can't go wrong with either steeda or roush IMO.
Suspension Attention!!! Failure Inside
- Thread starter Van@RevanRacing
- Start date
Van@RevanRacing
Active Member
The BMR Upper Control Arm will not work with the OEM Mount. The OEM UCA mount is stamped steel and BMR uses a heavier duty steel for mounting of their upper control arm.
In honor of Labor Day....................it's on!!
http://www.revanracing.com/products...d-upper-control-arm-mount-package-15-off.html
I used BMR components on my 2013 and picked up a full second at Sebring International Raceway. All components are in stock. If you'd like to ask me some additional questions feel free to give me a call.
Van
Revan Racing
561-445-7702
Last edited:
BMR/Roush for sure. We have both in stock and ready to ship, including the BMR mount to go alone with the arm. The roush is sold as a kit, where both are included.
Roush 05-2010 Mustang Wheel Hop Reduction Kit - Roush - Upper Control Arms - Control Arms - Suspension - 07-09 Shelby GT500
We just announced our sale our Lethal Labor Day Weekend Sale, so if you're looking to pull the trigger on either, give us a call and we'll get you hooked up and ready for the track!
Thanks
John
I would get the steeda mount its what i replaced my whiteline with, so far its been solid, its easy to adjust the pinion angle as well. Also get their bracket don't use the stock mounting bracket! Once you use the Steeda mount you wont want to use the new whiteline mount! Steeda has a better bushing set up then bmr! Steeda's Thrust washers keep the bushings in place over time and reduce noise!
Last edited:
AMWill
Active Member
Hey everyone,
I wanted to bump this thread with very promising news! Whiteline recently contacted us about their revised UCA and sent us a sample of the finished product. This new Whiteline UCA benefits from a thicker steel and additional bracing to endure whatever you can throw at it. I think you guys will be very pleased with updated UCA.
Whiteline has a large shipment of these revised UCA's headed our way, too. Starting no later than 10/17/2013, all of our Whiteline UCA's will be swapped out for the revised version!
Also, I took some cell pics of the revised UCA, so you guys get a sneak peak!
Shane
I wanted to bump this thread with very promising news! Whiteline recently contacted us about their revised UCA and sent us a sample of the finished product. This new Whiteline UCA benefits from a thicker steel and additional bracing to endure whatever you can throw at it. I think you guys will be very pleased with updated UCA.
Whiteline has a large shipment of these revised UCA's headed our way, too. Starting no later than 10/17/2013, all of our Whiteline UCA's will be swapped out for the revised version!
Also, I took some cell pics of the revised UCA, so you guys get a sneak peak!
Shane
What about their LCA...was it made of the same metal?
Wouldn't you think so?
Wouldn't you think so?
Looks better but that reinforcement "tab" welded to the round bar looks like the same thinner gauge stock used in the original design...after going through a redesign, I would thought they'd use the "thicker" gauge through out.
Van@RevanRacing
Active Member
Testing? Looks like the same design with thicker material and a couple of gussets added.
Yeah its better then the previous model but i still think the bmr and steeda unit's level of adjustability is a better design! Is it me or do those welds look sloppy to you?
I was thinking about getting a set of their LCA but this is making me REALLY weary and pondering if BMR would be a better choice.
How is BMR as far as making annoying sounds on their LCA?
How is BMR as far as making annoying sounds on their LCA?
AMWill
Active Member
As far as I've seen Whiteline's LCA's have worked great. I'm not aware of any changes or revisions being made to them. Also, I don't know for sure if they're used from the same metal. I would ask the Whiteline Rep on the forum. He'll be able to provide you a more detailed explanation!
Shane
Personally, I think the brace or "tab" welded on will be more than hardy enough. The squared plating that mounts to the top diff is much thicker and stronger, but also supports a thicker weld for the shaft. If you look at the BMR or Steeda UCA's, the use a similar thickness and don't require any brace or "tab" at all.
Shane
As far as testing, everything has been tested by Whiteline. Although, I'm sure we'll have this UCA mounted to one of our boosted 5.0's sooner or later!
