Sway bar endlinks setup

[sheizasosay]

I just got some whiteline adjustable endlinks for the front sway bar and have installed them on one side and have stopped for now. I'm looking at Steeda's instructions for setup and have a question. For reference http://www.steeda.com/store/uploads/555-1053-1.pdf

I understand you don't want the sway bar loaded unless you're turning and Steeda's instructions on the first part make sense in that respect: Remove both factory endlinks. Install one adjustable endlink. Put the wheels back on and lower the car. From under the car put the other end link on and set it to the length where it effortlessly slides in (strut ear) so as to not preload it. That all makes sense.

Now at the bottom of the instructions it has notes for track or competition use. Here it tells you to adjust the endlinks so they are parallel to the control arm bushing centerlines. It continues to talk about non-linear rate if you don't set it up accordingly.

Seems that would negate the previous instructions if you had to change the endlink lengths. Am I off here? Through searching I have found mostly "get them parallel" to be the norm. I'm leaning towards that. Any help would be appreciated.

 

[Whiskey11]

I just got some whiteline adjustable endlinks for the front sway bar and have installed them on one side and have stopped for now. I'm looking at Steeda's instructions for setup and have a question. For reference http://www.steeda.com/store/uploads/555-1053-1.pdf

I understand you don't want the sway bar loaded unless you're turning and Steeda's instructions on the first part make sense in that respect: Remove both factory endlinks. Install one adjustable endlink. Put the wheels back on and lower the car. From under the car put the other end link on and set it to the length where it effortlessly slides in (strut ear) so as to not preload it. That all makes sense.

Now at the bottom of the instructions it has notes for track or competition use. Here it tells you to adjust the endlinks so they are parallel to the control arm bushing centerlines. It continues to talk about non-linear rate if you don't set it up accordingly.

Seems that would negate the previous instructions if you had to change the endlink lengths. Am I off here? Through searching I have found mostly "get them parallel" to be the norm. I'm leaning towards that. Any help would be appreciated.

Ideally, you want your body weight in the driver seat, the car corner balanced without the swaybars hooked up and then eliminate any preload in the swaybar. That is as easy as turning the tube with the jam nuts loose. When the tube spins freely and turning it in either direction results in more tension, you are there. Pretty straight forward really.

As for the overall length, ideally you want your swaybar to start off horizontal and go from there. This provides the best range of motion in both directions.

 

[DevGittinJr]

I'm no expert, but I set mine up with the suspension loaded, on a lift. Ideally, you do want the ends of the sway bar parallel to the lca bushings, but if your car is lowered and you don't have struts with shorter housings, and/or slotted front sway bar mounts (Steeda, UMI), then you probably won't get the ends of the sway bar quite low enough to be parallel to the lca's. IIRC the Whiteline front sway bar comes with adjustable mounts so that you can raise the front of the sway bar a bit when the car is lowered, to help get it parallel to the lca's. Once you get one side adjusted to where the sway bar is as close as possible to parallel with the front lca bushings, then adjust the other side to where it goes in easy (no preload). I've adjusted mine between the middle and softest settings with the car on the ground using the same method. It takes about 20 mins to do both sides. Hope this helps.

 

[sheizasosay]

Cool. Thanks for the help.

 

[o2sys]

Do they increase noise?

posted via Tapatalk

 

[sheizasosay]

Not that I can tell.

 

[o2sys]

So there is not need to really adjust them. Its seems more of a marketing thing.

I got my adjustable endlinks now and during install if I dont notice my swaybar ends aren't parallel I should not adjust them?

Does this "parallel" thing apply to both front and rear?

 

[SoundGuyDave]

The adjustability isn't primarily for flattening the bar, that's more a function of the physical length of the link. What that adjustability is really for is to eliminate bar pre-load at static ride height.

The idea here is that if you don't have adjustables, then if the links are not PERFECT in length (think bushing and other mechanical tolerances, stacked up on top of unequal corner loading), then you will have some effect from the swaybar at static ride height.

So what? Who cares? What that really means is that the car could respond "differently" in right and left-hand turns. If the bar is preloaded right, you already have bar rate in addition to spring rate when flat, and it's a nice, linear increase in a left-hand corner. On a right-hander, though, as the car starts to roll over, the rate will actually decrease (less bar rate, same spring rate), then drop to minimum as the bar unloads and actually goes neutral, and then starts to rise again. Also, if you HAVE coil-overs, and take the time to corner-weight the car, all that work will be destroyed once you hook the bar up with no way of eliminating the preload.

Are the critical for the average track nut? No. Will it shave seconds off your lap times, solve world hunger, and give us all ever-lasting peace? No. IF you have the car corner-weighted, though, are they the final icing on the cake? Maybe. They won't hurt, that's for sure.

