coordinating sway bars

[Crownvicman289]

Your 97 isn't stock then. On a 97, factory swaybar endlinks attach to the knuckles. Hooking them to the LCAs gives the effect of an even weaker front swaybar.

[Piece-it pete]

Perhaps I'm mis-remembering (the 97 was certainly stock), but I know I didn't have to remove the rotor to change them like on the 03.

Pete

[Crownvicman289]

It's entirely possible that a previous owner replaced the stock endlinks with aftermarket units that fastened to the LCAs. Just know that it's inferior to the stock endlinks.

[Piece-it pete]

Man my grey matter is getting greyer. I must be mixing up the bolt on the sway bar with the bolt on the spindle! Idioto.

I found a shot of the older setup here:

http://www.autoclinix.com/Mercury/Brakes2.htm

Where the 03+ has the sway bar link going directly into the back of the (alloy) spindle behind the top part of the rotor. You have to remove the rotor to get to it. Can't find a pic. It might be the same sway bar, I don't know. The end links themselves are a bit different.

Pete

[sly]

This is bass ackwards. Bigger front bar = more understeer, bigger rear bar = less understeer. Since the cars are balanced toward gross understeer from the factory, I don't see why a base front bar wouldn't work nicely with an HPP rear bar on an otherwise stock car.

I don't know about yours... but all of my panthers prefer to overrun the front with the ass with open gears (gross over-steer). with track locks it's the opposite. The Lincoln has 4.10 with TL (no rear bar) and tends to push the front (gross under-steer) while the 88 GM and 93 Vic (both no rear bar) with the open rears tended to kick the ass out well before the front. so more bar in the back would work well to balance an open rear car more (over-steer less... under-steer more), but more rear bar would likely make one with a TL under steer even more (under-steer more... over-steer less).

also... this is all with foot in the gas. Foot in the brake would would lean the other way. Finding the balance between these is the real science.

[Piece-it pete]

Just out of curiousity I took a look at Addcos catalog. It shows 1 front bar for '91.5-01' Crown Vics (#509), and another for 02-09s (#2196).

Pete

[Crownvicman289]

The endlinks are different, I may have mis-spoke. If you match the endlink to the spindle, the front bars should be compatible from 92-02.

[Crownvicman289]

I don't know about yours... but all of my panthers prefer to overrun the front with the ass with open gears (gross over-steer). with track locks it's the opposite. The Lincoln has 4.10 with TL (no rear bar) and tends to push the front (gross under-steer) while the 88 GM and 93 Vic (both no rear bar) with the open rears tended to kick the ass out well before the front. so more bar in the back would work well to balance an open rear car more (over-steer less... under-steer more), but more rear bar would likely make one with a TL under steer even more (under-steer more... over-steer less).

also... this is all with foot in the gas. Foot in the brake would would lean the other way. Finding the balance between these is the real science.

Well stiffening the front reduces traction in the front and vice versa. Not to mention increasing the rate on a swaybar increases weight transfer exponentially quicker than body roll could ever dream of. I can't discount your real world experience, but I can offer mine. Conventional wisdom dictates that my car should understeer, but it too has a tendency to hang the ass out with my foot in it. I can't speak to steady state cornering, as it seems decent and I haven't much tested the limits there, but I attribute the aforementioned oversteer to crap tires. I assume your cars aren't running high performance tires either? With a bit of grip to overcome the meager power out back, and nothing changing the forces on the front tires, I imagine the car would then understeer on the throttle.

[sly]

yeah... cheapo tires

[Ghorneck]

Rear bar from a P71 would be perfect. The front and rear bars from a P71 would be even better. New ENS endlinks and you are all set. They might cost you $50 in a jy.

[85crownHPP]

Thank you so much for the post. It's really informative!

free cookies to any user who lets an admin know when obvious spam posts like this show up.
that is all...

[Crownvicman289]

WTF? I was gonna go back, edit my post, then demand cookies but there's no edit button!

[mrltd]

Unless they changed it again, the larger addcos have to be used with the older style control arm mounted endlinks because of stock endlink failure on the 98-02's.

Conventional wisdom does say that big front bar should mean more oversteer, but in real life on most cars that's not the case. This is due to the sway bar keeping the suspension in a sweet spot of the camber curve. When I went to the 1 1/4" 98-02 addco on the wagon, it got TONS more front grip(and this is with 1000lb front springs) . With the stock box PI rear bar the car is perfectly balanced. Both my Mazda and my BMW act the same.

[Crownvicman289]

Conventional wisdom does say that big front bar should mean more oversteer

Understeer, conventional wisdom dictates that a bigger front bar = more understeer. Clearly there are more extrenuating circumstances with these couches on wheels that defy conventional wisdom, but we're on the extreme end of the spectrum where almost any ill thought out performance oriented mod will make the car respond positively. I still dig it though, nothing more comical than seeing my multicolored oil smoking bomb get sideways or row through the gears all while remaining sound asleep at the wheel.

[mrltd]

oops, yeah. Was half asleep there. Everything is so softly sprung and the bars help out, a bit more than the should need to. But there are two types of thinking when doing a suspension- heavy spring/small bar and big bar soft spring....Just a tradeoff on where you get the spring rate from.