Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Opinions? 79-91 style control arm mounted swaybar vs 92+ link mounted swaybar.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Opinions? 79-91 style control arm mounted swaybar vs 92+ link mounted swaybar.

    79-91 Police Interceptor 1" Rear Swaybar
    vs
    92-02 Addco 1" Rear Swaybar.

    The propensity for this debate to occur is inevitable. I'm surprised it hasn't been discussed yet, but I'm sure many that have experience with rear swaybars on these cars have considered it. I'm looking for opinions. Yes, in order to install a 92-02 style bar on the 79-91, you must duplicate the body mount for the upper links and use a 3" inch swaybar bushing set from energy suspension on the bar to axle. This is not difficult in my opinion as I will demonstrate after this weekend. Now on to my argument. Open debate. Opinions welcomed and encouraged.

    In my opinion the 92-02 design is superior. The idea of a rear swaybar is to limit body roll which they both do. The 79-91 style may limit body roll by effectively limiting the lower rear control arms ability to compress under load by way of a high torsion bar and when those tires reach there limit of adhesion there is no give. Now with a 92-02 rear bar you have the same dynamic occuring where the body roll is being limited, but in this case it is with bushings in my opinion allowing a more progressive and controlled limitation of body roll therefore not inducing unwanted snap oversteer and reducing the rear swaybar's notorious harsh ride over uneven road surface . Go drive a fox body mustang and tell me if you don't figure out what I'm talking about. There is a fine line between adhesion and oversteer.

    Now I'm not looking to make this an Addco vs Ford swaybar quality debate. Simply comparing technology vs technology. Apples to apples. 1'' bar vs 1" bar. Link mounted vs Control Arm Mounted. Thank you.
    Last edited by 87stars_stripes; 07-26-2013, 01:27 PM.
    87' Lincoln Town Car Stars + Stripes. Explorer GT40P, Anderson B31 Cam, Shorty Headers, FRPP 1.6 Rockers, A9L, Sn95 T5 Trans, 3:55 Limited Slip, GNX Rear Springs, LSC Turbines, 1.5 wheelspacers, Full Custom Dual 2.5/Flowmasters, 00 P71 Airtube, 19lb calibrated Maf, Summit Alum Radiator, King Cobra Clutch, Short throw Shfter, Energy Susp Trans Mount,
    Mods to come: Big Brake/Poly Front Swap, PI Front Swaybar, Addco 650 Rear Swaybar, Boxed Upper Rear Control Arms, 351/Alum Heads, FRPP Valve Covers,

    #2
    Link mount may react faster. Reality, might see very little difference.

    Alex.

    Comment


      #3
      No rubber to deteriorate, far less complex of a linkage system on the 79-91 design. Less maintenance involved = win. I'm sure I'm not the only person who has had the front bar endlinks break or be rendered ineffective due to degradation of the parts. My S10's front bar thumps and bangs currently because the frame bracket's bushing is worn out and I've been too lazy to deal with it. Its poly too, and only about 5 years old. The front bar on the Towncar was totally useless when I got it, and the endlinks and bushings I think have been replaced twice since 2004. The Mark VII has had all of it's endlinks and bushings replaced at least once in it's life as well. The rear bar on the Towncar sports it's original hardware from the junkyard donor car, and I don't anticipate ever needing to replace it.
      86 Lincoln Town Car (Galactica).
      5.0 HO, CompCams XE258,Scorpion 1.72 roller rockers, 3.55 K code rear, tow package, BHPerformance ported E7 heads, Tmoss Explorer intake, 65mm throttle body, Hedman 1 5/8" headers, 2.5" dual exhaust, ASP underdrive pulley

      91 Lincoln Mark VII LSC grandpa spec white and cranberry

      1984 Lincoln Continental TurboDiesel - rolls coal

      Originally posted by phayzer5
      I drive a Lincoln. I can't be bothered to shift like the peasants and rabble rousers

      Comment


        #4
        I think everyone can agree the 92+ rear bar setup is better.

        But in my opinion it's nowhere near better enough to warrant the extra amount of work you have to do as opposed to literally 4 bolts.
        2020 F250 - 7.3 4x4 CCSB STX 3.55's - BAKFlip MX4
        2005 Grand Marquis GS - Marauder sway bars, Marauder exhaust, KYB's
        2003 Marauder - Trilogy # 8, JLT, kooks, 2.5" exhaust, 4.10's/31 spline, widened rear's, metco's, addco's, ridetech's 415hp/381tq
        1987 Colony Park - 03+ frame swap, blown Gen II Coyote, 6R80, ridetechs, stainless works, absolute money pit. WIP

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by pantera77 View Post
          I think everyone can agree the 92+ rear bar setup is better.

          But in my opinion it's nowhere near better enough to warrant the extra amount of work you have to do as opposed to literally 4 bolts.

          Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. -- Albert Einstein
          rides: 93 Crown Vic LX (The Red Velvet Cake), 2000 Crown Vic base model (Sandy), 2003 Expedition (the vacation beast)

          Originally posted by gadget73
          ... and it should all work like magic and unicorns and stuff.

          Originally posted by dmccaig
          Overhead, some poor bastards are flying in airplanes.

          Comment


            #6
            That's my take too. Heck I haven't welded since high school and don't have a welder anyway.

            Pete
            Originally posted by gadget73
            For other types of inquiry, more information is required. Please press 4 to speak to a representative who can help you with your question. This call may be monitored for quality assurance purposes.


            2003 Grand Marquis Ultimate, the "Stealth Bomber": http://www.grandmarq.net/vb/showthre...-Grand-Marquis
            1991 S-10, 'Bulldog', 2.5l 5 speed: http://www.grandmarq.net/vb/showthre...375#post698375
            1985 Town Car, 'Faded Glory', gone but not forgotten. 84/87/91/97 MGMs too.

            Comment

            Working...
            X