Yup. Alot of this seems like overkill
Roush anti-wheel hop kit
- Thread starter IA Shelby
- Start date
Yup. Alot of this seems like overkill
Multimatic is a bit more than a vendor Robert.
Multimatic Inc.
The parts Multimatic manufactures for Ford are made to Ford's specification. Multimatic was awarded the contract via a successful bid. Ford does not own Multimatic.
And don't get me wrong, I like the BMR part(s) as well. In the case of this thread the OP was interested in the Roush piece and I think it could fit his needs very well.
To be honest, when I got my car back from Las Vegas it would spin yes, and for long distances if I chose to press it. <<All of this was with stock/oem 2008 LCA's and UCA. I had no problem with the rear suspension "hopping" or "bouncing" on the oem rubber ends. I liked the looks of the poly LCA's that Shelby Perf. Parts offered, and thought, "what will it hurt to install nice looking poly LCA's?" and it has improved the rear suspension to a tighter more firm feel. The UCA I did not change until I had my 8.8 axle out for a restoration. I only changed my UCA at that time because it was the time to do it when it was best accessible. That UCA change also helped to stiffen the rear axle mounting and I was happy. Then I started to research what changes were made in 2011 to the UCA and what was available in the aftermarket world...........so I started to do some side-by-side comparisons.
I would guess that the "hopping/bouncing" of the rear suspension begins when an owner starts to upgrade rear tire rubber? and the car starts to grip a little more translating energy to the rubber points on the upper and lower control arms? I have never had "wheel hop" to this date with my car, but I have done some suspension upgrades first, and then rubber.
Is most of this overkill for a street driven car the "sprints" from a traffic light from time to time? Yes, I agree.
R
Thanks Tob, I knew Multimatic is in tight with Ford, but I didn't know how tight.
I did some price checking on the Roush site and the BMR site..........
The 2011-up Roush Anti-Hop Kit is $295.99
The 2011-up BMR Adj. UCA and UCM are $339.90
So there is just over $40 difference between the two, one being the longer adjustable arm, poly and a grease fitting (plus all of the big hardware), and the other is the Roush, it stops the hop and has the larger under seat bolt (if you choose the 2011-up version).
^^^This is what I looked at when I compared the two, one is overkill but meets or surpasses the needs for most, the other fits the anti-hop requirement, and the difference between them is $40+.
Here are some pictures of the 2011-up BMR in my 2008. It fits and seems to work well so far with no issues.
Kelly said many people have asked if the updated 2011-up UCA will fit in the B4 2011 cars and they (BMR) were not sure because it had never been done that they were aware of......
R
Last edited:
^^That is all that really matters. I may have purchased my 2011-up Roush UCA about the time this thread was being discussed.
Someone bringing this thread back to the top shows that there are always owners looking for suspension improvements, and there are vendors also improving/updating the parts that are available for the suspension upgrade(s). :thumbsup:
R
Hey guys I purchased the M-FR3-SVTA suspension from ford racing, drops the car approximately 1.25, currently have the roush upper control arm installed, will the roush upper work with this suspension set up,
Also will I have to worry about pinion angle with that kind of drop??
Thanks I did a search and this was This was all I could find....
Also will I have to worry about pinion angle with that kind of drop??
Thanks I did a search and this was This was all I could find....
Yes, the Roush upper will work just fine with the M-5300-L springs and the amount of drop they offer. Just remember to torque the arm in place with the suspension loaded to simulate ride height.
Regarding pinion angle - it won't be optimal but I don't see a major issue.
Regarding pinion angle - it won't be optimal but I don't see a major issue.
Thanks rob!
Tob*
An UPDATE to those who may try the 2011-up UCA/UCM on their earlier 2005-2010 Mustang/GT500............A 2007 owner on Team Shelby has said that the hole in his floor above the fuel tank is not large enough to allow the larger 2011-up UCM to fit in place without enlarging the hole. It fit fine without modification on my 2008, but I thought I would pass this along because there may be some production differences.
I have also added a possible option for using the longer 2011-up UCA with a UCM that has the smaller under seat mount to the Team Shelby thread related to this. I will add the link tonight.
R
I have also added a possible option for using the longer 2011-up UCA with a UCM that has the smaller under seat mount to the Team Shelby thread related to this. I will add the link tonight.
R
Last edited:
Beginning on post #19 in the link below offers a UCM that may work with the longer 2011-up UCA for those who find that the hole in their floor is too small to accept the larger UCM attachment under the rear seat.....
Fays2 installed what next? - Brakes & Suspension - Team Shelby
I have not bolted this in place to verify that it will work, but from the looks of this Drake bracket, it will do what is needed to get the longer UCA arm in place "if" the hole in the floor above the fuel tank is too small and drilling the floor in the car is not an option.
R
Fays2 installed what next? - Brakes & Suspension - Team Shelby
I have not bolted this in place to verify that it will work, but from the looks of this Drake bracket, it will do what is needed to get the longer UCA arm in place "if" the hole in the floor above the fuel tank is too small and drilling the floor in the car is not an option.
R
Last edited:
Replied to that thread Robert M.
I added a little more also, thanks for your "advantages" explanation of the longer arm and larger hardware, and the Roush UCA info. :thumbsup:
R
Users who are viewing this thread