 

[2013DIBGT]

One approach that I have been thinking to use for adjusting my adjustable end links that sounds good on paper is the following:

While the car is on the ground at ride height, measure the distance from the front hub centerline up to the fender lip on both sides of the car and write it down. If your car is corner weighted, these distances will probably be different like it is in my case.

Then jack up the front end, pull the wheels and put the car on jack stands.

Get two scissor or bottle jacks with a block of wood and set them up under each of the front wheel brake disks.

Jack up the front Hubs on both sides evenly until you reach the same measurement you recorded earlier from the wheel hub centerline to the fender lip.

In theory, This should place the car at the correct "loaded" ride height as it was while on the ground while at the same time providing plenty of room to work.

Then move on to installing the Endlinks and adjust them till Preload on the bar is gone.

I haven't decided if having the back end of the car up on small ramps at the same time is needed or not but it would certainly put the car at a more level setting front to rear while the above procedure was being done.

I'm not sure about anyone else but I don't have the ground clearance under the front of the car while its on the ground to do much of anything....

 

[SoundGuyDave]

Bah! Wayyyyy too much effort. Jack up one side, pop loose the jamb nuts, drop and settle the car. Reach around the tire with one arm, and spin the adjuster barrel until you find that neutral point, where there is no tension. Finger-tighten the jamb nuts, then jack it back up and tighten properly. Done. OR, get it done while you have the car on an alignment rack. OR, put the car up on ramps on all four corners (and keeping it flat is important), and do it that way.

 

[Norm Peterson]

Agree with Dave . . . and you'd at least need to run a couple of lug nuts (probably with spacers) to anchor the rotors to the hubs.


FWIW, I don't think I did any more than run my car up on equal-height ramps on my pretty-damn-flat driveway and adjust the second endlink so that the holes for the last bolt lined up and no forcing at all was required. Snugged the bolts as tight as I could with the room available before getting serious (wheel removal, etc.). If it matters, I'm running the UMI endlinks that use through bolts rather than studs integral with the sphericals as in the OE arrangement.


Norm

 

[sheizasosay]

I measured static ride height. Jacked the car up. Removed wheels. Jacked both wheels to ride height. Removed factory endlinks. Installed one side only. Adjusted it until it brought my swaybar parallel to my front lower control arm. Tightened that side down.

Installed the endlink on the other side and adjusted it until there was no preload. Tightened it all down. Put the wheels on and called it a wrap.

If one side of the swaybar is preloaded, so will the other side be. The steeda instructions say "If you are using your car in open-track or sanctioned road racing events, it is important to adjust the end links so the stabilizer bar arms are parallel to control arm bushing centerlines. This is particularly acute with S197 Mustangs that are running performance springs that lower the car. It is important to correct the bar arm alignment to best approximate a linear roll stiffness. As the stabilizer bar’s arm moves from parallel to the control arm pivot, the roll stiffness changes with the cosine of the angle the end link makes with the bar’s arm and the angle of the strut. Failure to observe this can make the car difficult to tune for optimum handling. "

So I was thinking that getting the sway bar parallel to the front control arm was the priority and then remove the preload. Because you can have a swaybar with no preload, yet not be parallel. It seemed like the most productive thing for me to with the endlinks.

Dave you always do find really easy ways to do stuff. I have looked over previous posts where you talked about you never had to remove the steering rack when you changed front control arms. I found those posts very helpful. A lot less work for sure.

 

[SoundGuyDave]

Thanks.... I'm the hardest working lazy guy any of you will ever meet. If I can figure out how to "push the easy button," trust me, I will!

With the control arms, it's a small PITA getting the clearance (shifting the wheel back and forth for clearance on the bellows) and having to use swivel sockets, but that's a LOT less hassle than pulling the rack...

 

[DevGittinJr]

Shouldn't the driver be in the car while cross-weighing and adjusting endlinks?

Also, I noticed that Watson Racing sells their adjustable endlinks individually, and that they are factory on the Boss 302r/s (but only on one side). Is the idea that only one really needs to be adjustable? This would counter the theory that the sway bar arms need to be parallel to the lca bushings, which is what I've always thought as well. IIRC, the 302r/s gets an adjustable endlink on the driver side and the stock endlink on the passenger side. With this set up the only adjustment is preload, as there's really no way to level the sway bar to correct for the car being lowered.

FWIW, I have the UMI endlinks and sway bar bushing mounts, and a BMR radiator support. The endlinks may be overkill, but they seem to be very well made. The bushing mounts are slotted, and so are the top sway bar mount holes on the radiator support. This allows the front of the sway bar to be raised about 1/4."

 

[Norm Peterson]

Shouldn't the driver be in the car while cross-weighing and adjusting endlinks?

Either that or have driver weight simulated with an equivalent weight in loose barbell plates.

