Improving a Pony Car's Handling - Part 1: Suspension Adjustability on a Budget

By Vince Illi

Apparently I’m weird. (I just told you something you didn’t already know, right?) MotoIQ people think I’m nuts for driving a domestic vehicle with too many cylinders under the hood. Fellow Mustang owners think I’m nuts for racing my car around corners. Road Racers think I’m nuts for dodging cones in parking lots and calling it “autocross” instead of a “driver’s license exam.”

When Ford released the latest Mustang chassis (code S197) in late 2004, they finally turned the Mustang into a world-class sports car platform. Gone was a pathetic chassis based on the old Fox Body that possessed rigidity paralleled only by moist balsa wood. It was replaced by a far more rigid structure with a good front suspension modeled closely on the 3-Series BMW’s. The GT’s weight bias is 54% front, which is pretty dang good for having a massive V8 up front. Sure, it still has a live rear axle, but the fact that the latest factory-tuned BOSS 302 kept up with and beat BMW’s M3 around Laguna Seca shows that beam axles can still be competitive around corners.

Being the weirdo that I am, I bought my Mustang for two purposes: daily driver and autocross terror. From the factory, the car is setup very well. It handles much better than its depleted-uranium 3,600-pound mass should. But, alas, my pony-car/land-yacht must compete with Miatas and S2000s half its size. It certainly has the advantage in power, but it tends to understeer after the apex of a corner. As an example, in a constant-radius corner, I would have to increase the steering input after the apex to keep the car on my intended line. My slip angle was increasing post-apex. The limited-slip differential installed from the factory helped me compensate somewhat by increasing throttle input a little early and powering out of the corner. But still, I felt I could do more.


In an earlier article, I installed forged wheels and stickier tires. While greatly improving handling and lateral grip, it did little to allay the post-apex understeering and did nothing at all for the body roll.

After perusing Mr. Kojima’s Ultimate Guide to Suspension and Handling, I decided on my path ahead to improve the handling. I figured taming the body roll and eliminating that post-apex understeering would be the first thing I should do after getting those stickier tires.

The first thing I tried was a strut-tower brace. Cars with the factory Brembo brake package came with a strut-tower brace from the factory. Although strut-tower braces are thought by many people to do nothing other than add weight, I thought I’d give one a try. I reasoned that some Ford engineer thought they were effective enough to convince the bean-counters to include them on Brembo-equipped cars.


Not really much to a strut-tower brace, but the Steeda piece is lightweight (under 9 pounds), well-constructed, and looks fairly nice under the hood.

To that end, I called up Steeda and ordered their strut-tower brace. After bolting it on, I noticed a slight improvement in initial turn-in and a more “solid” feeling around road imperfections, but it did absolutely nothing for the body roll or post-apex understeer. I needed a more complete solution.

Now, this being MotoIQ, I know what everyone’s thinking: KW coilovers and Whiteline sway bars and bushings! Unfortunately, I’m still making payments on my V8 lead sled and have no sponsors, unless you include Mom baking me cookies. (She says I’m special!) While I would have definitely liked a set of KW coilovers, I realized a few things. First of all, KW’s Variant 3s and clubsports lower my vehicle by a minimum of 1.5 inches. The S197 chassis cannot be lowered any further than that without compromising the suspension geometry and requiring additional parts, so using the coilovers for further height adjustment was out. Setting compression on your damper is nice for fine tuning, but I could do without that since I’m still a noob. I really wanted adjustable rebound, though. Koni shocks to the rescue!



Page 1 of 5 Next Page
Bookmark and Share
Wednesday, June 27, 2012 10:04 PM
I've always liked the blue and yellow combination. Hey, it matches the car lift! Plus, it's only appropriate as those are Michigan colors and Dearborn is down the highway from Ann Arbor. Nice upgrades; bang for the buck.

Back when I had a 2005 Evo VIII, all I did was front camber plates, rear trailing arm bushings and rear bumpsteer kit. Just those three things really got rid of the understeer. Just goes to show, really good results can be had for a low cost if choosing parts wisely like you did.

