Suspension/Lower Control Arms Upgrade - 2007 Mustang GT 500
- Thread starter Helfman
- Start date
67 AGAIN
Enthusiast
Strictly for wheel hop, it’s rear control arms that address that.
Start by doing lower control arms.
They don’t add any NVH (Noise, Vibration or Harshness).
If you are still stock ride height, then control arms only.
If you are lowered, add relocation brackets, to get proper angle back to the arms.
Recommend BMR for both LCA and relocation brackets.
This will not eliminate 100% but will help a lot.
If you’re still not completely happy after that, then you can do upper control arm.
Be advised upper control arm does contribute to added NVH. Mostly noise transfer.
Again, BMR recommended.
All with polyurethane bushings for minimal added NVH.
If you think you can live with a bit of extra noise, and you like your burnouts, then do all three at same time.
If you want maximum control, the next step up would be spherical bearings instead polyurethane bushings.
However this will increase NVH, mostly in the form of noise and harshness.
The likes of a track car, which you say you don’t want.
If you want to go that hardcore, BMR makes those too.
GT500 suspension, especially if older model like 07 to 09, must be getting tired.
Lowering springs such as Ford Performance or Eibach with dampers from Ford Performance, Eibach or Bilstein, along with sway bars from Eibach or Ford Performance would really improve the driving dynamics of the car.
However, these have no bearing on wheel hop.
They would make it feel like a totally new and much better handling car.
Start by doing lower control arms.
They don’t add any NVH (Noise, Vibration or Harshness).
If you are still stock ride height, then control arms only.
If you are lowered, add relocation brackets, to get proper angle back to the arms.
Recommend BMR for both LCA and relocation brackets.
This will not eliminate 100% but will help a lot.
If you’re still not completely happy after that, then you can do upper control arm.
Be advised upper control arm does contribute to added NVH. Mostly noise transfer.
Again, BMR recommended.
All with polyurethane bushings for minimal added NVH.
If you think you can live with a bit of extra noise, and you like your burnouts, then do all three at same time.
If you want maximum control, the next step up would be spherical bearings instead polyurethane bushings.
However this will increase NVH, mostly in the form of noise and harshness.
The likes of a track car, which you say you don’t want.
If you want to go that hardcore, BMR makes those too.
GT500 suspension, especially if older model like 07 to 09, must be getting tired.
Lowering springs such as Ford Performance or Eibach with dampers from Ford Performance, Eibach or Bilstein, along with sway bars from Eibach or Ford Performance would really improve the driving dynamics of the car.
However, these have no bearing on wheel hop.
They would make it feel like a totally new and much better handling car.
Thanks so much for the reply! I will definitely get my lower control arms done and will keep your information as an option.
S197CS
Corner Carver
Hey,
As Marc said above, rear lower control arms, the rest depends on how deep you want to proceed with modifications.
I personally went with Whiteline Suspensions Rear lower control arms and relocation brackets, as well as their front and rear sway bars and watts link, Eibach prokit springs, front GT500 lower control arms (I had a GT). I didn't do the upper control arm as I didn't want the added NVH and after doing the lowers and relocation brackets i was pleased for my use case.
My build tread is still lingering around here on the forum, as Marc's is as well i believe.
happy modding!
As Marc said above, rear lower control arms, the rest depends on how deep you want to proceed with modifications.
I personally went with Whiteline Suspensions Rear lower control arms and relocation brackets, as well as their front and rear sway bars and watts link, Eibach prokit springs, front GT500 lower control arms (I had a GT). I didn't do the upper control arm as I didn't want the added NVH and after doing the lowers and relocation brackets i was pleased for my use case.
My build tread is still lingering around here on the forum, as Marc's is as well i believe.
happy modding!
67 AGAIN
Enthusiast
I mentioned this in past threads but this one is entirely appropriate to repeat it in.
Strictly speaking rear relocation brackets for the S197 platform, the BMR were tested against other popular brands such as Ford Racing, Maximum Motorsports, Steeda, etc., in drag racing applications, and were shown to be the most robust of the bunch.
