Roush anti-wheel hop kit

[IA Shelby]

Does anybody have this Uca?

Can this only be used if your car is not lowered since it is non-adjustable?

I currently have Steeda sport springs and a bmr Uca bracket, bmr non-adj lca and a DSS driveshaft.

They work great but I get a constant clunk whenever I go over any bump.

I hear the roush kit is comparable to stock for nvh.

I could give up on some of the handling for a non- clunking rear end. It is a convertible so it does not see track time.

Thoughts?

I don't want to lose the driveshaft or lowering springs so I will keep the clunk of it comes at the expense of losing those.

 

[Tob]

I have it and I highly recommend it.

My car utilizes KR springs. Not in the weeds but lower than stock.

Writeup on the Roush upper is in my sig.

 

[IronTerp]

I installed mine last night. Very straight forward process. Have J & M Extreme LCA's and a DSS aluminum driveshaft and the car rides practically like it did from the showroom floor. Minimal NVH.

 

[IA Shelby]

I installed mine last night. Very straight forward process. Have J & M Extreme LCA's and a DSS aluminum driveshaft and the car rides practically like it did from the showroom floor. Minimal NVH.

Thanks for the feedback. Why do I always hear that you need an adjustable Uca?

I should have bought the roush in the first place.

 

[Shaker1]

I have the Roush with BMR lowers and FRPP springs. Solved the wheel hop and no noise.
The adjustable is if you need to reset your pinion angle after lowering or changing the DS. Not sure at what point that becomes an issue.

 

[Kevin P]

I too have one. No NVH, and fixed the wheel-hop with no other changes to my 2010 suspension. No wheel-hop AT ALL.

 

[YELL03]

any other reviews on this product?

I am getting a bit of wheel hop in 1st gear.

I am not looking to do a whole suspension, my surgically repaired back likes a soft ride.

I just want to add this one simple piece if it helps.

 

[enormous]

any other reviews on this product?

I am getting a bit of wheel hop in 1st gear.

I am not looking to do a whole suspension, my surgically repaired back likes a soft ride.

I just want to add this one simple piece if it helps.

When mine was stock I cured wheel hop with LCA's.

 

[///Bruce]

Thanks for the feedback. Why do I always hear that you need an adjustable Uca?

I should have bought the roush in the first place.

Because somewhere you will need to adjust the pinion angle to do it right. This can be done either by adjustable LCA's or an UCA.

To the OP, About two years ago, I traded my stock springs for the FRPP springs (1.25" drop all around). Until then, I had wheel hop. Since then I have had none. But not smart enough to leave well enough alone, I now run the BMR non-adj. LCA's and a Steeda dual adjustable UCA, KW V3's, new sway bar bushings all around. Still no problem and no clunking.

If your noise is only when you go over a speed bump or something similar, I would suspect something is loose or has excessive play. Check all your connections again. If the problem continues, I might move to a different shock/strut combo. From your description, it sounds like you have too much play in your rear shocks. Ergo, slack for your springs to bang around.

 

[Harry08]

IA, are the mounting bolts all torqued to specs? If not you can experience the clunk you are describing.

 

[Tob]

The two key elements in your search can both be successfully addressed with the addition of the Roush upper arm. You can bank on it.

...my surgically repaired back likes a soft ride.

...I just want to add this one simple piece if it helps.

 

[YELL03]

The two key elements in your search can both be successfully addressed with the addition of the Roush upper arm. You can bank on it.

Thanks!!!

 

[Robert M]

I started down this Roush path, but ended up installing the 2011-up BMR on my 2008.

There were so many changes made by Ford for the UCA starting with the 2011 model (longer arm, more robust mounting bracket, larger hardware) and the only change that was made to the 2011-up Roush unit was the larger bolt under the seat..........

^^^Shown above..........2008 oem, Roush 2011-up and oem 2011-up.

It would have been nice if the 2011-up Roush UCM would have been more robust like the 2011-up oem, but instead it kept the B4 2011 UCM structure and B4 2011 UCA length. The length of the UCA.........Ford increased the length for a reason.............I wish more than just the "under seat bolt size" would have been upgraded on the 2011-up Roush. I'm sure the Roush unit works fine and many people like it, I would have liked it, but it would have been nice to see more of what Ford felt needed to be upgraded incorporated into the Roush anti-hop UCA/UCM......Just my opinion........:shrug:


With only minor mods to the UCM I put the oem 2011-up in my 2008, once I was able to fit that UCA/UCM in my 2008 properly I went to the 2011-up BMR with no mods needed for the install........:thumbsup:


Another comparison........Ford felt a larger "through bolt" was needed for the 2011-up oem UCA/UCM attachment............Roush did not.........

2011-up Roush on the left, oem Ford 2011-up on the right..........

^^^^^One thing I do think I see in the picture above.....the UCM steel may be a little thicker on the Roush? but it may also be the angle of the picture?



I am not trying to sway anyone's decision, just providing side-by-side comparisons of what I observed......