I spy a power upgrade....
Thursday, June 28, 2012 12:35 AM
How about designing a Ford Mustang with independent rear suspension and get rid of that archaic solid axle?
Thursday, June 28, 2012 2:07 AM
A well designed axle setup will perform almost as well as any IRS. Just look at the Falken Mustangs in FD, they still have live axles and both JTP and JR are absolutely killing it. Three out of four FD rounds were won by Mustangs. Would the Falken boys be able to perform so well in cars with bad handling? Methinks not.
Dusty Duster
Dusty Dusterlink
Thursday, June 28, 2012 2:42 AM
Live rear axles are the most effective way of putting power down to the ground, period.
Dan DeRosia
Dan DeRosialink
Thursday, June 28, 2012 4:56 AM
Yeah, even if you look at some pretty high end roadrace stuff like the tube chassis cars built for Trans Am, most of them are running live axle rears (and, at 3 link plus panhard bar, similar geometry to the S197 Mustang) IRS done right can work better across rough stuff than live axles because of the unsprung weight issue, but most production IRS is full of weird compromises, while it's easier to get live axle geometry right.
Thursday, June 28, 2012 7:38 AM
I interned at Ford back in the day and a good number of my current co-workers are ex-Ford guys. Anyways, Ford did design a nice IRS for the Mustang, and then the bean counters came with the ax. Such is life. Aside from that, a large portion, majority even, of Mustang owners only care about drag racing and a rear axle is better for that.
Thursday, June 28, 2012 8:00 AM
I've been running an almost identical set-up on my 06 GT for 2 years now! Koni yellows, Steeda Sport springs, M&M CC plates, Steeda adjustable panhard and brace. I also have some Steeda rear lower control arms, which I cannot possibly recommend highly enough. Completely eliminated wheel hop and made corner exit feel much more planted, and only cost me $120 and an hours time to install. I also highly, highly recommend the Stranoparts sways I'm running. Very affordable for adjustables, very light, very nicely built and finished, and quite light. Sam is a great guy to deal with as well, his customer service is second to none. This suspension is a wonderful low cost balance suspension. It does damn well at the auto-X while still remaining nicely compliant for daily use. It completely eliminated the stupid body roll, brake dive, and terrible damping that the stock suspension displayed.

I too have experienced the confusion that you described :)

I don't know how many people I've talked to that seem flabbergasted that I autocross my S197. Yes, I autocross a Mustang, is it really that strange, lol? I can usually run with stock E92 M3s at the auto-x on Hankook RS-3s.

Welcome to the auto-x Mustang fold, we need more guys like you :D
Thursday, June 28, 2012 8:14 AM
i believe you accidentally a word on this line:

"In addition to installing an adjustable panhard brace, I installed Evolution Performance’s panhard bar brace, as well."

so you installed a brace then installed a brace?
Dusty Duster
Dusty Dusterlink
Thursday, June 28, 2012 8:34 AM
It was supposed to read, "In addition to installing an adjustable panhard BAR, I installed Evolution Performance’s panhard bar brace, as well."
Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:10 AM
Back when I lived in Florida, I use to auto-x in the NE region (Jacksonville, Gainesville events) and there was a 2003 Mustang Cobra. That thing hauled serious ass. Loved the blower whine on it too.
Julian ITR
Julian ITRlink
Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:33 AM
Please correct me if I am wrong, but
"Specifically, increasing the rebound on the rear shocks decreases understeer later in the turn."
sounds odd to me, wouldn't you rather increase front rebound for less understeer late in a turn?

As you start to accelerate, weight gets transfered to the back, and the front of the car rises up, taking weight off the front wheels and thus leading to understeer. The rebound valves in the front shock absorbers counteract this movement, the more front rebound you dial in, the slower the front is allowed to rise -> less weight transfer to the back -> less understeer.
Thursday, June 28, 2012 10:07 AM
So, why does Mike hate the watts links?
Thursday, June 28, 2012 10:26 AM
Dynamometer, not dynometer. Sorry to nitpick.

Anyways, I got a chance to drive a friend's Mustang GT at an event a few weeks ago. Great power and fun to drive. He thought it did nothing but understeer, but when I got in it oversteered all over. You can manage a lot of that weight transfer with carefully timed application of the brakes and throttle. I'm sure it does handle better now though.

I run Koni yellows too, on my Z they seem to work great and along with my custom self-built coil-overs they were much less expensive than off-the-shelf solutions that use inferior (in my opinion) Tokico dampers.
Dusty Duster
Dusty Dusterlink
Thursday, June 28, 2012 10:53 AM
@Julian ITR:

No, stiffening the rear rebound decreases understeer (or increases oversteer) later in the turn, specifically post-apex.

