I read somewhere that new revised front endlinks are available for 05-09 Mustang GTs. Anyone know the part # and why we need them? I plan to install a BMR front sway bar, and heard horror stories about clunking and loosening end links.

 

You got options:

http://www.ninosport.com/Ford-Racing...p/m-5483-a.htm


http://www.stranoparts.com/partdetai...D=80&ModelID=5


http://www.stranoparts.com/partdetai...D=80&ModelID=5


http://www.drakeautomotivegroup.com/...S.aspx?wid=141


And then the Ford replacement parts:

http://www.cjponyparts.com/sway-bar-...5-2010/p/EL15/



The new replacement parts no longer rely on a 8mm socket on the end of the bolt to torque the nut against. The originals did. Basically won't hold torque, at least didn't for me, loosened up on the track, the thing was banging around all over.

I switched to the last set (drake ones) above, and they loosened up, caused clunking.
Then got the Strano ones, are big, beefy solid units, no clunk, no loosening.

 

https://themustangsource.com/f730/sh...4/#post5953069

 

The OEM links in your photo are of the older pre-08 design. I read that the newer ones BR3Z-K483-B are supposed to be better?



The plastic link is from a SHO, the guy was using the bottom (revised link) for his SHO.

 

Those bottom ones are the older ones. The nuts are on backwards, though.
The tip of those bolts have a 8mm 'nut' that you use to tighten the socket against. Where the rubber boots are there's nothing to grab to tighten against, and the bolts themselves are free to rotate. I've heard of some people just putting an air wrench on and spinning til it tightens down, but I think all that does is wait for it to heat up and seize (it heated a lot when I tried that, realized it, and stopped).

The newer ones have another 16-18mm (don't recall exactly) nut at the base of the bolt, can put a wrench there, then one on the tightening nut, and get them torqued. And use locktite. I think the link above is to the newer ones, but now you have me wondering.

 

Here are my stock endlinks. My 07 GT was made late 2006.

I read somewhere that the BR3Z-5K483-B is reported to be a 2008-up revision for Mustangs.

Notice how my stock endlink is pretty skinny. The nuts in the top photograph don't appear to be backwards? They might for a wrench to hold still to prevent damaging the ball joints when tightening the nuts (which are purchased separately??)



I have been unable to find a definitive "How-To" or thread that describes the right endlinks to buy. The aftermarket endlinks are adjustable and seem more oriented towards track days and racing than street use.

 

Correct on all points. Those are the same that I had, and mine is a 2009. That dinky little 8mm socket end is what you're supposed to torque against, and my 8mm wrench is about 6" long. I got the Shelby/Scott Drake adjustable "street" units initially thinking I didn't want any NVH, just something beefier. They have a piece at the base right before the dust cover that you can clamp onto with a 18mm wrench (wasn't 6 sided, just two parallel flats connected by D segment) while tightening the nuts, and that worked great, no loosening (did use loctite as well, though). Problem was the bushing itself loosened up, I could grab it and feel slop/play at one end, so gave lots of clunking with bumps.

Looked for the Steeda Street ones, were discontinued (and may have been the same as what I had). So talked to Strano and he said his were very quiet for being a rod-end design, so got those. Very beefy, solid, and I don't think there's any noise (I have a minor driver front clunk on occasion, but think it's my J&M caster/camber plates).

The Ford Racing ones I posted first are still the old design, with the 8mm socket end, but with adjustable sleeves. The adjustable part is simply to remove pre-load, and is useful street or track.

I'm looking for a thread where this was all discussed before but can't find it, it was on a guy with a front end clunk...

 

So your 2009 has the BR3Z-5K483-B as a stock endlink? Or does your 2009 have the same endlinks on my 2007?

Do I need a new set of endlinks and nuts when I upgrade to the BMR? Or can I just use red threadlocker with a new nylock nut or just re-use my old nuts?

 

Looked around a bit, now see what you're talking about. I don't know the part number on mine, but they look identical to what you posted. No nut near the dust boot to tighten with, just the 8mm end.

Looks like the new ones have a nut near the boot, and another nut to tighten with, I thought what you posted showed the tightening nut put on backwards:



http://www.shoforum.com/showthread.php?p=1256066

Says it takes a different tightening nut as well.

