Parts in - MM XD RLCA's, panhard bar, Roush UCA

Tob

Salut!
Super Moderator
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
12,255
Location
The Ville
My latest order from Maximum Motorsports had arrived, completing a systematic array of parts that will no doubt make my 2009 GT500 a more capable automobile. I've used MM with much success in the past on my fox bodied cars and I expect nothing less with my latest S197 acquisition. But before I get into the hardware, I feel it necessary to mention what else I see that MM does right, packaging.

I ordered Maximum's "Extreme Duty Rear Lower Control Arms for 2005+ Mustang. Designed for high power applications and extreme use" last week. They come packaged in a slim box that you could tell had been filled just right in order to protect the contents within. The tag was simple.
ry%3D480


Parts are packaged and protected with a foam wrap. Voids are filled with the wrap to eliminate any empty space, a detail I really appreciate.
ry%3D480


The arms are supplied with new factory hardware and a few pages of Maximum's excellent step by step directions.
ry%3D480


The arms themselves are impressive, especially from a fabrication standpoint. I have yet to weigh them and compare them to the factory GT500 arm, but I will. The welds appear to be laid right and the powdercoating is uniform and scratch free. The length of the arms has been preset to match factory dimensioning and the rod ends are locked in and parallel (I checked and each arm is dead nuts).
ry%3D480

ry%3D480

ry%3D480


I've also chosen to install Roush Racing's "Wheel Hop Reduction Kit" in the hopes of further reigning in the most annoying characteristic that this chassis embodies - wheel hop.:p The Roush 'tech' that I spoke with on the phone didn't really impress me, nor does the vague product description on their website.

They could learn a thing or two on packaging from MM. It looked like the box the upper arm/bracket came in had been beaten up quite a bit. Most of what the box contained was air.
ry%3D480

ry%3D480


Pay attention, Mr Roush. I expect better care to be taken, especially for the price. I do appreciate the use of factory hardware (for the most part) and a good set of directions, however chock full of legal disclaimers they may be.
ry%3D480

ry%3D480

ry%3D480


I do have a few concerns about the part. Roush couldn't tell me about the arm's length. I asked whether it had been altered to improve the pinion angle and I was told that the pinion angle wasn't changed (evasive if you ask me). I like the reinforcement but am skeptical of the use of the factory upper bushing.

ry%3D480


The bushing is a bit soft and deflects easily by hand if you try to twist the two brackets. My hope here is that the lowers will do most of the improvement and that I don't need a rod ended upper, resulting in less NVH increase than if I did. I'll compare the dimensions and the bushings between this part and the factory upper upon disassembly.

I'll also be adding Maximum's rod ended panhard bar. A beautifully crafted part, beefier in size over that of the fox MM units I use on my '88 and '90 coupe.

ry%3D480


So there you have it. I'll try to get this stuff installed soon and all at once (forgive the parabola effect the fish eye lens offers below).

ry%3D480


In the meantime...anyone else running these arms yet?

Tob
 

chuckstang

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2004
Messages
11,540
Location
New England
The roush uca just flat out works

The angle is changed and the part is a bit more robust, beefy compared to stock and the rubber bushings are a bit more heavy duty

It does the job, trust me
 

swlacobra

too many cars
Established Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2004
Messages
1,310
Location
sulphur, la
my roush upper cured the wheel hop without any other changes. it works and has no more nvh than stock.
 

Tob

Salut!
Super Moderator
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
12,255
Location
The Ville
Because I've yet to see an adjustable upper with the factory bushing in it. That was the whole reason I decided to try it. I've chosen to avoid dealing with a urethane bushing that will end up squirming/tearing and require replacement.

I'd just like to know exactly what changes have been made to the upper. Is the arm shorter? Is the geometry of the bracket different thus changing the pinion angle? How many degrees of change did Roush build into it if they did? Roush tells you none of this.

I'll be certain to closely compare it to the stocker to find out.

Tob
 

Hissssss

Fox body lover
Established Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
527
Location
WA
Tob; thanks for a great write up and the detailed pics looking forward to reading your reviews and weight comparison to the stock units.
 

chuckstang

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2004
Messages
11,540
Location
New England
Why not a Adj. UCA in case you ever needed to adjust it?
May as well since they take a little time to do IMO.

Because adjustability is over rated

The SS's all come lowered and with a one piece DS and no adjustment is needed.

Adjustment is really only for hardcore racers or for for those that have slammed their cars low.

I trust Ford Racing and Roush
 

03 DSG Snake

Unknown Cyborg
Established Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2002
Messages
21,049
Location
CA
Not sure about that Roush upper. I like the Metco design.