Julian ITR
Julian ITRlink
Thursday, June 28, 2012 12:56 PM
I know about the suspension guide, but it does not distinguish between compression and rebound. Please elaborate :)
Thursday, June 28, 2012 7:09 PM
Since part of this article has the word "budget" in the title, wouldn't it make sense to corner balance the car? This is a very cheap mod and can sometimes yield big dividends.
Thursday, June 28, 2012 7:18 PM
Pretty sure you can't corner balance the Mustang without adjustable spring perches. Some cars you can (at least with a Corvette), but not most.
Thursday, June 28, 2012 10:06 PM
Wow, thanks for school me guys.
I guess I'm gonna keep my negative comments about the Mustang to myself. Such an orthodox car in today's technology.
Thursday, June 28, 2012 11:33 PM
Very nice writeup! Corner weighing is a great modification indeed, but I think this car's ride height is not adjustable and dont the FD Mustangs have some tricky CVT joints in the rear for camber and toe tuning?
Dusty Duster
Dusty Dusterlink
Friday, June 29, 2012 4:42 AM

I cannot corner balance a car without height adjustability.

@Julian ITR:

This is the way it was explained to me, so hopefully someone else who is more mechanically-inclined by me will correct me if I'm completely off-base here. ("Dang it, Jim, I'm an electrical engineer, not a suspension guru!")

After the apex of the turn, you are (supposed to be) straightening the wheel and pulling out of the turn. During this phase, the weight is beginning to shift off of the outside wheel, which means the suspension on that side is uncompressing or "rebounding." So, you tune the rebound of the shock for post-apex performance.


Your comment wasn't necessarily negative--a stick axle does have some disadvantages. However, I'm pretty sure you would have a similar berating comment for any car that isn't a Hondnissayota.


There's no way stock to adjust the camber or toe of the rear wheels on a Mustang. I would be VERY interested to see how professional race teams adjust rear live-axle suspension (if they do it at all, that is).
Friday, June 29, 2012 5:22 AM
@Dusty Duster

I've read that some of the AE86 drifters would bend the Axel tube to alter the camber and toe of the rear suspension. Although I wouldn't suggest doing this to a brand new Mustang one was still making payments on ;-)

I agree with @czubaka why does Mike K. hate watts links?

Maybe a future article on solid axle suspension? ^_^
Julian ITR
Julian ITRlink
Friday, June 29, 2012 5:47 AM
@Dusty yes, that is true for the front outer shock, but the rear outer shock compresses even more as you accelerate out of the corner. You take away the corner load, but gradually replace it with acceleration load at the same time. So basically the rear outer shock stays at roughly the same position, while the rear inner shock gets compressed.

In my "suspension book" there is also a flowchart on chassis setup, for the case of understeer at corner exit it also recommends increasing the front rebound.

There is also a passage I don't quite get, regarding setup if you can only adjust rebound and not compression. It says

'you can still influence the ratio of compression/rebound, and the more you increase rebound the more the car gets "sucked" into the spring, which seemingly hardens, because the damper tries to preload it at any movement. This reduces grip on the axle that has more rebound -> rear rebound up means more oversteer'

(sorry for crappy translation, it's a German book)
but it doesn't say anything about where in the corner you get more oversteer, so I guess everywhere? Suspension nerds to the rescue, please!!
Julian ITR
Julian ITRlink
Friday, June 29, 2012 5:48 AM
btw, also wondering why dumping the panhard and not replacing it with a Watt's Linkage? Where do the sideways forces go?
Dan DeRosia
Dan DeRosialink
Friday, June 29, 2012 6:12 AM
@Dusty: Well, the AE86 (and 1st gen RX-7, but noone outside the cult of Wankel cares about those) is stick axle too and gets no end of fanboy spoo... er... adoration. ;)

Amateur race teams adjust rear camber or toe on live axles by warping the thing a bit with welding, or putting it in something amounting to a goddamn-huge press; think in terms of having anchors sunk into concrete with chains around them attached to the ends, and a truck jack under the middle. It's hard on the splines and bearings so you generally don't go more than a degree or two. Yeah, it's kind of crude, but it works pretty well, just like the stick axles themselves. ;)

More professionally, floating axle housings have the wheel bearings carried on a spigot that possibly bolts or welds to the end of the housing tube, so the axles just carry torque. This was originally done so that breaking an axle wouldn't result in a wheel coming off, but it's also possible to have those spigots machined at an angle to give toe and camber changes to whatever degree you want, and it's at least theoretically possible to have the splines on the axles cut a little bit curved (think barrel shape) so that it acts kind of like a CV joint. Or maybe they just don't bother to care.