R

 

[Wharf Rat]

I'm on my 4th heavily modded S197 and I think the Roush UCA is one of the best additions to these cars.

No more hop. No NVH. No more broken poly bushings. No brainer.

 

[YELL03]

I started down this Roush path, but ended up installing the 2011-up BMR on my 2008.

There were so many changes made by Ford for the UCA starting with the 2011 model (longer arm, more robust mounting bracket, larger hardware) and the only change that was made to the 2011-up Roush unit was the larger bolt under the seat..........

^^^Shown above..........2008 oem, Roush 2011-up and oem 2011-up.

It would have been nice if the 2011-up Roush UCM would have been more robust like the 2011-up oem, but instead it kept the B4 2011 UCM structure and B4 2011 UCA length. The length of the UCA.........Ford increased the length for a reason.............I wish more than just the "under seat bolt size" would have been upgraded on the 2011-up Roush. I'm sure the Roush unit works fine and many people like it, I would have liked it, but it would have been nice to see more of what Ford felt needed to be upgraded incorporated into the Roush anti-hop UCA/UCM......Just my opinion........:shrug:


With only minor mods to the UCM I put the oem 2011-up in my 2008, once I was able to fit that UCA/UCM in my 2008 properly I went to the 2011-up BMR with no mods needed for the install........:thumbsup:


Another comparison........Ford felt a larger "through bolt" was needed for the 2011-up oem UCA/UCM attachment............Roush did not.........

2011-up Roush on the left, oem Ford 2011-up on the right..........

^^^^^One thing I do think I see in the picture above.....the UCM steel may be a little thicker on the Roush? but it may also be the angle of the picture?



I am not trying to sway anyone's decision, just providing side-by-side comparisons of what I observed......






R

Thanks, that is a lot of detailed info for me to consider

I'm on my 4th heavily modded S197 and I think the Roush UCA is one of the best additions to these cars.

No more hop. No NVH. No more broken poly bushings. No brainer.

statements like this are why I am considering it

 

[Robert M]

I'm on my 4th heavily modded S197 and I think the Roush UCA is one of the best additions to these cars.

No more hop. No NVH. No more broken poly bushings. No brainer.

^^^This is a reason to consider the Roush, if a person is having UCA poly bushing issues, the use of the rubber in the UCA hole instead may fix that.

My comments were mainly toward the lack of advancement in the 2011-up Roush that Ford felt was necessary to incorporate from the 2010 540hp level to the 2011 550hp level. Ford spent a lot of $$$ to redesign the fuel tank in the UCA area and engineer and test the 2011-up UCA upgrades, I'm sure there was a reason for these changes? The longer arm especially.......

I do agree that the Roush is a great add over the larger marshmellow oem rubber, no question, just holding all three brackets one at a time on their sides and pulling down on each UCA showed the difference in side deflection.

I have a full 3" exhaust so maybe I am missing some noise and harmonics with my poly?

One thing I did notice...........when I had pulled the sockets to tighten the fasteners on my LCA's and UCA I thought for sure that they were tight enough, no need for more............When I put a click torque wrench on each fastener and checked each for the "correct" torque spec., I was wayyy off and needed more tightening. <<This may be where some people have problem with "clunking". Pulling the fasteners tight with a breaker bar and leverage pipe doesn't always get the torque to where it needs to be with these suspension pieces.






R

 

[Illtaketwlight]

First, Ford didn't design that UCA. Second, The 2011 new design was an attempt to fix the wheel hop issues and it failed. Third, The Roush UCA isn't broke, so why fix it ??

 

[Tob]

Robert, the Roush arm/bracket is indeed thicker than the OEM piece.

The rear UCA (as well as a few other suspension components) in the S197 Mustang was manufactured by Multimatic in Ontario, Canada.

 

[Robert M]

Robert, the Roush arm/bracket is indeed thicker than the OEM piece.

The rear UCA (as well as a few other suspension components) in the S197 Mustang was manufactured by Multimatic in Ontario, Canada.

I understand that a vendor made it (Multimatic in this case), I thought it was made to Ford specs by Multimatic, and someone at Ford provided the specs?

Maybe not?

Does Ford own Multimatic? I know they also worked on 2000 Cobra R items.


R

 

[Robert M]

First, Ford didn't design that UCA. Second, The 2011 new design was an attempt to fix the wheel hop issues and it failed. Third, The Roush UCA isn't broke, so why fix it ??

I agree, the Roush was not broke, point taken.

There just seems like a lot more than "anti-hop" that was incorporated into the oem redesign? and yes the oem still has a big rubber bushing, so there is hop.

I guess on this same thought, why did BMR do anything to their UCA design? A simple change of the front UCM mounting size like Roush did would be all that was needed? I don't think the older design BMR could be considered "broke"?

The 2008 oem, B4 2011 BMR, 2011-up oem and 2011-up BMR........

Why lengthen the BMR arm if there is no advantage to a longer arm? Why increase hardware size to something that wasn't considered "broke"?

I'm not trying to argue about UCA's, just trying to understand why others did some considerable upsizing when their UCA wasn't broke?


R