Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Cobra Forums
The Terminator
Driveline
Does your car have the Stock IRS or SRA
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tt335ci03cobra" data-source="post: 12947283" data-attributes="member: 68944"><p>Reply: ok I gotta take a few minutes and go over a few of my opinions on things that I think might be getting muddled up a bit unintentionally via your take on my post.</p><p></p><p>(Take always: </p><p></p><p>-built sra isn't Midveil/archaic IMO</p><p>-IRS is inherently better for circuit</p><p>-built sra handles better than the stock irs imo</p><p>-built IRS handles better than built sra IMO</p><p>-sla front vs mcphearson is much more important than sra vs irs in cutting lap times.</p><p>-yada yada yada I'm growing apathetic to editing this reply and the text below is coherent, well written and imoisn't a bore so read it if interested.)</p><p></p><p>1: Mm kmember lets you set the motor rearward about 2", additional tweaks can be done to achieve about 4" rearward if my memory is correct. My mechanic did these things while installing my 5.4 swap, I can talk to him and post up the details, it involves using the optional linkage port on the t56 rather than the traditional port as well as various other changes/tweaks/maximizing the firewall, shorter driveshaft etc.</p><p></p><p>2: I wouldn't go that far. For an owner to go sra, I think it's more so misunderstanding/less knowledge about building an IRS. It's alot easier/more comfortable to put in a built sra that has a relatively tested and understood aftermarket/industry comprehension etc than try to learn about the IRS and shoot around in the dark. When the IRS cobras 1st came out, there wasn't much understanding of how to fortify them, and it made sense to swap a solid in IMO for many people. A purpose built sra in a given mustang will out handle that same given mustang if it had a stock cobra irs put in any day of the week assuming same driver/tires/brakes etc etc. It's not like people were swapping stock 99 gt solid rears in, they were swapping in fully built Sra's with mm/steeda/griggs suspension components etc if they wanted handling plus big power fortitude/peace of mind. </p><p></p><p>3: Ford? Sorry what are you saying? I'll slow down, and explain for ya. The aftermarket and modders/tuners/mechanics/car guys/track rats/ enthusiasts who build up their cars, that whole community, has had sra mustangs to tweak and learn on for decades and atleast a 1/4 million solid axle mustangs exist that are modded out/built up etc. Sra mustangs are relatively inexpensive to buy/build etc. obviously the numbers favor sra being more understood and easier to figure out a gameplan with than the IRS which has about a decade and a half worth of experimenting, build ups, etc but on a much much lower volume of builds, it's not only a time vs time scenario, its number of builds/experiences as well. Hundreds of thousands of sra cars have been built up, many for drag but also a great number for handling, american iron, aix, various other fielding etc. Hell, most street car builds are mixed performance as well, grand tourers so to speak. Pan hard bars, 3links, lower arms etc coupled with 400whp. They handle nicely, not skittish or garbage by any means. At the limit would they be optimal? Of course not but neither is the stock or mildly modded IRS either.</p><p></p><p>Its unlikely that even 25-50,000 IRS cobras have been/became project cars that stayed irs and helped evolve the IRS fortification/tuner/aftermarket etc community. I prefer IRS but reality is reality here. Innovation come from experience/evolution/ trial error, not just inherent strengths. Ingenuity can trump inherent efficiency. We all see that dynamic happen from time to time in other aspects of life.</p><p></p><p>Statistically, there is so much experience with Sra's that though the design is inherently less capable than an IRS for cornering, the aftermarket/know how/experience, etc has more than proven itself as epic (drag and circuit) and that knowledge base easily lends itself to become repeatable to where building a well handling sra is not black magic or difficult like IRS often seems to be to some. Also some just prefer the feeling of a solid axle car when hot lapping. Driver confidence is nearly all things feel, "comfort", not just the chassis/engineering/sophistication etc. It usually norms out the opposite way but some simply prefer an Sra's cornering dynamics. Again, a stock ford sra mustang may be some seconds slower than that exact car with a stock ford irs (I highly doubt 5-10 seconds a lap, reference/link to article please?), but a built sra will slaughter a stock ford irs on a race track in that same exact car. No question IMO. Built sra trumps stock irs at all things except possibly noise/ride/comfort depending on the extent of the sra build/spring rates/materials (nvh transmission) etc.