Shane
We've found the adjustments to be easy and secure on for this UCA, but I know the Steeda or BMR design works great too. Everyone has their own preference for sure.
Thanks for your feedback!
Shane
Shane,
I see the eccentric cam bushing adjuster on the bushing end and the two bolts (rather than one bolt & nut) threaded into it, but how do you rotate the cam for adjustment?
Does one of the bolts have a flat on it?
Phill
Now that Shane has shared a look at the forthcoming arm from Whiteline I think I can add a little as well. I spoke Tom Phan from Whiteline early on expressed an interest in offering feedback on any attempt at a new arm.
To be clear, I lean heavily towards "OEM engineering" when it comes to parts for my car. I currently utilize a Roush upper and have been happy with it. Is it the best? No. The fact that it isn't adjustable eliminates it from consideration from a number of potential customers.
I like the Multimatic Boss 302S upper but that one isn't adjustable either. Still a nice piece.
BMR...major kudos for continually improving the product line. From a hardware perspective, I can't help but froth at the mouth at the upper arms they offer (as well as what they are working on).
Now, Whiteline. I had a lengthy discussion with Tom regarding the Mustang aftermarket, specifically the S197 UCA along with Whiteline's philosophy and target market. Tom was the first one to admit that their original UCA design was flawed. In addition, apparently there was an issue with the materials utilized (non-spec) on some arms. I've seen the results but I'm not in a position to discuss them further. Maybe Tom can elaborate more if necessary.
Regarding the revised arm, I believe Whiteline is still using a 4130 alloy, albeit in a thicker cross section where necessary.
I think in terms of the Mustang aftermarket, in this case suspension componentry, engineering dogma is primarily to reach certain performance goals while adding the least amount of weight possible. In the case of a gusset, if FEA and real world testing allow a smaller or lighter gusset to be used then that's what you go with. In other words, if engineered properly, you really can get more from less.
To me, and I weld quite a bit, they look to be done properly. The weave, convexity, heat signature, as well as lack of any visible (to the naked eye, anyway) porosity, all look good. Here are some shots of an arm prior to being coated...
In actuality, the design is a simple one. With the right materials and fabrication it does indeed appear to be very robust. I'm not addressing the eccentric adjustment design here - certainly worthy of discussion though.
Now have a look at a comparison to the original Whiteline UCA. The larger clevis end and gusseting, in addition to thicker alloy being used, should make the arm very strong.
Personally, I like the simplicity. The two back to back definitely show a weak original design as well as a much improved new design. I think the argument now is whether you prefer a turnbuckle design or an eccentric design. I've stated my preferences earlier but I'm eager to see someone beat one of these to within an inch of its life and then have a good look at it.
To be clear, I lean heavily towards "OEM engineering" when it comes to parts for my car. I currently utilize a Roush upper and have been happy with it. Is it the best? No. The fact that it isn't adjustable eliminates it from consideration from a number of potential customers.
I like the Multimatic Boss 302S upper but that one isn't adjustable either. Still a nice piece.
BMR...major kudos for continually improving the product line. From a hardware perspective, I can't help but froth at the mouth at the upper arms they offer (as well as what they are working on).
Now, Whiteline. I had a lengthy discussion with Tom regarding the Mustang aftermarket, specifically the S197 UCA along with Whiteline's philosophy and target market. Tom was the first one to admit that their original UCA design was flawed. In addition, apparently there was an issue with the materials utilized (non-spec) on some arms. I've seen the results but I'm not in a position to discuss them further. Maybe Tom can elaborate more if necessary.
Regarding the revised arm, I believe Whiteline is still using a 4130 alloy, albeit in a thicker cross section where necessary.
Locotone07 said:
I think in terms of the Mustang aftermarket, in this case suspension componentry, engineering dogma is primarily to reach certain performance goals while adding the least amount of weight possible. In the case of a gusset, if FEA and real world testing allow a smaller or lighter gusset to be used then that's what you go with. In other words, if engineered properly, you really can get more from less.
blackbeast12 said:
To me, and I weld quite a bit, they look to be done properly. The weave, convexity, heat signature, as well as lack of any visible (to the naked eye, anyway) porosity, all look good. Here are some shots of an arm prior to being coated...