You can use your OEM stuff, try using lots of blue loctite. don't be surprised if they loosen.

 

 

is that a new SHO part from Ford ,are they the same as the Mustang will these new SHO ones work on 2005-09 Mustangs ?

 

This thread is very timely as I just swapped out my struts and was struggling with trying to ensure the endlinks were tight enough given some of stories I have read about them coming loose. I won't know until spring when I start driving the car if mine will stay snugged up, but given the relatively small cost of those newer OEM links with the secondary tighening nut, I may just order a set ($13 each from Tousley).

 

Rick: Any reason why you're using the softer setting? I read in Fred Puhn's book that with cars that have independent front and live axle rear, that a stiffer front anti-roll bar actually reduces understeer by preventing positive camber in a turn. I was going to start with either the middle or the tightest in the front, and the tightest in the rear.

I recall reading somewhere that the BR3Z-5K483-B endlinks were designed for Mustangs, and it just so happens to interchange on a lot of other Fords. I can't find any definitive threads that talk about this particular endlink. I just want to get the right one that is well designed. The adjustable ones look nice, but I don't want to constantly adjust/fiddle fart with them and end up with uneven settings.

 

Generally with the adjustables you set it for no preload and then leave it. If you ever change things in the future you have the option of adjusting again.

The front bar's further hole from the bar (closest to the end of it) is the softest, and is slightly stiffer than the stock. That's where mine is. Generally softening the front end to roll will reduce understeer, as it allows both tires to more fully participate. You can imagine an infinitely stiff bar raising up the inner front tire in a turn (due to body roll and cornering forces) such that it's off the ground (and some mid engine cars and the one rear-engine car do this during hard cornering; many front wheel drive cars do the same to the inner rear tire). A tire not on the ground gives no grip. So reducing roll stiffness on the front or rear increases grip on that end. If you have more grip on the front, comparatively less on the rear, so less understeer/more oversteer. And vice-versa. Setting it to stiffer (closest to the bar, furthest from the end) does reduce roll, but can also reduce grip. You might get away with it with that really stiff rear bar, though.

The AR bars shouldn't be used to control camber, that's what the suspension geometry and static negative camber are for. Lowered Mustangs naturally have more negative camber unless you correct it with camber plates/bolts.

 

I've read that about the stiffer front bars and inducing understeer, but Puhn's book mentioned that it only generally held true for vehicles with similar front and rear suspensions. Our Mustangs are independent front, live axle rear. According to Puhn, increasing the stiffness of the front bar can reduce understeer: "The stiffer anti-roll bar prevents excessive positive camber from occurring on the front tires during a turn. This effect is sometimes stronger than the extra weight transfer, and the result is less understeer"

Adding a stiffer rear bar still holds true in reducing understeer, but I thought that was interesting about the front bar. I know for a fact that when I installed both bars on my Crown Vic, there was an immediate difference in handling characteristics and the front end felt tightened up but did not induce plowing/understeer. The Vic is independent front, live axle rear (stock Watt's Linkage).

 

I have a Strano set waiting to go on.

 

That is an interesting concept, and I can appreciate what he's saying, especially with a strut style front, which doesn't control dynamic camber very well. It'd be interesting to experiment with, I think you'd need a skidpad to know for sure, but I'm sure you'll notice some difference in feel.
For me, the reduced effective spring rate of the softer bar was nice. The stiffer your AR bar, the less 'independent' the suspension is, so driving down a bumpy road you get more ride disturbance. Which is why it's better to use a different tuning approach to control dynamic camber changes, I think. You'll have to let us know what you find.

I just ordered one of Sam's bars, too, gotta get the car ready, first track day in one month!

 

I hear you, I definitely don't want to feel every bump in the road.

 

I replaced the stock front endlinks I had been using with my Eibach swaybars with the ones from UMI (the same ones Strano sells, but I bought them direct from UMI), and it seemed like there was a small bit of NVH added when I switched, but nothing terribly significant. They are rather expensive, but very well made.

 

I ordered the updated Ford endlinks and new nylock nuts.