Re: Watts links - Watts links are one of those things where they're theoretically better than panhard bars, but practically it's at best a wash. You end up in practical terms more limited in where the roll center can be by the need to mount this pivot thing to the center of the axle and have arms go to both sides of the chassis and clear everything else happening back there, and once you do that it's hard to make it so that you can adjust it. Panhard bars do move the axle from side to side a bit as it moves up and down relative to the chassis, but with a longish panhard bar and reasonable levels of chassis movement, that's not much of a big deal. For a 48" panhard bar moving 4" up or down from a level position, that's 3/16" sideways motion unless I'm not awake and screwing up my math. In exchange, it weighs a lot less, and it's easy to design it so that both ends are adjustable, so you can quickly and easily change the roll center in the rear.
Saturday, June 30, 2012 11:08 AM
I don't have a Mustang here in front of me, but lowering a strut suspension often creates POSITIVE camber.

Also, what are you going to do instead of the panhard bar? A non-parallel four link is deep fried pooh and the Watts Link, for some reason, appears to have attracted the wrath of Kojima, so what are we talking about, leaf springs?

Final thing, if you want cheap adjustability, get somebody to build an adjustable mount for your panhard rod and/or the top mount on your three link.

The panhard adjustment let's you set the roll center wherever you like and the top link would let you adjust anti-squat. When you mentioned corner exit understeer, the first remedy I thought of was more anti-squat in the rear suspension.
Saturday, June 30, 2012 10:48 PM
@Dusty, I'm curious on what watts linkage you plan on going with. I used to work for a well known mustang builder that had designed their own watts linkage system that used the original pan hard mounting points and a beefed up diff cover as the center pivot. Honestly, when I first saw it I thought, one curb check and say bye bye to the diff oil. But surprisingly, they did very well. So well in fact that they were too stiff for the factory panhard mounting point on the body. We had a few customers come back and found that the spot welds on the factory bracket for the top mounting point had ripped off of the body. This only happened on cars that were tracked often enough to see a significant amount of lateral load on the suspension. This was actually easily remedied with some weld in support for the bracket.

Just giving you a heads up if you decide to go this route!
Dusty Duster
Dusty Dusterlink
Sunday, July 01, 2012 5:15 AM
The camber after lowering my car went from -0.5 to -2.0.

The Watts link I have sitting in front of me right now replaces the panhard rod and brace with a single "frame" that the propeller mounts to.
b drecksage
b drecksagelink
Monday, July 02, 2012 7:23 AM
since we drive the same car, do you know of anything to get some feeling in the steering wheel? I;m used to my old cobalt ss turbo, I could feel a small rock in the road because I got so much feed back in the wheel. Now I get nothings.

also, is that intake on there without a tune?
Dusty Duster
Dusty Dusterlink
Monday, July 02, 2012 12:02 PM
The 2012 and later Mustangs have the ability to change steering feel via the trip computer. There's not much to do on the 2011.

And, yes, AEM makes properly-engineered intakes that don't require a retune. The stock airbox is actually very good; the intake only adds 8 horsepower. However, an amount that small could almost be a rounding error. I installed it for better throttle response, and I'm pretty impressed with it for that purpose.