Hopefully MM has one of those in the works as well. :burnout:
 

Spawn

mmjax.com webmaster
Established Member
Joined
May 1, 2006
Messages
906
Location
Jacksonville, Florida
Im using the BMR adjustable with the urathane and have had no issues at all. its also about twice the piece that the roush is as far as material. The arms will radiate some noise but its worth it.

I used these.
CAP003.jpg
 

Tob

Salut!
Super Moderator
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
12,255
Location
The Ville
I'll cut to the chase.

The rod ended parts from Maximum Motorsports add zero NVH.The Roush upper does the same. Wheel hop? What wheel hop? It's gone!

Now for how it was done.:)

I cleared the way and swept the floor a couple of times as I assumed I'd be on my back for a while. Turns out I was right.
ry%3D480


After the car was up in the air I removed the back seat to gain access to the foremost UCA bracket bolt. The seat weighs little more than a couple of bags of Doritos.
ry%3D480


I started removing the factory UCA, following Roush's instructions. They recommend dropping one of the gas tank straps and loosening the other. I tried to get by w/o doing that. Guess what? I could not remove the bracket with the tank still tight to the body. I tried every angle possible and couldn't remove it. Roush was right. The issue I ran into here was the fact that the tank bolts a T50 Torx bolt, which I didn't have. I did manage to remove them though (more later). With the tank down I was finally able to pull the arm/bracket and compare them to the new Roush pieces. To this day I haven't seen a comparison anywhere on the web and Roush doesn't help here either at their website. Here they are together (factory on left Roush on right)...
ry%3D480


The bushing Roush uses is much smaller and stiffer than the OE bushing. It appears to be identical to the OE bushing that is pressed into the cast ear atop the 8.8 differential.
ry%3D480


The Roush chassis bracket is 1/32" thicker than the OE bracket as well.
ry%3D480


The pivot is in a different location than factory (look closely at the two bushings)
ry%3D480


The front spacer is 1/8" shorter on the Roush piece
ry%3D480


Most importantly - the geometry. The factory bushing centerline
ry%3D480


The Roush bushing centerline
ry%3D480


Both brackets above were inverted. I also found the setting that Roush uses to adjust and 'lock in' the bracket for proper preload was incorrect. It comes adjusted for a stock Mustang GT. I readjusted it to match the factory arm/bracket I had removed. I recommend that this be done before it is placed in the chassis, as once installed, the chassis underside won't allow you to fit a socket over the nut without some mild 'clearancing'.

Gotta run, more later.

Tob
 
Last edited:

Tob

Salut!
Super Moderator
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
12,255
Location
The Ville
Here's a shot of what happens when you don't have the necessary T50 bit and you try to get by with a T45 bit.
ry%3D480


I replaced the factory metric tank bolts with metric fasteners that utilize a bolt head, like I wish the factory would have used from the start. I installed the Roush setup utilizing the new hardware they include and torqued everything to factory specs. Next up I did the Maximum Motorsports Extreme Duty LCA's.

I started by trying to release the e-brake cable from the caliper so I could feed it out of the LCA. Word of advice - make sure your emergency brake isn't on like mine was. Makes for a head scratcher when you try to get it to release from under the car:idea:.
ry%3D480


Once removed, I verified that the MM arms matched the stock length (they were right on).
ry%3D480


I utilized the new factory hardware that MM supplied and torqued to spec.
ry%3D480

ry%3D480

ry%3D480

ry%3D480

ry%3D480


I then used the heaviest duty zip tie I could find at Home Depot and attached the e-brake cable to the arm
ry%3D480


I then moved on to the Maximum Motorsports panhard bar install. I was concerned about clearance with my FRPP axle cover, as even the stock bar to cover clearance was less than 3/8" and the MM bar is even larger in diameter than the factory bar
ry%3D480


The Maximum bar comes preset to match the factory bar in length
ry%3D480


It was a simple install, made easier by loosening the bolt above the passenger side panhard attachment bolt.
ry%3D480


I had the bars switched out and torqued in less than five minutes (the LCA's took twenty). I now have less than 1/4" clearance between the corner of the cover on the driver's side and the panhard bar. The bar is skewed in relation to the axle centerline.
ry%3D480


I'll keep my eye on the arm/cover and note any issues. These shots were with the axle at stock ride height and the upper and lower control arms ~ parallel to the ground. Thus the gear cover to panhard clearance should grow in either bump or compression as the swing of the arm should draw the top of the axle forward (it effectively gets shorter).

Anyway, once finished and cleaned up, I pulled out into the street and dumped the clutch at three grand or so. Smooth as silk, and very similar in feel to my torque armed fox bodies. I then hit some rough roads on the way to some curvy highway on/off ramps.

As I said, nothing. No rattles, klinks, squeaks, or thudding. No additional gear or road noise. The ride quality hasn't changed one bit. And I could not be happier. I heartily recommend any and all of this stuff to any GT500 owner looking to ditch the hop and tighten things up a bit.:thumbsup:

Tob
 
Last edited:

6-Speed

Member
Established Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
982
Location
Arizona
Great write up Tob - with lots of pertinent details. I'm glad the heims didn't introduce any objectionable NVH. One question though, can the E-brake cable be routed above the LCA rather than below?
 

Tob

Salut!
Super Moderator
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
12,255
Location
The Ville
Yes it can. I tried it that way first, but it was forcing the sheathing to try to conform to an 'unnatural' angle or curve. Going below allowed a gentler radius.

Tob
 

me32

BEASTLY SHELBY GT500 TVS
Moderator
Premium Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
18,482
Location
CA,NorCal
very good write up. im sure the Reason you dont hear any NVH is because the UCA takes care of it. i have a J&M UCA with the poly ball an it added NVH, but not bad. but i still have stock LCA.
 

swlacobra

too many cars
Established Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2004
Messages
1,310
Location
sulphur, la
very good write up! i didnt have to adjust the uca as it came from roush. when the axel was raised it lined up very easily. i wonder how much difference there is in the stock ride height between the stock gt and our gt 500s?
 

Tob

Salut!
Super Moderator
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
12,255
Location
The Ville
I suppose I didn't do a good enough job detailing the ride height portion of the install. If you can slip your visualization caps on for a moment...

I compared the two arm/bracket assemblies to each other. Here is a shot of the factory GT500 assembly as it was removed from my car (2009 GT500 with stock springs, shocks, struts, wheels/tires and some 700 miles).
ry%3D480


If you look at it as the baseline (inverted with the floor representing the floorpan) you can see the three attachment points of the chassis bracket are flush as they would be on the car. The axle end of the arm is touching the concrete as well (the gap you see on one side measured 1/16"). Again, this was stock geometry.

Here is a shot of the Roush bracket, as setup for stock Mustang GT ride height.
ry%3D480

ry%3D480


So if you can think upside down for a moment and relate it well, you can see that Roush envisions the GT as having the body sit ~5/8" higher (than the GT500) relative to the to the bushing centerline at the top of the axle. Thus I loosened the Roush bolt at the arm pivot, adjusted to match the stock arm and retorqued. And as I had mentioned, I'm glad I did it out of the car. Once installed, I tried to slip a socket on over the nut and couldn't. The floorpan wouldn't allow it (and there was no room to swing a wrench). About three blows with a socket on the end of a couple of 1/2" extensions and I had relieved the floorpan enough so that I could now adjust it if I wanted to (in car).
ry%3D480

[Note: The above photo has not been approved for the viewing pleasure of queasy 2010 GT500 owners that cry at the sight of rust on their axle tubes:poke:)

Anyway, I hope that makes what I was trying to explain a little clearer.

Tob
 
Last edited:

RedlineHP

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2009
Messages
187
Location
everywhere
Tob,
Excellent write-up and pictures. Thanks for that.
I have been thinking about getting the Roush uca for awhile, so good to see some real world input.
The MM lca's look excellent, keep us posted on these products after you get a few miles on them.
Mark
 

Tob

Salut!
Super Moderator
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
12,255
Location
The Ville
Well it looks like yesterday may have been the last outing this season for me. The weather has finally turned bad here in Upstate, NY. It'll only get worse from here.:bored:

Anyway, I had a few moments to try out my new GoPro HD Motorsports camera. I wanted to use it to capture the goings on underneath to show how quiet the MM rod ended arms are. My problem is I had to convert the raw footage from mpeg4 to meg in order to edit the length. I ended up using some garbage shareware to do it. Then YouTube lessens the quality a bit as well. I'll pay the piper and come up with something so that anything else I do will be more clear. So here is the undercar footage, with the camera bolted directly to the MM rod ended panhard bar. Again I'll do better next time.:rolling: Be sure to click on HQ and go full screen.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruy0XTQDeMY"]YouTube- Undercar vid[/ame]

At the end of that clip I crawled under the car (at a junkyard parking lot), removed the camera, and then reattached it to the underside of the rear window via a suction cup. Bottom line, no additional cabin noise from the MM parts or the Roush UCA. I'm extremely satisfied with the parts I have put on so far.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDyYM1EcDJA"]YouTube- 2009GT500 Quick Jaunt[/ame]

Tob
 

Users who are viewing this thread



Top