Handling was [Shotimes] RE: supercharging
Bruce Malachuk
bmalach1@nycap.rr.com
Thu, 13 Feb 2003 14:49:09 -0500
very true
my 94 mtx sho has the tpr or 1/2 tpr bushing on the tension strut in the
front, while my 95 SE has plain ole rubber ones. I think that is part of the
reason my sho feels a little rigid and almost to tight when driving, and my
se feels tight but smoother. Course my tension strut bushings in the from on
my SE are new rubber
I am thinking that I might hold off on putting my 24mm in the front till
I've gotten a chance to drive the whatever int the front/26mm in the rear
with TPR.
Till at least middle summer the tranny and clutch will be stock and stock. I
can wait till then to add my 24mm if ppl keep saying to much of understeer
or oversteer...
Thoughts?
Bruce
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Fisher" <ianf@eden.rutgers.edu>
To: "'Midwest SHO Specialists'" <SHOtimes@midwestsho.com>; "'John
Weidenbenner'" <johnjweid@earthlink.net>; <shotimes@autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 1:53 PM
Subject: RE: Handling was [Shotimes] RE: supercharging
> No, gen2's had many different sway bar combos, spring rates and in some
> cases, lower rated struts between 1992-1995.
>
> 5 speeds also have TPR front tension strut rod bushings whereas
> automatics had rubber all around.
>
> Ian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Midwest SHO Specialists [mailto:SHOtimes@midwestsho.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 1:47 PM
> To: Ian Fisher; 'John Weidenbenner'; shotimes@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: Handling was [Shotimes] RE: supercharging
>
>
> Gen II suspensions were identical guys, with the exception of the steel
> caliper piston rather than the phenolic. My 95' SLO had the same sway
> bars as the 95' SHOs. Stock, all Gen II's handle like ass, IMHO.
>
> Mike Kopstain
> Midwest SHO Specialists
> 827 North Chestnut Avenue
> Arlington Heights, IL 60004
> www.MidwestSHO.com
> Sales@midwestsho.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ian Fisher" <ianf@eden.rutgers.edu>
> To: "'John Weidenbenner'" <johnjweid@earthlink.net>; "'Midwest SHO
> Specialists'" <SHOtimes@midwestsho.com>; <shotimes@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 7:57 AM
> Subject: RE: Handling was [Shotimes] RE: supercharging
>
>
> > You are correct, I wasn't thinking about that. I wish I knew what FSB
> > I had on my 94 ATX. Whatever it was, it went well with my 26mm
> > RSB/poly bushings. A little eager to get the back to come around, but
> > it was very controllable.
> >
> > Ian
> > 93 SHO MTX
> > Tried:
> > 24 (rubber)/24 (rubber)
> > 24 (rubber)/26 (polyurethane)
> > 24 (rubber)/26 (TPR)
> > 20.6 (polygraphite)/26 (TPR)
> > 22 (TPR)/26 (TPR) current setup
> > 22 (rubber)/26 (TPR) coming with addition of Quaife
> >
> > *Paul Fisher approved sig* ;)
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Weidenbenner [mailto:johnjweid@earthlink.net]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 8:47 AM
> > To: Ian Fisher; 'Midwest SHO Specialists'; shotimes@autox.team.net
> > Subject: Re: Handling was [Shotimes] RE: supercharging
> >
> >
> > Ian,
> >
> > Don't forget that he's talking about his SLO. The ATX SHO has slight
> > oversteer with the 24/26 combo and is a good basis to tune handling. I
>
> > would expect the SLO's of the world would be more like the ATX SHO
> > than the MTX SHO when it comes to handling modifications.
> >
> > John W.
> > 3.2 TLS
> > 3.2 ATX SHO
> > 3.2 MTX SHO
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Ian Fisher" <ianf@eden.rutgers.edu>
> > To: "'Midwest SHO Specialists'" <SHOtimes@midwestsho.com>; "'John
> > Miller'" <jem@milleredp.com>; <shotimes@autox.team.net>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 6:52 AM
> > Subject: RE: [Shotimes] RE: supercharging
> >
> >
> > > I thought that your point was that the Taurus understeers like a
> > > pig. It will understeer like a pig forever and ever as long as you
> > > are running a 24mm Front sway bar.
> > >
> > > By the way, are we confusing grip with handling? In my book, good
> > > handling consists of being able to toss a car around without losing
> > > grip. A Slalom would be a good example. A car that can easily
> > > transition from straight line driving to sudden changes in direction
>
> > > without losing it is a decent handling car.
> > >
> > > A lot of people feel that good handling is the ability to take a
> > > turn quickly because they have wider tires. To me, that's just grip.
> > >
> > > It's all relative though and it depends on what you are comparing it
>
> > > to.
