2014 New Rules related to Aftermarket Sway Bars

Questions and answers about CMC and NASA rules

Moderator: Al Fernandez

Glenn
Posts: 2672
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 3:53 pm
Location: Ft. Worth

Postby Glenn » Wed Sep 10, 2014 3:52 pm

Not gonna happen. The rule was opened up from OEM only to aftermarket equivalent of OEM to make it easier to find the limited production bars like the 35mm front and 21mm rear for the 4th gens. There was never a plan to open it up completly.
Texas Region AI/CMC Series Director
Inferior Driver, Superior Platform…. since 2005.

User avatar
MHISSTC
Posts: 1061
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 12:44 pm
Location: Goodland, Kansas

Postby MHISSTC » Wed Sep 10, 2014 5:12 pm

DrC wrote:Rules Change Requests
Suggested change to the rule:
The sway bar(s) may be removed or any solid or hollow one piece sway bar(s) that matches the OEM profile/contour and use the original system of attachment and OEM bayonet style end links (i.e. a direct bolt in).


Giving this topic the benefit of consideration if you intend to submit an RCR to open up aftermarket swaybars to everyone...

We currently allow sway bar mount modifications for bars that are not direct bolt-ins (SN95 in a FOX), so I don't think the wording "direct bolt-in" should be used. In it's place I could see "OEM type" or "OEM style" attachment with regard to the mounts and end links.

I don't think the profile/contour element should be a requirement as that is going to be hard to define and verify with any degree of accuracy on aftermarket bars. I do think a range of sizes, either hollow or solid, should be specified.

What I think should be added is that the sway bars need to remain "unadjustable". I suppose one could argue that unadjustable bars make it more expensive to tune the suspension since you now have to posses a number of sway bars for the front and back. A single adustable bar, while initially more expensive than any OEM bar, could end up saving money in the long run by only needing one bar on each end to tune the suspension. I have a feeling Mr Supercharged111 will chime in and say learning suspension setup is a goal of the series, and an adjustable bar would be one step towards that goal. However, I don't like adjustable bars for the simple fact that I think it goes well beyond the intention of CMC to keep things cheap, easy, and simple as an entry level series.
Scott Lockhart
Team Incidental Contact
Sponsor - Hanksville Hotrods

User avatar
DrC
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 5:59 pm
Location: Dayton, OH

Postby DrC » Wed Sep 10, 2014 5:58 pm

I am not in favor of having an adjustable sway bars, that is the one reason I only have a single adjustable shock I would be out there attempting to make changes all the time and not working on my driving.

Glen - based on what I am finding the GM cars have a lot of options for aftermarket sway bars where the Fords do not. The statement above should also be applied to the Fords to allow them more options but with no OD limitation.
Thanks
Dan Close
Dayton, OH
CMC
Black 95 Mustang #74

DAlgozine
Posts: 309
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 8:19 am
Location: Crown Point, IN

Postby DAlgozine » Wed Sep 10, 2014 7:30 pm

I have never understood why it is limited to OEM diameter bars.
It cant be a cost thing. Nearly all bars cost about the same. This is where the 4th gen is severely limited, mainly for rear bars. I've never heard a logical answer as to why. 3rd gens have many options. The Mustangs have been expanded to include non Mustang bars. Why the limit on the 4th gen? Again, why not make it easy to tune and tweak for all platforms. Ten minutes to change a rear bar. There are thousands of cheap, stock OEM 3rd gen bars at 22 and 24mm that are available, and direct fit in a 4th gen. The 22's and 24's are used, easier to find and cheaper then the 21.
Dave Algozine
CMC #12

User avatar
MHISSTC
Posts: 1061
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 12:44 pm
Location: Goodland, Kansas

Postby MHISSTC » Thu Sep 11, 2014 6:20 am

DAlgozine wrote:The Mustangs have been expanded to include non Mustang bars.

There are thousands of cheap, stock OEM 3rd gen bars at 22 and 24mm that are available, and direct fit in a 4th gen.


It would be a stretch for me to explain why the front sway bars from an SN95 are legal on a FOX when you have to use an adapter at the frame rail mounting points, but the reason the 79-93 FOX Mustang/Capri can use a Lincoln Mark VII front swaybar is because they have the same chassis. The Mark VII swaybars are identical in size and shape to the Mustang/Capri front swaybars with the only difference being the slightly longer ends on the Mark VII bar needed to properly mount up to the slightly longer Lincoln lower control arms that give it a wider track width. So when the '79-'93 Mustangs/Capris are converted to the '94-'04 SN95 front suspension with the longer lower control arms, the Mark VII swaybar is a cheap and easy swap as direct bolt-in OEM replacement.

