handling questions on struts and shocks for 2004 v6 mustang
i have a 2004 mustang and i wanna keep the stock hieght if possible and i want better handling i already put some 18x9 with 265tires on it and i dont want compromise anymore of the ride quality so can i just replace the struts and not the shocks to keep the same clearance off the ground or does anyone know where to get non lowering springs i do a little bit of drag racing i need to keep that in mind and i just like to take tight turns and last i would love to keep budget approved thank you
Good for drag racing
Good for corners
Not very expensive
No such thing
You are going to want to figure out what you will be doing the most with it and set it up that way. The other option will then be comprimised.
As far as cost goes suspension is like stereo equipment. A good basic setup is not to expensive but it's easy to talk yourself into add ons till you are spending twice the money. Suspensions are also one of those things where you hit a point of diminishing returns rather quickly.
If you will be driving street stuff mostly and doing some twisty stuff I would recomend shocks and struts (adjustable for compression and rebound if you can afford them), sway bars, sub frame connectors and poly bushings for the rear arms. That will give you a good balanced NON racecar setup.
__________________
Under Construction. Better, Stronger, Faster than it was before.
dieselmonkey- Why do you want to keep the stock ride height? Mustang's sit like trucks from the factory. Some springs do not compromise your ride quality. I have the C springs from Ford Racing on my car currently and they do not ride harsh at all for a lowered car.
Some of the only cars that you are going to get amazing handling with great ride quality are BMW, Mercedes, Audi/Porsche and the supercar companies. You have to pay to have a car that can handle and rides great.
i also have ford c springs and my car doesn't sit much lower and doesn't look like a 4x4 anymore either. after i bought mine i saw a package deal that came with ford racing c springs and shocks and struts and i want to say a sway bar for like 600. little upset about that one lol
__________________
3.73 gears, BBK cai,BBK Throttle body and plenum, BBK long tubes with x-pipe, flowmaster 40's, steeda pully's, steeda's tri axle shifter, diablo predator, spec stage 1 clutch,spec aluminum flywheel, crossed drilled rotors front and back, ford racing springs
^ The Bullitt handling package? It comes with the C springs, stiffer shocks/struts and upgraded sway bars. It is an ok kit if you are not too concerned with handling. The kit improves the handling and lowers the car an ok amount.
im not sure if there's a rear independent suspension upgrade for the '04 but if you could get your hands on one, then invest on it. mustangs have always been a bane on corners 'coz of it's solid rear axle.
^Not really... The IRS is an ok piece of equipment. You can use the IRS off of a Thunderbird if you want the 7.5" or you can use them off of the Cobra's if you want an 8.8". They are not very strong and they were not fully developed when Ford released them.
An SRA can made to handle incredibly well. Have you seen what Griggs, MM, Steeda etc. etc. are able to do with the SRA cars? A SRA can handle just as well as an IRS car, the only difference is that the IRS takes bumps nicer.
well i agree that if you throw all those SRA upgrades in there, it will improve handling but its characteristics remain unchanged. for straight lines, SRAs are perfect. toss it around twists and turns with rapid grade changes, either you'll end up going sideways, in the shrubs or ditch, or off the cliff. even on level ground, it fights to keep you in contact with earth.
first off, the cobra IRA is heavier, thus improving front/rear weight distribution and decrease the car's unsprung weight. better balance translates to better traction and riding comfort.
second, IRA doesn't bind during hard turns. it has better wheel articulation since the right doesnt have to compromise with what the left is doing and vice versa, thus the wheels locate itself accordingly with respect to ground geometry and chassis angle. side to side movement is likewise eliminated.
IRA's design fundamentals are reasons why high performance cars have it instead of the SRAs. the downside of it is that it's expensive and less durable than an axle. but it should carry the mustangs weight around no problem.
__________________
'96 V6 M/T...stock motor, modified driver!
It's not what you drive; it's how you arrive!
Last edited by hatawna; 08-26-2008 at 02:07 PM.
Reason: addendum
Are you sure you know what you are talking about? Why do you think that MM, Griggs, and Steeda are just now investing time and money into making parts for the IRS? Because it was a piece from the factory is why...
Take a look at Griggs ST, TT, RT and then tell me that a SRA binds up and tries to come loose at every corner...
"All those SRA upgrades"? Panhard bar, torque arm, LCA's, springs/shocks, SFC's and the Mustang will be beyond most people's driving capabilities. That would still be cheaper than paying for the IRS, IRS brace, bushings etc. etc. Not to mention it is a lot easier to work on a SRA than an IRS, IMO at least.
"IRA's design fundamentals are reasons why high performance cars have it instead of the SRAs. the downside of it is that it's expensive and less durable than an axle. but it should carry the mustangs weight around no problem."
True, But Ford's IRS are pieces of ****. lol They are just now starting to actually make some IRS's that are worthwhile.
im not pointing out specifically on what ford has got to offer. IRS conversion for mustang is no longer a rarity. if you catch my drift, all im saying is that the IRS is much better than the SRA in more ways than one. test and proven baby!
you seem to contradict yourself here...not sure where you're coming from... - Have you seen what Griggs, MM, Steeda etc. etc. are able to do with the SRA cars?
- Why do you think that MM, Griggs, and Steeda are just now investing time and money into making parts for the IRS?
Take a look at Griggs ST, TT, RT and then tell me that a SRA binds up and tries to come loose at every corner...that's exactly the point why they came out with upgrades. SRA will always be SRA, no matter what. no amount of upgrade will change it's characteristics (i.e. high unsprung weight, limited articulation, erratic location, etc.). case in point? the tires are always on a constant 90deg angle with respect to the road. can you change that on the SRA?
am i missing something here? im not so sure what you're driving at. if you're pushing that SRA is just as good as IRS, im not buying it. just imagine that the SRA has been in existence since Karl Benz invented the car, now you're trying to tell me that it is just, or can be as good as IRS? c'mon...
My point is that the Ford IRS is a weak piece of ****... I thought that it was fairly obvious?
In Mustang's, Yes the SRA can handle just as well as the IRS. The IRS in a Mustang is not a very nice set-up.
When you quoted me about contradicting myself I was not contradicting myself. Griggs, MM, and Steeda are just now starting to build things for the IRS because it was such a piece that the SRA could handle better.
I do not think that I said that the SRA is better than the IRS anywhere. I said that in Ford's case the SRA is better than the IRS on the Mustang. Their are not too many people who can do what Griggs and MM does with their SRA's on an IRS. Go to the Griggs site or look up videos of Griggs Mustangs, They handle almost perfectly. I have seen a lot of the Cobra guys take off their IRS for a full SRA track set-up, wonder why?
handling questions on struts and shocks for 2004 v6 mustang 
. after i bought mine i saw a package deal that came with ford racing c springs and shocks and struts and i want to say a sway bar for like 600. little upset about that one lol