</p><p></p><p>I wasn't saying anything all to correlative to the engineering of the stock suspension via ford techs. Those guys have the know how but budgets and protocol don't allow them free rein. Look at the svt focus and ford gt, as well as the raptor, etc to see some of the suspension engineering successess ford techs can call their own when red tape and freeing up if the reins is permitted IMO. </p><p></p><p></p><p>4: Obviously if tracking your car is the primary concern, IRS is a no brainer. I'd also add its even more important to go sla front than IRS. What do I mean? If I had say a sloppy/salvage tittle 94 gt I'd bought strictly to be gutted and was building up as an American iron car, I'd spend the money doing an sla agent 47 or Griggs front suspension before tackling an IRS swap with the car. You can build a lot of speed out of the sra for relatively cheap vs the cost of an IRS swap and honestly, without solid bushings, a limited slip diff like a trutrac, auburn, etc, and supporting mods, the gains won't be enough to justify the costs on a budget buildup. Hell even the sla would be more than the car itself is worth probably but you will shave 5-10 seconds (track dependent) swapping the bone stock McPhearson strut architecture out for an sla, you won't shave if even 3 seconds a lap IMO switching the stock sra out for an IRS. Again this is assuming tires, brakes, chassis all stay the same on the same car except for the mentioned suspension changes. I simply can't see a stock ford irs shaving much more than 3 seconds off a lap vs te stock solid axle. Both are very compromised units do to budgeting and protocol; red tape. </p><p></p><p>That all said, this humble American iron car (aix? Technically I believe so if sla) would probably shave 3-4 seconds a lap by going from bone stock gt rear suspension to fully built sra and would probably shave at least an additional 1-2 seconds per lap with a fully built IRS vs the sra. All things IMO obviously. I just simply can't see the rear being near as important as the front suspension so when "road racers" start telling me how inferior sra is, I just kinda chuckle to myself when I see they're still McPhearson. I'm McPhearson because although I love circuit, I don't have the room for sla due to the power plant I chose. Hot piping takes up space. I have no doubts my car would be anywhere from 3-5 seconds faster around a track like Leguna with an sla. Honesty if I had a built up sra in the rear matched to my circuit desires, I would probably only be 1-2 seconds a lap slower, mainly all in turn 5-7, the corkscrew, and the final turn before the final straightaway. The rest of the time, an sra would be a non issue.</p><p></p><p></p><p>(all shaving of seconds is assuming a medium/large track like Mazda raceway Leguna Seca, and is just speculation, obviously. Please no flame throwers, just bench racing here on an internet car forum, not trying to be scientifically methodic or exact in any way.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tt335ci03cobra, post: 12947283, member: 68944"] Reply: ok I gotta take a few minutes and go over a few of my opinions on things that I think might be getting muddled up a bit unintentionally via your take on my post. (Take always: -built sra isn't Midveil/archaic IMO -IRS is inherently better for circuit -built sra handles better than the stock irs imo -built IRS handles better than built sra IMO -sla front vs mcphearson is much more important than sra vs irs in cutting lap times. -yada yada yada I'm growing apathetic to editing this reply and the text below is coherent, well written and imoisn't a bore so read it if interested.) 1: Mm kmember lets you set the motor rearward about 2", additional tweaks can be done to achieve about 4" rearward if my memory is correct. My mechanic did these things while installing my 5.4 swap, I can talk to him and post up the details, it involves using the optional linkage port on the t56 rather than the traditional port as well as various other changes/tweaks/maximizing the firewall, shorter driveshaft etc. 2: I wouldn't go that far. For an owner to go sra, I think it's more so misunderstanding/less knowledge about building an IRS. It's alot easier/more comfortable to put in a built sra that has a relatively tested and understood aftermarket/industry comprehension etc than try to learn about the IRS and shoot around in the dark. When the IRS cobras 1st came out, there wasn't much understanding of how to fortify them, and it made sense to swap a solid in IMO for many people. A purpose built sra in a given mustang will out handle that same given mustang if it had a stock cobra irs put in any day of the week assuming same driver/tires/brakes etc etc. It's not like people were swapping stock 99 gt solid rears in, they were swapping in fully built Sra's with mm/steeda/griggs suspension components etc if they wanted handling plus big power fortitude/peace of mind. 3: Ford? Sorry what are you saying? I'll slow down, and explain for ya. The aftermarket and modders/tuners/mechanics/car guys/track rats/ enthusiasts who build up their cars, that whole community, has had sra mustangs to tweak and learn on for decades and atleast a 1/4 million solid axle mustangs exist that are modded out/built up etc. Sra mustangs are relatively inexpensive to buy/build etc. obviously the numbers favor sra being more understood and easier to figure out a gameplan with than the IRS which has about