> > >
> > > Ian
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Midwest SHO Specialists [mailto:SHOtimes@midwestsho.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 2:05 AM
> > > To: ianf@eden.rutgers.edu; John Miller; shotimes@autox.team.net
> > > Subject: Re: [Shotimes] RE: supercharging
> > >
> > >
> > > Ian,
> > >
> > > 24/ 26mm combo, poly bushings and endlinks, strut tower brace, 225
> > > series tires, tokicos, plugged bias valve 11.6" front rotors/ 10"
> > > vented rears (converted from drum!).
> > >
> > > All that does wonders to keep the car remarkably flat. My car
> > > handles
> >
> > > better then my bro's 94' Z28, although with a larger turning radius.
>
> > > :
> >
> > > ) My Mustang, would just be up and gone. The wheels would stay
> > > firmly
> >
> > > planted and the car would haul ass away. It's quite a different
> > > experience than the typical fighting of the steering wheel feeling I
>
> > > get with the Taurus.
> > >
> > > My point was, for the same amount of money I spent making my car
> > > handle better, I could improve that Mustang the same amount and it
> > > would be better then the Taurus again.
> > >
> > > We all know that we are the types that are up for some kind of
> > > challenge. There are a lot of applications out there that are a much
>
> > > better base to start modding on than the SHO, but most aren't as
> > > fun. The SHO is a great car, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't
> > > want my precious Saleen back. : (
> > >
> > > Mike Kopstain
> > > Midwest SHO Specialists
> > > 827 North Chestnut Avenue
> > > Arlington Heights, IL 60004
> > > www.MidwestSHO.com
> > > Sales@midwestsho.com
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: <ianf@eden.rutgers.edu>
> > > To: "Midwest SHO Specialists" <SHOtimes@midwestsho.com>; "John
> > > Miller"
> >
> > > <jem@milleredp.com>; <shotimes@autox.team.net>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 1:14 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [Shotimes] RE: supercharging
> > >
> > >
> > > > Understeer on a Taurus is easily cured as 1-2-3.
> > > >
> > > > Sway bars are where its at. Some year Taurii understeer more than
> > > > others (depending on sway bar combo)
> > > >
> > > > Ian
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Speaking as someone that owns a Taurus and someone that owned a
> > > > > Fox
> > > > body
> > > > > (sheds a tear) let me toss in my 8.75 cents. The fox body is
> > > > > raw,
> > > > not very
> > > > > comfortable to drive, but fun as all hell. Regardless of
> > > > > whether or
> > > > not the
> > > > > Taurus has a stiffer structure to being with, stock for stock,
> > > > > the
> > > > Mustang
> > > > > handles very well and the Taurus has more understeer than....
> > > > ummmmm....
> > > > > Something that has a lot of understeer. : > )
> > > > >
> > > > > With that said, the cars are for two different people. The
> > > > > Mustang
> > > > is your
> > > > > raw go fast mobile, while the Taurus is your family luxury
> > > > > sedan. Or
> > > > at
> > > > > least that is what it was intended to be. : )
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike Kopstain
> > > > > Midwest SHO Specialists
> > > > > 827 North Chestnut Avenue
> > > > > Arlington Heights, IL 60004
> > > > > www.MidwestSHO.com
> > > > > Sales@midwestsho.com
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "John Miller" <jem@milleredp.com>
> > > > > To: <shotimes@autox.team.net>
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 10:53 AM
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Shotimes] RE: supercharging
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > > Not to be a jerk, but why are SHO's so much better than
> > > > > > > mustangs?
> > > > 4
> > > > > > > doors/trunk space/fwd & rwd asside, what are the apples to
> > > > > > > apples comparisons that make the SHO better?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Stiffer structure (the SHO is quite stiff for a production
> > > > > > sedan,
> > > > the Fox
> > > > > > cars are very floppy), slightly better material quality (yeah,
> > > > there's
> > > > > > still a lot of Ford in it, but there's also some fairly clever
> > > > details),
> > > > > > better suspension design (you can get better balance and more
> > > > > > grip
> > > > out of
> > > > > a
> > > > > > SHO chassis than you ever can a Mustang with the stock
> > > > > > four-link
> > > > rear
> > > > > > suspension), and so on.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > John.
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Shotimes mailing list
> > > > > > Shotimes@autox.team.net
> > > > > > http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Shotimes mailing list
> > > > > Shotimes@autox.team.net
> > > > > http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Shotimes mailing list
> > > > Shotimes@autox.team.net
> > > > http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Shotimes mailing list
> > > Shotimes@autox.team.net
> > > http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes
> _______________________________________________
> Shotimes mailing list
> Shotimes@autox.team.net
> http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes