BadBBC

Hey guys i been lookin at and reading about them, but wanted to get your opinions on which one. jegster, burkheart, madman, bmr, spoon... heck i dont know.. I know the jegs, burk, and madman are short one. anyways thanks guys!

mods in a nutshell are, n/a 468bbc, 9in

brandoz28

iTrader: (1)

i have a burkhart piece and its really nice, it hasn't been to the track yet though

xpndbl3

iTrader: (5)

I have the jegs adjustable piece and really like it. You need to figure out if you want the adjustability of multiple mounting heights for the torque arm in the front to change your instant center, that will limit your decision. Or cut/reweld the jegster mount to offer the same thing for instance.

92droptopws6

iTrader: (10)

Madman has had some of the hardest 60' cars out there from basic street machines to a
sick LARGE C.I. big block in Paco's 4th gen TA
Absolutely nothing wrong with:
Jegster
BMR
UMI
ETC. They have all earned a reputable position

brandoz28

iTrader: (1)

another little anecdote:
the make of torque arm doesn't seem to make as much difference as making sure that you have a good set of shocks

BadBBC

you have the one that bolts up to the tunnel??

BadBBC

yea i was goin to go with the qa1's

xpndbl3

iTrader: (5)

yes....and don't buy the Qa1's, buy the strange mustang double adjustable(buy the clevis mount for the rear to turn the shock 90 degrees on a f-body housing) or get the madman valved shocks.

BadBBC

any links?
looks like i am leaning toward the burkhart, as it is the most reasonable priced for the needs

xpndbl3

iTrader: (5)

call madman and ask him about the shocks. or the double adjustable mustang shocks are sold in summit even

KWIK84

iTrader: (5)

https://www.secureway1.com/alston/in...?productID=216

Alston Race Cars arm, LCARB's and summit 3 ways. On a 28x10.5S it hooks hard.

The shorter torque arm will be harder on the tires IIRC.

1BADRZ28

iTrader: (2)

I have a Spohn that I shortened 3 inches.

BadBBC

Havent talked to Madman yet but his piece is nice. I am thinking hopefully it will run in the low 11's to high 10's. What do you guys think?

xpndbl3

iTrader: (5)

for that power level anything would work fine

BadBBC

The crappy pic of the white one on the trailer is mine, the other is just some random pic from the local of some Fast A$$ 3rd gens....

Sorry for the large pictures.

BadBBC

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

I'm really surprised at how many fast cars out there have the jegster TA...

Otherwise, I'm not a big fan of the madman or spohn stuff, but there have been plenty of fast cars out there running them (for that matter, it seems like there are fast cars running almost any of them, including all sorts of cobbled and modified versions). The fact is that as long as it's rigid it doesn't seem to really matter what the exact geometry is, the basic design is long enough that even significantly moving the pick up point doesn't change the IC/antisquat.

xpndbl3

iTrader: (5)

Wouldn't call me one of the "fast" ones with a jegster

Madman is one of the best in the business, no way you can't be a fan of his stuff. It plain works, sure it's pricey but it's great parts and service from him.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

i really like the looks of the burkhart piece, and the price is nice too. i'm hoping to replace my non adjustable jegster with one. if my arm was adjustable, i'd probably just modify it for IC adjustment.

more pics of your car...i'm a fan of white sport coupes

DIGGLER

iTrader: (1)

arm length changes ic, not mounting height.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

arm length will change it, but mounting height will too. and mounting height is much more adjustable than arm length once the car is setup, lol.

xpndbl3

iTrader: (5)

how would mounting height not change it? But LCA mounting height would, the two lines need to intersect to find the instant center off both pieces...?

brandoz28

iTrader: (1)

the burkhart piece is really nice, and Chuck is a stand up guy. He can even help you set it up on the phone

DIGGLER

iTrader: (1)

the front mount of the torque arm is a vertical line on a suspension layout graph. moving the front mount up or down will still put your vertical line in the same place on the car. if you think about it, the only thing a torque arm does is push upwards or downwards on its front mount. if you move that mount up or down 2", it will still be pushing up or down on the same spot on the car. i would say the adjustable front mount is more for getting the arm level with the various ride heights you could have.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

well, then that would mean that the IC on a ladder bar car is a vertical line, which is not the case.

up and down adjustment is beneficial...ask any fast drag radial guy.

xpndbl3

iTrader: (5)

Then why does madman suggest to hit the tires different to change the front mounting point height of his torque arms? Obviously he knows what he's doing with drag radial cars.

DIGGLER

iTrader: (1)

ladder bars push the car foward. torque arms do not. they work completely different.

you guys may not believe me, but a few years back madman got on one of these forums and made a post on a thread about setting pinion angle... said to park the car on level ground and check pinion angle. i have to wonder how many people did it like he said.... one of my friends did, and he wound up with around -14 degrees of pinion angle. if you have a pretty low car you might come out ok using madmans (wrong) method. but if you have a stock ride height or slightly higher than stock, you may wind up in the same shape as my friend did.
another friend bought madmans adjustable torque arm when it first came out. there was no slider link in there so it bound up. basically just a ladder bar in the center of the car. which worked at a different arc than the lca's, since they were different lengths.

honestly i wonder if he is just a welder/fabricator that has been around alot of cars and knows what setups people are running and goes off of that info? imo, if you want to learn something, talk to racers who TUNE THEIR OWN STUFF. never trust an overhyped internet hero. i got burned by a nationally known LT1/LS1 tuning internet GOD a couple years ago. turns out, he didnt know all that much.

DIGGLER

iTrader: (1)

here you go.

DIGGLER

iTrader: (1)

also, i know im not "fast", but ive been 1.30 so far on 275s in a car that might make 600rwhp on a good day. i think it will hit a 1.28 or so if i can keep the front end down. i do not have a front adjustment on my arm. honestly about all ive really been adjusting on the thing is getting the rearend square in the car and swaybar adjustments. the rest has been with the shocks.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

so by that sketch, the IC is the vector perpindicular to the plane of the lca's through the torque arm mount...

so then the question becomes, what is ideal? and how do i get there, lol. would this be why the lca mounts on "Racecraft's" rearends have like 6 or 8 settings? do you have a link to more info on this?

DIGGLER

iTrader: (1)

yup, your lca's are the big tuning key with whatever arm your running. you will see guys tuning them in degrees. thats why racecraft has so many settings. you can also adjust rear ride height to change lca angle slightly. your ideal setting will be determined by the cars weight/weight distribution, torque, tires, shocks, and track conditions. generally, you just need to hit the tires hard enough to plant them initially and then the shocks take over from there. lowering the rear mount of the lca's will make you hit the tires harder. also shortening the arm will hit the tires harder.
im not sure what book that diagram came out of, but i believe it to be correct.

BadBBC

Front end shot, and the mini tubb has begun (wolf 4th gen kit).
Still not shure on which TQ Arm im going to go with...

brandoz28

iTrader: (1)

burkhart FTW. for what its worth.....its VERY similar to the madman on my friend's car

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

the difference between one of our TA's and ladder bars is that our ta's have a sliding link in the front, which prevents it from exerting any force for and aft, so the mount location has no effect on IC without making the arm longer or shorter. The adjustment points on them are only there for adjusting pinion angle.

As far as not being a big fan of Madman, well, they've had something on the order of 15 years to figure it out now, and I don't know if that's still the case but even only a few years back they didn't have a clue how a the TA rear suspensions on our cars worked, and almost everything they did and posted had something wrong with it. Back then there were some cars that went fast with their stuff, but often it was modified from the form that it came from from madman to make it work and they still took credit for it, or basically their stuff had such screwed up geometry that the rear suspension couldn't move enough to get out of whack, so you essentially ended up with something that worked like a rail rear suspension (in other words none, on a rail they bolt the rear axle right to the frame). I wouldn't be surprised if their current stuff exhibits some small bit of evidence of knowledge, but I wouldn't give them credit for figuring anything out on their own.

As far as the original question... lets face it, that car is slow enough that it will work fine with stock stuff.

As far as what works on a faster car... well anything that maintains something resembling the stock action (allowing the front joint to move, I still prefer sliding but there are some pivoting setups that work OK) and is stiff enough not to flex at the power level you're at will work fine, once you get a reasonable pinion angle the TA isn't going to be used for tuning any at all anyway, you can tune with LCA angle, springs (though I would argue if you have things right, you should only really need the springs to hold the car up when it is not accelerating, the anti squat in the suspension will hold it up without the springs when it is accelerating), sway bar, shocks, tire height and pressure, front suspension...