Most of the "gains" on other intakes (Such as Steeda and JLT) are actually from the required computer tune. Those other intakes are wider, which changes the MAF sensor's transfer function and thus a new computer tune. Personally, I feel AEM has the best-designed intake for this platform.
Monday, July 02, 2012 2:46 PM
Did Ford forget to paint or coat the rear axle? I'd be pissed if my brand new car was already rusty underneath...
Dusty Duster
Dusty Dusterlink
Monday, July 02, 2012 5:34 PM
It's a type of steel that is supposed to develop a layer of rust on it, though I agree it's rather ugly.
Tuesday, July 03, 2012 12:55 PM
glad to see a stang on here. im a fox body fan even though they are pretty flimsy.
b drecksage
b drecksagelink
Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:16 PM
I know about the steering thing. I have a 2012, all it does is make the wheel harder to turn....doesnt add any feel to it. Are you using the stock steering wheel? I switched out to the boss 302 wheel...feels soooo good.
Dusty Duster
Dusty Dusterlink
Tuesday, July 03, 2012 8:00 PM
Yes, I'm using the stock steering wheel. Sure the BOSS wheel feels nice, but if I'm going to spend THAT much money, it's going to go towards making the car faster.
b drecksage
b drecksagelink
Wednesday, July 04, 2012 9:30 AM
true, it was only 150 though and easy to install, the surfaces that you touch should always feel good to enjoy the car more. It also helps when driving hard cause your hands dont slip on it like they can with leather and plastic.
CID Vicious
CID Viciouslink
Thursday, October 03, 2013 2:09 PM
I used to be a SCC reading, pushrod hating, 'import guy', and frankly, I think it's funny that they 'don't get' a car like a 2012 Mustang 5.0. They don't get the Camaro SS/1LE/ZL1/Z/28 either, and that comes with an IRS that not only handles, but doesn't wheelhop so bad you think the back window will shatter when you apply the 400+hp/lb-ft liberally - something Dave Coleman wishes the S13 had when he was desperately trying to get Project Silvia to actually dip into the 12's. I recall it was roast tires or buck and lug the motor, but no hook up and go. With a 'raging' 275hp/tq no less.

But the Japanese and Europeans are perfect at everything and there are zero compromises in their designs, right?

If they were paying attention, 'Too Many Cylinders' equates to 410+hp and a 7300rpm redline. I'm a die hard Chevy nut and I admit Ford has a nice motor here. I personally will always prefer the LS, but if one wants a cammy, revvy V8 it's this or the M3, and one of those is actually affordable. Where's the Japanese 400+hp factory car for 30k?

Oh, but it's a 'muscle car'. Doesn't matter how much power you have, it's American so it'll never turn. Live axles will never beat IRS, don't try, right?

Well, technically it's a 'pony car'. And one should really look up Trans Am if one wants to act like they know their stuff, 'love imports because of drifting', and realize that those drivers had shit brakes that basically failed not long into a race, and were drifting down mountain roads and such because - drum roll - that was the only way to scrub off speed. Not just with a 'log axle' but with a leaf spring rear suspension. I'm pretty sure if the suspensions were as bad and uncontrollable as they're made out to be, so 'hopeless' most of those drivers wouldn't have lived throughout the first season.

And I really don't want to hear about your 'almost 300hp' engine swap and your ease of drifting, try doing it with 450+ controlled by multple 4bbl carbs and complicated linkages, and top end power comparable to a cammed big block. Most people are under the illusion that their underpowered compact is 'superior' because - drum roll - there's no power to upset the chassis. Your 150hp 240SX is easier to control around corners than an 80's Camaro with nearly twice the power and easily twice the torque? Do tell.

One of the factory ZL1 engineers has a personal first gen Camaro that is highly modified but still runs a solid axle and modified stock suspension - no "I'm just going to throw a Vette suspension underneath" here. On a twisty track the 1st gen, of course with more power, was able to beat up on a ZL1 severely - and don't make me post that thing's Ring Time relative to 'real sports cars'. While it was more involving to drive - and we all know how we hate actually being bothered with the act of driving, use motorheads - it was faster. The ZL1, of course, was much easier and required less skill to go fast with.

Point being, it's not so simple as "IRS=Win". Want an all-rounder, a corner carver that you can take to drag nights and not be embarrassed? Good luck with typical IRS cars and that. Funnily, most 'geeks' will deride the Vette's use of leaf springs (mostly because they won't actually go look at how they're being used - I've seen people who honestly assumed the modern Vettes were 'cart sprung live axles' and they haven't been in 50 years) while one of the reasons it's used is because it's a wheelhop-fighting design, and when you have Vette levels of power and torque - which most of the import fanboys cars did not have from the factory, and aside from some very expensive builds, probably never will - that's a factor.

