How do LCA relocators work and how do you set them up for track use?

[935.0]

I bought a 12 gt mustang that had steeda lower control arms and the relocators brackets I went to the drag strip with it and it did good but I was wondering if I can help it hook up better by adjusting the control arms and can I drive it in long trips, without screwing with the rear end angle
thanks

 

[Scuba-Matt]

The rear lower control arms help reduce axle wrap that causes wheel hop.
Lowering the control arm will give you the best straight line traction. But cornering will suffer.
A rear adjustable upper control are will eliminate the axle wrap all together.

 

[HammeredSoul]

I lowered my car with Steeda sports with Koni Sport (yellows), and installed UMI Rotojoint/poly LCAs with CHE LCA brackets. The car has absolutley no wheel hop anymore, and it handles great. I was weary about the rear being touchy after lowering the LCA's, but it is not bad at all. No different than stock really...

I haven't driven with lowered LCA's on a stock height vehicle, but I wish people would stop spreading tripe about the car's handling being negatively affected, simply by adding LCA's. Maybe on a stock height car with a drastic LCA change... I can see the rear end coming out easily. But a stock height vehicle with a slight change (accomplished with LCA brackets with multiple settings) I don't think there would be much of any negative handling effects.

I chose to go with the CHE because they are built like a tank, have 1 hole, and I wanted to weld them in. SET IT AND FORGET IT. They work like a charm.

AND BTW, I drove from Washington DC to DFW,TX with about 600 lbs out guns, clothes, and belongings packed into the car with no problems.

 

[BMR Tech]

I bought a 12 gt mustang that had steeda lower control arms and the relocators brackets I went to the drag strip with it and it did good but I was wondering if I can help it hook up better by adjusting the control arms and can I drive it in long trips, without screwing with the rear end angle
thanks

Is your car a manual or auto?

The relocation brackets help in setting your Instant Center point, which changes your Anti-Squat percentage. Anti-Squat percentage at 100% means basically, the rear does not squat...nor does it rise. The further under/above 100...the more the car does of each, squat or rise. If you have 150%....the ass of the car is going to shoot up a few inches above the tire when you launch, if you have 50%....the car is going to squat HARD when you launch.

The good news is, you have a set of brackets that allows for some adjustment, as the "one-size fits all" approach that some companies use, is unfriendly to the end user, who wants the most traction available to them via suspension adjustment.

On most S197's, I like to see the AS% in the 90% - 115% range. 105% seems to be the best overall, just from our experience and my customers feedback.

This will also depend on A LOT of variables, track prep, tires, launch RPM, etc etc etc....

Here is a calculator, thanks to Baseline Suspension:

Instant Center Calculator for your drag car suspension

The “COG” on these cars is typically the height of the crankshaft bolt, PLUS an additional 6”…. So if the crank bolt is say, 15.5” from the ground, the COG height will be 21.5”.

Wheelbase is typically in the 107” range….of course, this may vary with all the adjustable suspension stuff.

Front/Rear weights are usually in the 54/46 range…..so on a stock 2011 GT ---- (1970/front) (1680/rear)

Everyone's set-up is different, and it is a good thing that you have multiple positions to plot with...

Have fun! :beer:

 

[BMR Tech]

Just a little more info (results)

Our 2011 GT, when it had nitrous on it for launch testing gained about 4 tenths of a second, in the sixty-foot alone, by installing LCA and Brackets; compared to stock LCA and LCA position. This car had our SP009 Lowering Springs. I am looking at the run sheets, we went from 1.988 down to a 1.527.

That set-up was a wet nitrous shot, .062 Nitrous / .035 Fuel jets. - on stock 18's with MT Drag Radials on rear.

To show how much only 1" of LCA movement makes a difference, we tested our lowest position of our LCA Brackets to just the Middle position, which is only 1" higher.

The lowest position (4" lower than factory) gave us an average sixty of 1.81, with a best of the 3 launches being a 1.76.

The Middle position (3" lower than factory)....all three passes were 1.49.

 

[UnleashedBeast]

All of that information was copied and pasted into a word document. Now I have measurements and guidance from one of the best suspension vendors in the industry.

However, with the SP009 springs and all other parts, it's common to use the top hole on the UCA mount and the middle hole on the LCA mount. That should put anti-squat right where it needs to be.

 

[Mr. Freeze]

subbin'

 

[Famine]

Great info.

 

[BMR Tech]

Surprised this thread died so quickly.

This is one of the most important aspects of getting an S197 to perform to its maximum potential at a drag-strip, on the street, and on the road course.

 

[Dave_6]

Bookmarked

 

[TheVikingRL]

I have the FM P springs and relocation brackets. Without brackets my car lost all sorts of traction after it was lowered. Now using Steeda spherical/poly LCA's mounted on the top hole traction is much better than stock even on the temperamental Goodyear Supercar's. The car also corners better now IMO, less feeling like the rear might break away. Although the new LCA's might have played a part in this as well.

Never tried the lower mounting location but most every post I've read said stick with the upper hole.

 

[UnleashedBeast]

Surprised this thread died so quickly.

This is one of the most important aspects of getting an S197 to perform to its maximum potential at a drag-strip, on the street, and on the road course.

Bump for an awesome tech thread.

 

[nosympathy]

Surprised this thread died so quickly.

