of the stock axle LCA mount, as well as fabbing up some custom brackets, plates or tabs.





That said, a car that is dropped 1"+ from the stock ride height, can typically benefit from dropping the LCA down about 2" (that would be the first hole in our bracket)

2" down is about as close as you can get, to the factory mounting point with an aftermarket bracket.

For a car that is lowered 1.5"...especially an 05-10 car.....a 2" drop in LCA angle will work much better in corner exit, than a stock position LCA.

The recent fad, is, customers (handling specific) are calling me and ordering the 2011+ UCA Mount and our relocation brackets. They are using the 1" longer UCA (they grab a stocker form ebay), and our Upper Mount actually has a position that is 1/4" higher than the factory - so this alleviates some of the erratic axle movement due to the aggressive AS%. They pair that position with the Middle position of our brackets, and it is working extremely well.

The 1" longer UCA, paired with a higher UCA mount.....can do wonders. You can go more aggressive on AS% - specifically adjusted by LCA, and not suffer as much from an erratic rear axle.

 

[Sharad]

The recent fad, is, customers (handling specific) are calling me and ordering the 2011+ UCA Mount and our relocation brackets. They are using the 1" longer UCA (they grab a stocker form ebay), and our Upper Mount actually has a position that is 1/4" higher than the factory - so this alleviates some of the erratic axle movement due to the aggressive AS%. They pair that position with the Middle position of our brackets, and it is working extremely well.

The 1" longer UCA, paired with a higher UCA mount.....can do wonders. You can go more aggressive on AS% - specifically adjusted by LCA, and not suffer as much from an erratic rear axle.

^^This is EXACTLY what I was talking about in that other thread. In fact, I'll copy/paste this there. Obviously, this parts swap doesn't apply to my 11 car, but the idea applies. If I can raise my body side UCA mounting point even a little, I will. (for handling purposes)

 

[sheizasosay]

The recent fad, is, customers (handling specific) are calling me and ordering the 2011+ UCA Mount and our relocation brackets. They are using the 1" longer UCA (they grab a stocker form ebay), and our Upper Mount actually has a position that is 1/4" higher than the factory - so this alleviates some of the erratic axle movement due to the aggressive AS%. They pair that position with the Middle position of our brackets, and it is working extremely well.

The 1" longer UCA, paired with a higher UCA mount.....can do wonders. You can go more aggressive on AS% - specifically adjusted by LCA, and not suffer as much from an erratic rear axle.

And this fits is a straight bolt in affair for 2005-2010? You can use any 2011 UCA with as long as you use the 2011 mount?

 

[BMR Tech]

Correct.

And our mount, specifically, features a 1/4" higher than stock mounting position, designed for lowered cars. You can grab a BMR Mount, a new 18mm forward bolt, and a stock 2011+ UCA (or any 11+ specific uca)....and throw it in an 05-10 car.

 

[Sky Render]

Correct.

And our mount, specifically, features a 1/4" higher than stock mounting position, designed for lowered cars. You can grab a BMR Mount, a new 18mm forward bolt, and a stock 2011+ UCA (or any 11+ specific uca)....and throw it in an 05-10 car.

Interesting. What benefits are there to using the BMR mount's other hole if you already have a 2011 UCA?

 

[BMR Tech]

Interesting. What benefits are there to using the BMR mount's other hole if you already have a 2011 UCA?

Our upper most position on our UCA Mount is 1/4" higher than the stock UCa position.

If you are lowered, and you use our upper position, then lowering the LCA lower on the relo brackets, places the instant center point in a more desirable location for road course / handling applications.

 

[sheizasosay]

^^This is EXACTLY what I was talking about in that other thread. In fact, I'll copy/paste this there. Obviously, this parts swap doesn't apply to my 11 car, but the idea applies. If I can raise my body side UCA mounting point even a little, I will. (for handling purposes)

So Sharad, does this mean that you will buy the BMR mount to do this or does it mean you will have to get UPR "in" on "adjusting" UPR's mount design to mirror BMR's? Just wandering...because I just went to your website and I looked at the pics of your mounts and they all only have one hole. You should slap a big ole' BMR sticker on the side of your car!

 

[Norm Peterson]

The recent fad, is, customers (handling specific) are calling me and ordering the 2011+ UCA Mount and our relocation brackets. They are using the 1" longer UCA (they grab a stocker form ebay), and our Upper Mount actually has a position that is 1/4" higher than the factory - so this alleviates some of the erratic axle movement due to the aggressive AS%. They pair that position with the Middle position of our brackets, and it is working extremely well.

Do you know what roll center height adjustments they are also making - if any?


Norm

 

[Sharad]

So Sharad, does this mean that you will buy the BMR mount to do this or does it mean you will have to get UPR "in" on "adjusting" UPR's mount design to mirror BMR's? Just wandering...because I just went to your website and I looked at the pics of your mounts and they all only have one hole. You should slap a big ole' BMR sticker on the side of your car!

I'll tell you what- I mentioned to the Admin that I'm getting tired of your Man-crush on me. Since they don't seem inclined to do anything about it, despite the fact that I pay a lot of money to be here, I'm just gonna handle this the way I handle all keyboard warriors.

Threats? Nope. Not my style. Cuss words, temper tantrum? Nope, I'm too old for that nonsense. Here's how I handle keyboard warriors on the automotive boards- You think UPR is junk? You think I don't know how to make a car work? Prove it. You can catch a lane with me. Drag race, autocross, open track... you choose. Me in my car, you in your car. If I win, I'll accept your public apology as my winnings. Let me know if you'd like to back up your talk on the racetrack. If not, kindly quit e-stalking me. It's creepy.

 

[sheizasosay]

This page in this thread is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. I mean c'mon man...you copy their products and their quotes? LOL!!! GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE!!!

You literally just quoted BMR's advice in post 106 about moving the pick-up point up 1/4" and then I call you out because:

A-You are quoting BMR, a competitor ( out of your league though) on technical advice in a technical discussion and all you have to bring to it is what BMR JUST said. Well hey, just copy it.

B- Your product (UPR's product) does not facilitate this modification(yet), but BMR's does. I'm sure you will copy it and solve that whole "yet" problem.

I don't give two, count them, one, two shits how much money you pay to be on this board. I don't know the admins personally, but I have spoke to two of them before and those guys are a "fuck the bullshit" group. I happen to like that. If you addressed them about me and they didn't do anything....go cry a fucking river. I DO NOT GIVE A SHIT. I guess you have to deal with getting called out.

I've already seen the difference in BMR and UPR. UPR does not know what to do unless somebody else does it first. I don't care if you know how to make your car work. What I do care about is UPR's business ethics. So me apologizing for UPR is not gonna happen anytime soon.

 

[NoTicket]

You do realize that literally everybody in the aftermarket parts business has been copying off of either previous generations designs, or each others all along, right?

Your BMR fanboy enthusiasm for slamming on UPR is... strange.

If a company that is designing a part sees another company talking about how people LOVE their 1/4" higher mounting point they would be completely stupid not to consider it. It is the way of the world and the only reason that Ford has Direct Injection, DOHC, or variable valve timing on the Coyote engine.

The automotive industry is one in which some companies experiment, and other companies see what worked and what didn't, and copy it.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[sheizasosay]

You do realize that literally everybody in the aftermarket parts business has been copying off of either previous generations designs, or each others all along, right?

Your BMR fanboy enthusiasm for slamming on UPR is... strange.

If a company that is designing a part sees another company talking about how people LOVE their 1/4" higher mounting point they would be completely stupid not to consider it. It is the way of the world and the only reason that Ford has Direct Injection, DOHC, or variable valve timing on the Coyote engine.

The automotive industry is one in which some companies experiment, and other companies see what worked and what didn't, and copy it.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

There is truth to your examples in and of themselves, but I would not use them as a legit metaphor between BMR and UPR.

I'm not a "fan" of BMR, but I have given BMR more shit than anybody. I had issues with BMR being in the proper capacity to develop a critical part and not doing what I thought was "enough" testing/development to be selling that part. I said my piece about it then though.

There is a difference in someone straight copying vs someone that knows and understands the product and it's design and can engineer their own. That is evolution of a product. Somebody came up with the combustion engine. Other engineers add to it and in their own way and with understanding and motivation to be competitive and design something better. The product is improved. It benefits the consumer and on top of that feeds other innovation.

What does not benefit the consumer (in the long run) is someone straight copying something and offering it cheaper. Sure you can get a product cheaper, but ultimately the originator takes a hit because he has the research and development cost AND on top of that the guy who does nothing but copy only brings down the guys that do innovate.

Now...do I think UPR is taking BMR down? No, but that's an assumption. I notice there has been no denial of the things I have been saying; just deflection. So it's obvious that there is truth in my statements. What anyone else decides about it is their own piece. I will say mine though.

 

[SD_Stang]

This page in this thread is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. I mean c'mon man...you copy their products and their quotes? LOL!!! GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE!!!

You literally just quoted BMR's advice in post 106 about moving the pick-up point up 1/4" and then I call you out because:

A-You are quoting BMR, a competitor ( out of your league though) on technical advice in a technical discussion and all you have to bring to it is what BMR JUST said. Well hey, just copy it.

B- Your product (UPR's product) does not facilitate this modification(yet), but BMR's does. I'm sure you will copy it and solve that whole "yet" problem.

I don't give two, count them, one, two shits how much money you pay to be on this board. I don't know the admins personally, but I have spoke to two of them before and those guys are a "fuck the bullshit" group. I happen to like that. If you addressed them about me and they didn't do anything....go cry a fucking river. I DO NOT GIVE A SHIT. I guess you have to deal with getting called out.

I've already seen the difference in BMR and UPR. UPR does not know what to do unless somebody else does it first. I don't care if you know how to make your car work. What I do care about is UPR's business ethics. So me apologizing for UPR is not gonna happen anytime soon.

How does that have anything to do with a Torque Arm? Right.

You think CorteX didn't borrow most of their design from Griggs even though their parts have minor changes they are more or less the exact same pieces. BMR is coming out with a Watts Link and their are only about 6-7 of them out do you honestly think they are not getting "ideas" off of ones that are already out?

No offense Kelly I'm not saying it will be a bad piece or that it's a rip off it's just very late to the game. I am looking forward to seeing it though because I know you guys make well thought out durable pieces.

Normally when a Company or person decided to make a part it's because they feel they can improve upon something and either make it stronger more adjustable, fit better or lighter not just hey this company sells it so lets copy it and throw our tag on it maybe they''ll sell?

And all your f this I don't give a shit comments make you sound like your in junior high.

 

[BMR Tech]

No offense Kelly I'm not saying it will be a bad piece or that it's a rip off it's just very late to the game. I am looking forward to seeing it though because I know you guys make well thought out durable pieces..

None taken.

I believe the S197 Segment of our operation is just getting warmed up, with the abundance of stock 2011+ Coyote powered cars out there, combined with the abundance of current 3V cars being owned and modified, still. Add to that, we truly believe the new platform will cater to a different crowd. Kind of like, the difference between Fox/S97 and 93-02 F-Bodies and the newer 5th Gen. I think the 2011+ market is going to be big for quite some time.

That said, we designed our Watts link many years ago, actually. Sure, there are similarities to the other kits....but we make it a point to design and manufacture our components with little to no influence from the outside. Who knows, it may be another 2 years before it gets released - I wouldn't be surprised, as the 2015 is coming up quick, and you can bet your bottom dollar it will be in our hands and getting completely ripped apart asap..

Back to T/A talk. I am enjoying it.

 

[sheizasosay]

How does that have anything to do with a Torque Arm? Right.


And all your f this I don't give a shit comments make you sound like your in junior high.

This thread has a lot of good info. The Torque arm talk has led over to UCA's and I just couldn't help noticing Sharad talking about adjusting the UCA up a 1/4" in which he(his customers) would not be able to facilitate with UPR parts and the "tech" he quoted came from the company UPR will likely copy the part to "facilitate" the adjustment. Hard to say no to irony sometimes. I do have a tendency to cuss pretty bad. I'll drop it and we can get back on tech. I apologize for getting off track.

 

[SD_Stang]

None taken.

I believe the S197 Segment of our operation is just getting warmed up, with the abundance of stock 2011+ Coyote powered cars out there, combined with the abundance of current 3V cars being owned and modified, still. Add to that, we truly believe the new platform will cater to a different crowd. Kind of like, the difference between Fox/S97 and 93-02 F-Bodies and the newer 5th Gen. I think the 2011+ market is going to be big for quite some time.

That said, we designed our Watts link many years ago, actually. Sure, there are similarities to the other kits....but we make it a point to design and manufacture our components with little to no influence from the outside. Who knows, it may be another 2 years before it gets released - I wouldn't be surprised, as the 2015 is coming up quick, and you can bet your bottom dollar it will be in our hands and getting completely ripped apart asap..

Back to T/A talk. I am enjoying it.

Sometimes being late to the game means it's worth the wait just take MGW for instance. I won't be ready for my Full Suspension until July most likely and will probably change my mind 10 different times between what I "Need"what will work.

There was not a lot of good info on the Mustang Specific Torque Arms that I had seen from real people who race them and street their cars and the pro's and cons hence why I asked.