More specifically, perhaps, one should just read one of the bevy of Boss/5.0 Mustang vs. V8 M3 tests that have been done. The Mustang doesn't really come up all that short against one of the very most iconic measuring sticks you could put it up against - after all, the M3 USED to get compared to the Vette quite a bit, 10 years ago, until the Vette basically left the M3 quite a bit behind, despite the latter moving to V8 power. Recently it's been M3/Boss quite a bit. Still, the 3 series is an icon and a bogey for many - yet running right alongside it, and beating it in some respects, gets no respect from 'true gearheads', when the only real benefit to choosing the Propeller over the Oval is non-gearhead things like perceived status, interior luxury, and badge cache. You'd think guys into Toyotas, Nissans, Hondas, etc - companies that mostly make 'appliance grade' cars like the Corrolla, Sentra, and Civic - would appreciate a 'lesser' car taking down a 'greater' one. But their engines are 4v DOHC and they have IRS...well, the Ford does, too, and the first two econoboxes have beam rear axles, so yeah, huge technological leap there. This argument isn't a moldy leftover from the 90's era AT ALL...

I see many, many, many arrows fired at even the Vette for being a 'muscle car good only for drag racing', while it's obviously the LEAST like that of any RWD/V8+ car from America. And I think it's sheer ignorance and/or trolling. Japan has made 2 - count 'em - cars that have beaten the ZR1 around the ring. There are only 9 right now, about 4 of them are Koenigseggs and Nobles which are really dubious as 'production cars', one is a Viper, and the most recent is the most complicated/fast car Porsche has ever built for public consumption and costs nearly a million dollars. One of those two Japanese cars is the LFA, and the base $375k version was actually closer to the ZL1 than the ZR1's time, so they needed the Nurburgring package to actually beat it. Know how much it costs?

As much as a ZR1 does. Just the package, on top of the 375-400k base price.

But Americans can't engineer anything, it's all crap, and nothing they make can turn unless it's all lefts, right?

Wink with me ;-)

I think folks with this type of attitude/bias are going to have to dig deep within their reserves of cognitive dissonance when the IRS '15 Mustang shows up followed by the ATS-based next Camaro. If you don't know what the latter is, it's basically a factory offered E46 M3 with Corvette motor/trans swap. For less than the price of a base 370Z.

Get your excuses ready now, why wait...

Face it, most of the cars that can really run with the really good American performance cars cost more than their contemporary Domestic rival. Remember back when a Supra was actually kinda world class, that one generation? Well it also cost $40k in 1990s money. Top end Camaros were 25k and Corvette started at 35k.

For Corvette money we'll give you a steel unibody, bulky weight, chassis flex, and a pretty great motor, but only about as good as a Vette's V8 when it comes to potential - oh, and no 6 speed in California. But it's a legend! That's why no one bought one and they're collector's items now.

Nothing factory came close to the LT5, either. Currently you can buy a 400+hp Camaro or Mustang - or a 200hp Toyobaru! for 30k. Nissan just dropped the Z's base price by 3k to 30k, MT only, and you get 330 whopping horsepower. Want a NISMO? Sure you wouldn't want a Vette for that money, or any of the other multitudes of cars with more performance and/or panache than a hotted up Nissan for $45k? For the price I'd want either way more speed or something I could roll around in feeling like I was truly in 45k worth of car.

I think the 'Domestics' have always had their appeal and this will only continue to be true well into the future. Read the new C7 reviews - what happens when you can't criticize the Vette for having a cheap interior, bad seats, and non-noob-friendly handling? What happens when the Camaro is essentially a BMW 3 series coupe running a Vette V8/trans and only 'bodied' as a muscle car?

I'm assuming brand loyalty, ingrained prejudices, and 'modern opinions' that are decades old and probably rooted in Consumer Reports as much as Car and Driver will continue. I don't care, I'll just watch the 'drift kids' start jawing empty words as Formula drift ends up more or less eschewing anything BUT 'Mercan V8 power...as Mike K said recently, 600hp isn't competitive anymore. I have a feeling as more and more Domestics get into drifting and more and more 'Imports' end up running LSs and Coyotes, maybe someday people will look at engineering as what it accomplishes in the real world, and not how much you geek out about it on paper.

Until then, man, enjoy that 5.0 and go turn some heads and change some minds!
Thursday, August 28, 2014 6:37 PM
What was the reason there was no mention of replacing the upper control arm? Isn't pinion angle a consideration when lowering a S197?
Post Comment Login or register to post a comment.

MotoIQ Proudly Presents Our Partners:

© 2018 MotoIQ.com