These tests were done by Matt Dasilva on his 2005 car and the BMR were the only brackets that held up to his hard launches.
The BMR design has an extra bolt/attachment point to the axle housing that none of the others have so they don’t twist or bend under heavy load like some others.
Strictly speaking rear relocation brackets for the S197 platform, the BMR were tested against other popular brands such as Ford Racing, Maximum Motorsports, Steeda, etc., in drag racing applications, and were shown to be the most robust of the bunch.
These tests were done by Matt Dasilva on his 2005 car and the BMR were the only brackets that held up to his hard launches.
The BMR design has an extra bolt/attachment point to the axle housing that none of the others have so they don’t twist or bend under heavy load like some others.
Last edited:
white 5.0
Well-known member
For the relocation brackets you will only need them if you go lower then 1-1/2 if not well you really do not need them waist of money .would say all products are good depend what you intend to do with your car and also it s a personal choice like some people prefer gm truck compare to ford . But I prefer ford.
other brand also good it perfect time of year to shop with big specials coming specially Black Friday deals
other brand also good it perfect time of year to shop with big specials coming specially Black Friday deals
67 AGAIN
Enthusiast
What’s nice about this thread is that Helfman started it with a specific concern on a specific car model.
Which were, a 2007 GT500 and wanting to eliminate or reduce wheel hop.
I would suggest to Helfman or anyone else looking at doing mods to their car to do diligent research.
This would obviously focus on the hardware one is thinking about adding to their car, but I would also suggest an objective introspection into how you drive your car and what you plan to do with it in the future.
Helfman has made it clear that he has no plans to track the car, but he has a specific concern about wheel hop.
I don’t know Helfman nor did elaborate in his initial question, but the fact that he was very specific about this aspect tells me he regularly or periodically put his car into a wheel hop situation, which means loss of traction and wheel spin.
Translation, burnouts.
If this is the case then his needs are very different from the Sunday afternoon cruiser with the loving spouse on board scenario.
Along with driving style being different, tire and wheel combos are different from a GT to a supercharged GT500 so the two cars won’t have the same reaction or result within the same or similar driving inputs.
I bring this up because advice with very specific criteria was given, leaving the impression that there is no wiggle room.
I don’t agree with this advice and since it’s a grey, drizzly fall afternoon with little else to do, I will expand on the subject.
I’n no engineer or CAD design expert but to assist in understanding some of the principals I sketched a few visuals.
The sketches show this part of the car where the control arms (in red) tie to the chassis in front of the rear axle (front end of the control arm) and the axle housing at the back (rear end of the control arm).
The control arms are inboard of the wheel or behind it.
The four sketches I have.
Sketch #1 is a stock height car with no relocation brackets.
From what we know, this is Helfman’s car.
In this configuration, with all the factory OE hardware all S197 Mustangs are susceptible to wheel hop when traction is broken and prolonged wheel spin is maintained.
IE burnout situation.
The fist corrective measure is to replace lower control arms with arms containing bushings with stiffer than the factory rubber.
This advice already discussed previously.
Still with sketch #1, notice that the rear of the control arms point slightly downward toward the back. This rear downward angle acts to distribute weight or energy onto the axle under acceleration.
This energy transfer contributes to traction and wheel hop control.
Sketch #2 is a lowered car with no relocation brackets.
The first and most important thing I want readers to notice is the new angle of the control arms.
Notice how the rear end of the control arm is now higher than sketch#1.
In fact, it’s close to horizontal.
See the little arrow lines I drew in to indicate the direction of the energy being transferred by the control arms?
Now that the control arm is close to horizontal the energy is no longer being transferred down onto the axle.
It is just being transferred on a horizontal plane toward the back, no longer contributing to added traction or minimizing wheel hop.
This happens because when a car is lowered, the axle moves up under the car, reducing this downward rear angle of the control arms.
So any lowered car, no set numbers required, has less traction and is at risk for more wheel hop. Any lowering contributes to this condition, whether 1/4 inch or 2 and a 1/2 inches. Any lowering starts to affect things.
This is why I don’t agree with the specific advice given above.