This is one of the most important aspects of getting an S197 to perform to its maximum potential at a drag-strip, on the street, and on the road course.

Ok I have a question for you then .

So A while back you recommended I swap holes in the way I mounted everything. I am loving the change. Feels like the car hooks better from a stop.

So...My mods in the sig below. I have your UCA mounted in the top hole now, closest to the chassy and set to a correct pinion angle, too right about -1.7 which you had recommended between -1.5 and -2.0.

Now it hits the chassy lightly when I hit hard bumps and the rear fully compresses. I am assuming there is no fix for this, other than to swap springs to something not as low? I love how low my car is but have contemplated swapping springs as these things some days are more a PITA than they are helpful. Currently I went to home depot and got this super heavy duty thin rubber I 3M taped right where it is hitting, to help deflect the blow from metal on metal. 3M tape and rubber combined are maybe 3/16ths of an inch so shouldn't affect the full range of motion.

Also, bummed I took a picture of my suspension and you guys never sent me that keychain after giving you guys my info .

No worries, i will still buy your products without question and have been considering your springs to replace the H&R SS

 

[Marc]

I don't have the UCAs, but when I installed the LCAs, my wheel hope is gone. One of the best mods I have made to my '13 Shelby GT500.

 

[Holovacko]

I have the BMR brackets and had them set on the lowest hole. Best 60' was 1.74, I've taken the advice and switched it to the middle hole, added front sway bar delete and JPC upper control arm with spherical bushing. Haven't had chance to try new set-up, but hoping for some good gains. I'll let you know how it goes within next couple weeks.

 

[rdplain]

Found this website awhile back when i was doing some LCA research.

cherod.com/mustang - LCAs

 

[VETTEHUNTER]

Bump for an awesome tech thread.

Agreed...I've said it before and I will say it again..Kelly is the man, and BMR products kick ass.

 

[VETTEHUNTER]

Ok I have a question for you then .

So A while back you recommended I swap holes in the way I mounted everything. I am loving the change. Feels like the car hooks better from a stop.

So...My mods in the sig below. I have your UCA mounted in the top hole now, closest to the chassy and set to a correct pinion angle, too right about -1.7 which you had recommended between -1.5 and -2.0.

Now it hits the chassy lightly when I hit hard bumps and the rear fully compresses. I am assuming there is no fix for this, other than to swap springs to something not as low? I love how low my car is but have contemplated swapping springs as these things some days are more a PITA than they are helpful. Currently I went to home depot and got this super heavy duty thin rubber I 3M taped right where it is hitting, to help deflect the blow from metal on metal. 3M tape and rubber combined are maybe 3/16ths of an inch so shouldn't affect the full range of motion.

Also, bummed I took a picture of my suspension and you guys never sent me that keychain after giving you guys my info .

No worries, i will still buy your products without question and have been considering your springs to replace the H&R SS

Hmm...I'm running the same set-up as you in the rear minus the shocks. I too have my UCA mounted in the top hole, but don't make any contact going over bumps...I wonder if the Koni shocks are a little softer than my Steeda Pro-Action's....Do you have any pics of where you are hitting?

 

[NTXRockr]

Just a little more info (results)

Our 2011 GT, when it had nitrous on it for launch testing gained about 4 tenths of a second, in the sixty-foot alone, by installing LCA and Brackets; compared to stock LCA and LCA position. This car had our SP009 Lowering Springs. I am looking at the run sheets, we went from 1.988 down to a 1.527.

To show how much only 1" of LCA movement makes a difference, we tested our lowest position of our LCA Brackets to just the Middle position, which is only 1" higher.

The lowest position (4" lower than factory) gave us an average sixty of 1.81, with a best of the 3 launches being a 1.76.

The Middle position (3" lower than factory)....all three passes were 1.49.

All of that information was copied and pasted into a word document. Now I have measurements and guidance from one of the best suspension vendors in the industry.

However, with the SP009 springs and all other parts, it's common to use the top hole on the UCA mount and the middle hole on the LCA mount. That should put anti-squat right where it needs to be.

Very true! The man is giving away crucial information to every bracket racer on the forum LOL :beer:

I'm heading out to the garage right now to try this out...I was cutting 2.0-2.1 sixtyfoots on stock suspension, and then cut 1.8-1.9s (best of 1.83) with BMR adjustable LCAs and relo brackets set to the bottom hole! I've been contemplating bumping them up one hole to test out the launch times, but hadn't done it due to being lazy lol...NOW I see some hard evidence that I'm not getting the maximum performance from the suspension, and I know I need to try my setup out for my car.

I was running on the premise that a lot of downforce on the tires would ensure maximum traction, but I always knew in the back of my mind that antisquat could likely be hampering my launches; I guess this proves that point! Thanks for the heads up!!! :rockon:

 

[nosympathy]

Hmm...I'm running the same set-up as you in the rear minus the shocks. I too have my UCA mounted in the top hole, but don't make any contact going over bumps...I wonder if the Koni shocks are a little softer than my Steeda Pro-Action's....Do you have any pics of where you are hitting?

Yeah I can take some. That is really weird...I'll have to go measure the pinion angle again, maybe I miss measured and I am more positive than negative and that is causing the control arm to be long enough to hit.

Honestly not sure, I know I have read other threads where people have had the same issue.