In actuality, the design is a simple one. With the right materials and fabrication it does indeed appear to be very robust. I'm not addressing the eccentric adjustment design here - certainly worthy of discussion though.
Now have a look at a comparison to the original Whiteline UCA. The larger clevis end and gusseting, in addition to thicker alloy being used, should make the arm very strong.
Personally, I like the simplicity. The two back to back definitely show a weak original design as well as a much improved new design. I think the argument now is whether you prefer a turnbuckle design or an eccentric design. I've stated my preferences earlier but I'm eager to see someone beat one of these to within an inch of its life and then have a good look at it.
Doesn't the crush collar adjuster limit the amount of pinion angle that can be set?
Last edited:
Now that Shane has shared a look at the forthcoming arm from Whiteline I think I can add a little as well. I spoke Tom Phan from Whiteline early on expressed an interest in offering feedback on any attempt at a new arm.
To be clear, I lean heavily towards "OEM engineering" when it comes to parts for my car. I currently utilize a Roush upper and have been happy with it. Is it the best? No. The fact that it isn't adjustable eliminates it from consideration from a number of potential customers.
I like the Multimatic Boss 302S upper but that one isn't adjustable either. Still a nice piece.
BMR...major kudos for continually improving the product line. From a hardware perspective, I can't help but froth at the mouth at the upper arms they offer (as well as what they are working on).
Now, Whiteline. I had a lengthy discussion with Tom regarding the Mustang aftermarket, specifically the S197 UCA along with Whiteline's philosophy and target market. Tom was the first one to admit that their original UCA design was flawed. In addition, apparently there was an issue with the materials utilized (non-spec) on some arms. I've seen the results but I'm not in a position to discuss them further. Maybe Tom can elaborate more if necessary.
Regarding the revised arm, I believe Whiteline is still using a 4130 alloy, albeit in a thicker cross section where necessary.
I think in terms of the Mustang aftermarket, in this case suspension componentry, engineering dogma is primarily to reach certain performance goals while adding the least amount of weight possible. In the case of a gusset, if FEA and real world testing allow a smaller or lighter gusset to be used then that's what you go with. In other words, if engineered properly, you really can get more from less.
To me, and I weld quite a bit, they look to be done properly. The weave, convexity, heat signature, as well as lack of any visible (to the naked eye, anyway) porosity, all look good. Here are some shots of an arm prior to being coated...
In actuality, the design is a simple one. With the right materials and fabrication it does indeed appear to be very robust. I'm not addressing the eccentric adjustment design here - certainly worthy of discussion though.
Now have a look at a comparison to the original Whiteline UCA. The larger clevis end and gusseting, in addition to thicker alloy being used, should make the arm very strong.
Personally, I like the simplicity. The two back to back definitely show a weak original design as well as a much improved new design. I think the argument now is whether you prefer a turnbuckle design or an eccentric design. I've stated my preferences earlier but I'm eager to see someone beat one of these to within an inch of its life and then have a good look at it.
That design looks much better. The issue with the previous design was the open, non gusseted end that allowed the axial force of the tube to be converted into bending at exactly the place where you don't want it - near the weld. In addition, chromoly is brittle and subject to fatigue with even the smallest of repetitive bending forces. I broke a chromemoly lower arm on my T-Bucket because it had an anti-rotation element attached 1/3 the way down the length of the arm (like 30" long). It took a year or so of driving, but eventually it snapped where the triangulation element was welded to the tube (think of the spring perch on Fox body cars :O ).
The new design with the thicker material, large radius corners and that tab to prevent the open end from flexing should work just fine to prevent work-hardening in the perpendicular plate that the tube is welded to.
I do think the designs with folds in the axial direction to prevent/distribute twisting loads are much better at keeping the steel in compression-tension so work hardening is avoided completely.
Last edited:
AMWill
Active Member
There's a bottom for each of the bolts that are threaded in. So, one can be locked while the other is free. Below is the installation instructions directly from Whiteline. Hope this helps!
Shane
Very poor...indeed.
Users who are viewing this thread
