OzCharger69
Well-Known Member
When I installed PST thick torsion bars and thick sway bar + Bilstein shocks, it made a world of a difference
advice on front suspension options?
- Thread starter whiteknuckler
- Start date
Mr. Belvedere II
Well-Known Member
I went the QA1 route, and have been very pleased with the quality and fitment of the entire Level 2 front suspension kit. Tubular K member, adjustable strut rods, tubular upper, and lower control arms, bigger torsion bars, and a beefy sway bar, and singular adjustable shocks. I also did away with the stock steering and went with a Borgeson kit.
j-c-c-62
Well-Known Member
I don't disagree with much that already has been shared here, except for one aspect. I lean towards best bang for buck of an ungraded OEM TB IFS, 2 way adjustable shocks. big TB's 1"+, SFC or Torque boxes, not both, a real K member (the K member is the Pelvic bone equivalent of the chassis), big brakes, fat hollow sway bar, delrin LCA bushings, lightweight OEM unwelded LCA, etc.
However, if you want the best, highest tech, beefiest, state of the art, purpose designed IFS available today that fits your $8K budget, it's an Art Morrision set up, bar none. I have visited their shop, put my eyeballs on it, and nothing compares.
BTW, I have no dog in this fight. I own what I first suggested above, I also have a Reilly, now modified IFS.
Choose wisely.
Home Page - Art Morrison
However, if you want the best, highest tech, beefiest, state of the art, purpose designed IFS available today that fits your $8K budget, it's an Art Morrision set up, bar none. I have visited their shop, put my eyeballs on it, and nothing compares.
BTW, I have no dog in this fight. I own what I first suggested above, I also have a Reilly, now modified IFS.
Choose wisely.
Home Page - Art Morrison
Last edited:
Rusty knuckles
Well-Known Member
Would you be able to weigh what all the new components weigh vs stock ones? Curious what the weight savings is?
j-c-c-62
Well-Known Member
1. IMO this is not an area that a lot of weight can be saved without really diminishing the structural integrity of the chassis and the IFS
2. Most previously claimed weight reductions revolved around converting to a lighter disc brake system
3. Any weight saved here is mostly below the COG and has reduced benefits, other than RAISING the COG
4. Weight savings in this area should always be after Alum intake, Alum heads, Battery relocation and FG hood, all items above COG.
5, Most everyone is "pleased" with the mods they have made, as they likely have no empirical data to challenge it, they also have no way to do a real A/B comparison performance wise other than from memory (memory about what???), and the normal human nature effects of confirmation bias, unless something breaks
2. Most previously claimed weight reductions revolved around converting to a lighter disc brake system
3. Any weight saved here is mostly below the COG and has reduced benefits, other than RAISING the COG
4. Weight savings in this area should always be after Alum intake, Alum heads, Battery relocation and FG hood, all items above COG.
5, Most everyone is "pleased" with the mods they have made, as they likely have no empirical data to challenge it, they also have no way to do a real A/B comparison performance wise other than from memory (memory about what???), and the normal human nature effects of confirmation bias, unless something breaks
Last edited:
Mr. Belvedere II
Well-Known Member
I really would have no idea, BUT it’s definitely less. Weight honestly was never a major consideration really for me
Similar threads