Also, I noticed that Watson Racing sells their adjustable endlinks individually, and that they are factory on the Boss 302r/s (but only on one side). Is the idea that only one really needs to be adjustable? This would counter the theory that the sway bar arms need to be parallel to the lca bushings, which is what I've always thought as well. IIRC, the 302r/s gets an adjustable endlink on the driver side and the stock endlink on the passenger side. With this set up the only adjustment is preload, as there's really no way to level the sway bar to correct for the car being lowered.

Apparently they aren't too concerned about arm inclination, which won't be the same as the physical arm inclination if the bar arms are bent as seen in side view. FWIW, the struts' caster inclination has to figure in to how close the endlinks can remain to being perpendicular to the bar's arms - and which probably won't be symmetrical, comparing bump travel vs rebound. I haven't even tried to put any numbers to see how any of this actually varies, but it's easy enough to understand why anybody might allow adjustability to eliminate preload and call it done.


Norm

 

[SoundGuyDave]

Shouldn't the driver be in the car while cross-weighing and adjusting endlinks?

Only if the driver is very, VERY patient.... Better solution is to pile an equivalent amount of weight on the driver's seat. Sandbags, barbells, old truck brake drums, whatever is handy and weighty will work. But yes, conceptually, you do want driver's weight in there. Also, if you're running the stock tank, you also want it full, due to the saddlebag shape.

[Also, I noticed that Watson Racing sells their adjustable endlinks individually, and that they are factory on the Boss 302r/s (but only on one side). Is the idea that only one really needs to be adjustable? This would counter the theory that the sway bar arms need to be parallel to the lca bushings, which is what I've always thought as well. IIRC, the 302r/s gets an adjustable endlink on the driver side and the stock endlink on the passenger side. With this set up the only adjustment is preload, as there's really no way to level the sway bar to correct for the car being lowered.[/quote]

Be a little cautious in blindly copying any given race car's setup... You may not be reading the correct reasoning into what they're doing. Is there a class rule that is preventing their use of a particular part? OR is there a class rule that REQUIRES the use of a particular part? Take Spec Iron for example: They REQUIRE the use of a specific damper, which is a single-adjustable monotube, of reasonable quality. It is NOT, however, the best possible solution, nor is it the ONLY solution. The Sachs triple-adjustables from the FR500S is probably a "better" damper. In this particular case (endlink on the Boss 302R/S), my guess would be that either A) there's a class rule that prevents use on both sides, or B) the effect of leveling the bar is minimal or even detrimental, and as a result, they simply go for eliminating preload. All I'm really trying to say is that most race cars are compromised in some form or another, so just because it's on a particular car really isn't a valid reason to run a given part unless you're cloning or trying to fit into class rules.

 

[Norm Peterson]

Shouldn't the driver be in the car while cross-weighing and adjusting endlinks?

And also for alignments, which I should have added above.

In fact, for all of these adjustment procedures in street-only applications you might even want to simulate driver + half a passenger, located appropriately.


Norm

 

[sheizasosay]

Apparently they aren't too concerned about arm inclination, which won't be the same as the physical arm inclination if the bar arms are bent as seen in side view. FWIW, the struts' caster inclination has to figure in to how close the endlinks can remain to being perpendicular to the bar's arms - and which probably won't be symmetrical, comparing bump travel vs rebound. I haven't even tried to put any numbers to see how any of this actually varies, but it's easy enough to understand why anybody might allow adjustability to eliminate preload and call it done.


Norm

So in translation from engineer talk to common talk: in regards to the swaybar being parallel to the front control arm bushings-the variables are too tedious to waste a lot of time on it unless you are searching for perfection.

I might be fighting a personality disorder here, but I can't NOT at least make an attempt to do it. It doesn't make sense to not put the arms parallel and then loose the preload. Regardless if it is perfect or not....to me.

I think the mistake would be after you have put the car back down on the ground, and see that there is a 1/2 degree inclination shift on the bar (not perfect) and then go back to work on it. That I can see being chalked up to "a waste of time".

Why not make a one-time attempt? It's not like it is difficult.

PS- I have zero problems with double-negatives.

 

[Norm Peterson]

If you're going to be fussy about this at all, you might as well be fussy about more things that go into it rather than fewer.

You're still assuming that what amounts to a motion ratio remains symmetrical about "horizontal arm inclination". Given that the strut end of the endlink moves rearward (and inward) in jounce and forward (and outward) in rebound relative to the bar's chassis brackets, this cannot be true. And if it isn't, just where do you put things to make this behavior as close to symmetrical as possible?

I am assuming that functional symmetry is what you really want here, vs an appearance that "looks right". Car show fanatics with mirrors and such showing the undercarriage would likely disagree, but this isn't their section.


Norm

 

[o2sys]

Ok got mine installed and I just set them to match the oe lengths and called it a day.

Another issue I have is, how important is that the front sways are mounted exactly on the center?

Whiteline doesn't give you any mounting point references for the bushings and you have to center it on your own. I tried the best but had no point of measure but now my OCD thinks it's off...argggg.