BMR's 2015 Mustang S550 K-Member Prototype

[BMR Tech]

This is the first version we will be testing. This thing is a PITA.

This is the most complex and difficult "K-Member" we have experienced to date.

There are a few gussets and other items that we have not implemented into this version. We need to save every bit of weight we can on this, due to the OEM piece being a little lighter than we anticipated.

:thumbsup:

 

[Deranged2013]

Looks good. A pound here and a pound there will add up. Just have to attack the car in several different areas for weight lose. I see your car is spread out all over the floor in the background.

 

[SID297]

Looks good Kelly. What does the stock one weigh compared to the stock S197 one?

 

[sunburned]

There are a few gussets and other items that we have not implemented into this version. We need to save every bit of weight we can on this, due to the OEM piece being a little lighter than we anticipated.

:thumbsup:

What's the point in making/buying a new k-member if it barely saves any weight?

And I don't think I'd want to sacrifice strength for a tiny bit of weight savings like missing gussets.

 

[BMR Tech]

Looks good Kelly. What does the stock one weigh compared to the stock S197 one?

The OEM 15 K-Member is only about 8lbs heavier, believe it or not.

I am shooting from the hip, but I can get exact details very soon. I did the comparo over a month ago...almost two.

What's the point in making/buying a new k-member if it barely saves any weight?

And I don't think I'd want to sacrifice strength for a tiny bit of weight savings like missing gussets.

Because better.

I guess it is similar to comparing wheels, shifters, hoods, spoilers, lowering springs, and most other mods that are most popular for mustangs.

Less weight is always better. Better geometry is better. More clearance is better (I'm already speaking with several companies about them using this for their turbo kits)

The cons would be like any other con - cost and install.

I can understand the sacrifice you make when saving weight. That said, having a flawless track record so far with the S197 K-Members, I can tell you that it is possible to save weight and not run into an issue doing so. :-D

 

[SID297]

You wouldn't happen to be playing with cradle bushings in the background would you?

 

[BMR Tech]

You wouldn't happen to be playing with cradle bushings in the background would you?

You wouldn't happen to be going to PRI, to see the entire chassis / suspension we have for the car.... would you? ---------------

 

[Tob]

What's the point in making/buying a new k-member if it barely saves any weight?

And I don't think I'd want to sacrifice strength for a tiny bit of weight savings like missing gussets.

If you can save weight on a part you may want to swap out from your car and if the part gives up nothing in terms of strength - great. With respect to the K-member, you have an opportunity not only to install something lighter or something stronger but rather to alter the suspension geometry. To relocate pivot points and thus change geometry. Whether optimizing anti-dive, roll center, etc, the idea is to manufacture a K-member that allows the car to perform better, especially when the ride height is altered.

Anybody can lop weight off without regard to how it may increase NVH, handle worse, and perform poorly in a crash situation (in comparison to the original design), etc. Few know how to design a K-member that allows your car to handle better than the stock one did. Even fewer can do it with less NVH than stock.


I love your stuff Kelly. That piece looks very nice.

 

[SID297]

You wouldn't happen to be going to PRI, to see the entire chassis / suspension we have for the car.... would you? ---------------

Nope, but I shall send Steve in my proxy.

 

[beefcake]

nice

 

[sunburned]

Because better.

I guess it is similar to comparing wheels, shifters, hoods, spoilers, lowering springs, and most other mods that are most popular for mustangs.

Less weight is always better. Better geometry is better. More clearance is better (I'm already speaking with several companies about them using this for their turbo kits)

The cons would be like any other con - cost and install.

I can understand the sacrifice you make when saving weight. That said, having a flawless track record so far with the S197 K-Members, I can tell you that it is possible to save weight and not run into an issue doing so. :-D

If you can save weight on a part you may want to swap out from your car and if the part gives up nothing in terms of strength - great. With respect to the K-member, you have an opportunity not only to install something lighter or something stronger but rather to alter the suspension geometry. To relocate pivot points and thus change geometry. Whether optimizing anti-dive, roll center, etc, the idea is to manufacture a K-member that allows the car to perform better, especially when the ride height is altered.

Anybody can lop weight off without regard to how it may increase NVH, handle worse, and perform poorly in a crash situation (in comparison to the original design), etc. Few know how to design a K-member that allows your car to handle better than the stock one did. Even fewer can do it with less NVH than stock.

I get that, but nobody said anything about a change in geometry in the first post. I don't have a whole lot of experience with the newer mustangs or with BMR, but back with the new edges, most k-members were just made to save weight and to add some space for turbo piping. And that was only possible because the stock k-member was a huge tank of really heavy metal. I think only MM and Griggs were actually changing the geometry of things or at least offering adjustability. I modified the entire suspension on my GT, basically the only stock part left was the k-member because it was my daily driver and I didn't want to sacrifice strength and collision durability for a few pounds off the front end.

I don't see much adjustability in this new k-member, but I guess that means the mounts are already moved and I just can't tell? From what I've seen on S197 cars and maybe it's different with teh S550, but the stock K-member looked like a pretty scrawny piece that already had speed holes and didn't take up much space under the car. When you said you barely saved any weight and didn't really mention space savings and geometry changes, that's why I questioned the point initially. Not trying to hate, just want to find out more info. This new k-member does look much more complicated than all the ones I've seen previously.

 

[BMR Tech]

^ I see your perspective, completely.

Please keep in mind, we are typically on the forefront of suspension development, for Mustangs, since 2005. The K-Member pictured is a prototype - and it is not an accurate depiction of what we will be releasing. As a matter of fact, we have (3) different K-Members for the car. Like, here is a shot of another design we are testing (this was the first one we built)

All the details will be provided, once I am confident that the versions we are testing, are going to be released shortly afterwards.

 

[sunburned]

No worries man, keep on innovating! I hope to have one of these cars, so I'll definitely keep an eye out for what you finally come out with.

I did Baja SAE in college, so I got to design and build suspension parts for our car and the jigs to manufacture them. I always wanted to get into the auto aftermarket, but couldn't pass up an offer on a secure govt job.