a decade and a half worth of experimenting, build ups, etc but on a much much lower volume of builds, it's not only a time vs time scenario, its number of builds/experiences as well. Hundreds of thousands of sra cars have been built up, many for drag but also a great number for handling, american iron, aix, various other fielding etc. Hell, most street car builds are mixed performance as well, grand tourers so to speak. Pan hard bars, 3links, lower arms etc coupled with 400whp. They handle nicely, not skittish or garbage by any means. At the limit would they be optimal? Of course not but neither is the stock or mildly modded IRS either. Its unlikely that even 25-50,000 IRS cobras have been/became project cars that stayed irs and helped evolve the IRS fortification/tuner/aftermarket etc community. I prefer IRS but reality is reality here. Innovation come from experience/evolution/ trial error, not just inherent strengths. Ingenuity can trump inherent efficiency. We all see that dynamic happen from time to time in other aspects of life. Statistically, there is so much experience with Sra's that though the design is inherently less capable than an IRS for cornering, the aftermarket/know how/experience, etc has more than proven itself as epic (drag and circuit) and that knowledge base easily lends itself to become repeatable to where building a well handling sra is not black magic or difficult like IRS often seems to be to some. Also some just prefer the feeling of a solid axle car when hot lapping. Driver confidence is nearly all things feel, "comfort", not just the chassis/engineering/sophistication etc. It usually norms out the opposite way but some simply prefer an Sra's cornering dynamics. Again, a stock ford sra mustang may be some seconds slower than that exact car with a stock ford irs (I highly doubt 5-10 seconds a lap, reference/link to article please?), but a built sra will slaughter a stock ford irs on a race track in that same exact car. No question IMO. Built sra trumps stock irs at all things except possibly noise/ride/comfort depending on the extent of the sra build/spring rates/materials (nvh transmission) etc. I wasn't saying anything all to correlative to the engineering of the stock suspension via ford techs. Those guys have the know how but budgets and protocol don't allow them free rein. Look at the svt focus and ford gt, as well as the raptor, etc to see some of the suspension engineering successess ford techs can call their own when red tape and freeing up if the reins is permitted IMO. 4: Obviously if tracking your car is the primary concern, IRS is a no brainer. I'd also add its even more important to go sla front than IRS. What do I mean? If I had say a sloppy/salvage tittle 94 gt I'd bought strictly to be gutted and was building up as an American iron car, I'd spend the money doing an sla agent 47 or Griggs front suspension before tackling an IRS swap with the car. You can build a lot of speed out of the sra for relatively cheap vs the cost of an IRS swap and honestly, without solid bushings, a limited slip diff like a trutrac, auburn, etc, and supporting mods, the gains won't be enough to justify the costs on a budget buildup. Hell even the sla would be more than the car itself is worth probably but you will shave 5-10 seconds (track dependent) swapping the bone stock McPhearson strut architecture out for an sla, you won't shave if even 3 seconds a lap IMO switching the stock sra out for an IRS. Again this is assuming tires, brakes, chassis all stay the same on the same car except for the mentioned suspension changes. I simply can't see a stock ford irs shaving much more than 3 seconds off a lap vs te stock solid axle. Both are very compromised units do to budgeting and protocol; red tape. That all said, this humble American iron car (aix? Technically I believe so if sla) would probably shave 3-4 seconds a lap by going from bone stock gt rear suspension to fully built sra and would probably shave at least an additional 1-2 seconds per lap with a fully built IRS vs the sra. All things IMO obviously. I just simply can't see the rear being near as important as the front suspension so when "road racers" start telling me how inferior sra is, I just kinda chuckle to myself when I see they're still McPhearson. I'm McPhearson because although I love circuit, I don't have the room for sla due to the power plant I chose. Hot piping takes up space. I have no doubts my car would be anywhere from 3-5 seconds faster around a track like Leguna with an sla. Honesty if I had a built up sra in the rear matched to my circuit desires, I would probably only be 1-2 seconds a lap slower, mainly all in turn 5-7, the corkscrew, and the final turn before the final straightaway. The rest of the time, an sra would be a non issue. (all shaving of seconds is assuming a medium/large track like Mazda raceway Leguna Seca, and is just speculation, obviously. Please no flame throwers, just bench racing here on an internet car forum, not trying to be scientifically methodic or exact in any way.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cobra Forums
The Terminator
Driveline
Does your car have the Stock IRS or SRA
Top