If I understand what you're saying, the 3rd/4th gen bars are directly swap-able as a simple bolt-in OEM replacement similar to the situation I've described above for the FoMoCo units.

There is still a division between the Early/Late GM (the Early designation needs to be removed from the FoMoCo since there are no more S197s in the series). And if there is no up/back-dating between the 3rd gen/4th gen platforms because of it, I feel there needs to be an exception granted in this case if they really are that easy to find and swap. If they are essentially the same bar with exception to the diameter, I think we are too hung up on keeping OEM diameter bars to their respective generations.
Scott Lockhart

Team Incidental Contact

Sponsor - Hanksville Hotrods

Glenn
Posts: 2672
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 3:53 pm
Location: Ft. Worth

Postby Glenn » Thu Sep 11, 2014 6:31 am

SN-95 bars on a fox.....
the fox was allowed to use the sn95 lower arms for track width gain (legal per update/backdate rules). The fox bar was too narrow causing issues with endlinks. The wider bar helps this issue.
Texas Region AI/CMC Series Director

Inferior Driver, Superior Platform…. since 2005.

User avatar
cozog
Posts: 388
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:14 am
Location: Avon, IN

Postby cozog » Thu Sep 11, 2014 7:09 am

MHISSTC wrote:[
If I understand what you're saying, the 3rd/4th gen bars are directly swap-able as a simple bolt-in OEM replacement similar to the situation I've described above for the FoMoCo units.

There is still a division between the Early/Late GM (the Early designation needs to be removed from the FoMoCo since there are no more S197s in the series). And if there is no up/back-dating between the 3rd gen/4th gen platforms because of it, I feel there needs to be an exception granted in this case if they really are that easy to find and swap. If they are essentially the same bar with exception to the diameter, I think we are too hung up on keeping OEM diameter bars to their respective generations.


Actually, the division between 3rd and 4th gens is a non-issue when it comes to rear sway bars. The GM p/n for a 21mm 3rd gen rear bar is the same GM p/n as for the 4th gen 21mm rear bar. It's the same bar.

The real problem is finding one. Incredibly rare on 4th gens (93 only 1LE, I think) and very rare 3rd gens (only on certain low production number models). I'm going to submit a RCR for allowing 22mm bar on with 4th gens simply because they are being manufactured in mass by a few different companies. NO one is making a 21mm bar, even if they advertise it as such. I've tried Dorman (turned out to be 19mm), BMR (25mm only) and UMI (22mm only) because they all had 21mm in the advertised part description. But the delivered product was never 21mm. 22mm yes, all day, 21mm never. UMI, Spohn and Strano all offer a 22mm bar for around $175.
Todd Johnston, #59

Glenn
Posts: 2672
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 3:53 pm
Location: Ft. Worth

Postby Glenn » Thu Sep 11, 2014 7:14 am

I will let you in on a dirty little secret about the 22mm bars...... at one time they were OEM 21's that were powdercoated. Thats what added the extra 1mm.
I know this first hand.
I would rather just allow the 3rd gen and 4th gen to be allowed to update and backdate as long as it is a bolt in deal.
Texas Region AI/CMC Series Director

Inferior Driver, Superior Platform…. since 2005.

User avatar
cozog
Posts: 388
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:14 am
Location: Avon, IN

Postby cozog » Thu Sep 11, 2014 9:16 am

Glenn wrote:I will let you in on a dirty little secret about the 22mm bars...... at one time they were OEM 21's that were powdercoated. Thats what added the extra 1mm.
I know this first hand.
I would rather just allow the 3rd gen and 4th gen to be allowed to update and backdate as long as it is a bolt in deal.


LOL. Never thought about paint thickness.
But let's get it in the rulebook somehow then. Or maybe I should just grind some paint off and area for measurement.

They are bolt it swaps.
Todd Johnston, #59

User avatar
DrC
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 5:59 pm
Location: Dayton, OH

Postby DrC » Thu Sep 11, 2014 9:36 am

If we removed the OD size reference from the rule the size would not be an issue.
Thanks

Dan Close

Dayton, OH

CMC

Black 95 Mustang #74


Return to “Rules Questions/Answers”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest