• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Patina'd RR1 Burgundy 1968 Charger ("Ribeye")

If you guys can design one better, then by all means…show me yours.

The haters/doubters are always the guys who have never installed/driven one.
Bill and his products have been around along time now and have outstanding reviews/reputation. There’s Never any proof of real issues (maybe installation issues)…just speculation/doubt.
It’s built well stuff. For what I want, it’s perfect.
It’s funny to me what technology people are open to considering and what Technology some people will never ever consider.
 
"Haters" is a word the millenials use. Nobody likes those guys anyway!
FBBO Darius reported a few problems, including early failures of the links in the rear suspension.
 
Haters/doubters…I provided two terms everyone can understand…but I guess it’s easier to deflect by finding issue with something trivial in my reply that has nothing to do with the argument.

Darius’s build was like 10 years ago…what you got that’s current?
And are you telling me Darius didn’t like the RMS setup?
 
Last edited:
Darius had problems with the rod end links failing after less than 15000 miles. He wrote about it here.
If you're happy, that is great.
The design is inferior to OEM in terms of durability and longevity. The engineering is substandard to OEM.
You get header clearance and a steering rack but aside from that, it will not last like a OEM based suspension.
Cantilevered tie rod ends?
Coil over springs placing all suspension loads into the frame rails instead of at the torsion bar crossmember?
Thin lower control arms with inadequate shear resistance?
No aftermarket suspension shows an advantage in durability or racing lap times compared to a OEM based system.
For a show pony that will never see 20,000 miles in the entire time you own it, the RMS stuff may be fine.
They do look pretty.

Rich Ehrenberg has railed against the RMS, Magnum Farce and other systems that use coil overs. I don't always agree with the guy but he made a very convincing argument against these setups.

One myth that buyers fall victim to is the belief that the car performs so much better with the new system in place.
Well, a shiny paint job on the car looks better than the 53 year old car with original paint too.
Compare a RMS equipped car to one with a stock based arrangement and see if the hype holds up.
I'm talking a car with larger torsion bars, offset upper control arm bushings or aftermarket UCAs entirely, a bigger sway bar and decent shocks. Add in a Borgeson steering box to round it out. There you have factory durability, ease of finding replacement parts when you need them and excellent road and track manners for far less money.
The factory stuff doesn't look as pretty though.

601 Y.JPG
 
Last edited:
Haters/doubters…I provided two terms everyone can understand…but I guess it’s easier to deflect by finding issue with something trivial in my reply that has nothing to do with the argument.

Darius’s build was like 10 years ago…what you got that’s current?
And are you telling me Darius didn’t like the RMS setup?
I've worked on two cars with RMS front ends.. They both had the same issues, mostly related to ackerman angles... When you adapt Pinto (Most call it Mustang II suspension but the Pinto came first and that is where the suspension came from) suspension to a Mopar your not making anything better...

Those who drink the Koolaide tend to not want to hear anyone talk about the flaws in their plan...
 
I'm going to make a real push to get this thing together and running before summer is over. I sent the transmission crossmember out for powdercoating but took a couple pics first.

H9Ldrcmh.jpg

ulg0fECh.jpg

koCFSFBh.jpg
 
That crossmember looks amazing, very professional looking.
 
Auto Transport Service
Back
Top