Sketch #3 shows a lowered car, no specific numbers suggested, with relocation brackets.
The relocation brackets allow to restore that downward angle of the control arm toward the axle.
This restores that geometry pushing energy down onto the axle under acceleration in order to provide traction and control wheel hop.
Some relocation brackets only have 2 points to adjust the control arms to.
Others have 3 points allowing for more variance in adjustability.
With a 3 point of adjustability relocation bracket, one can return the control arm angle close to original whether on a slightly lowered car or aggressively lowered car.
Top attachment point for conservative drop and lower attachment points with more aggressive drops.
So, any lowering and relocation brackets become a viable option.
This is where driving style and intended use of the car become important.
The Sunday afternoon cruiser never puts his car in a situation of loss of traction, therefor does not require relocation brackets, but it does not mean that they are not an appropriate option for another driver.
A driver, for example, who likes to do hard launches and burnouts, and is contending with wheel hop.
Here I show the BMR brackets.
Second picture shows them installed.
The top three bolts tie them to the axle.
This one more point of attachment than the other brackets which only have two points of attachment.
The bottom three holes are the three points where you can attach the rear end of the control arms in order to restore that downward angle onto the axle discussed above.
In the installed picture, they choose the middle attachment point for the control arm.
This is the look I was going for in sketch #3.
Sketch #4 is a stock height car using relocation brackets for specific applications.
Namely a drag car seeking maximum traction and maximum wheel hop control.
Or someone who likes to do burnouts and wants to tame wheel hop.
In this application, the relocation bracket is used to increase the rearward angle.
I sketched it as if they were using the top attachment point for the control arm, making that angle more aggressive, for more energy on the axle on acceleration.
Relocation brackets can have many useful applications on the S197 cars in the right circumstances.
Research and knowing the intended use of the car very important.
Advice from sources who have actual on car experience is most often more insightful than advice from sources who have not experienced the product in question.
It most often is not as clearcut as, if you are this high - no, and if you are this high- yes.
Note to readers.
The above information is only applicable to the S197 platform cars.
Those between 2005 and 2014.
Happy modding everyone.
Which were, a 2007 GT500 and wanting to eliminate or reduce wheel hop.
I would suggest to Helfman or anyone else looking at doing mods to their car to do diligent research.
This would obviously focus on the hardware one is thinking about adding to their car, but I would also suggest an objective introspection into how you drive your car and what you plan to do with it in the future.
Helfman has made it clear that he has no plans to track the car, but he has a specific concern about wheel hop.
I don’t know Helfman nor did elaborate in his initial question, but the fact that he was very specific about this aspect tells me he regularly or periodically put his car into a wheel hop situation, which means loss of traction and wheel spin.
Translation, burnouts.
If this is the case then his needs are very different from the Sunday afternoon cruiser with the loving spouse on board scenario.
Along with driving style being different, tire and wheel combos are different from a GT to a supercharged GT500 so the two cars won’t have the same reaction or result within the same or similar driving inputs.
I bring this up because advice with very specific criteria was given, leaving the impression that there is no wiggle room.
I don’t agree with this advice and since it’s a grey, drizzly fall afternoon with little else to do, I will expand on the subject.
I’n no engineer or CAD design expert but to assist in understanding some of the principals I sketched a few visuals.
The sketches show this part of the car where the control arms (in red) tie to the chassis in front of the rear axle (front end of the control arm) and the axle housing at the back (rear end of the control arm).
The control arms are inboard of the wheel or behind it.
The four sketches I have.
Sketch #1 is a stock height car with no relocation brackets.
From what we know, this is Helfman’s car.
In this configuration, with all the factory OE hardware all S197 Mustangs are susceptible to wheel hop when traction is broken and prolonged wheel spin is maintained.
IE burnout situation.
The fist corrective measure is to replace lower control arms with arms containing bushings with stiffer than the factory rubber.
This advice already discussed previously.
Still with sketch #1, notice that the rear of the control arms point slightly downward toward the back. This rear downward angle acts to distribute weight or energy onto the axle under acceleration.
This energy transfer contributes to traction and wheel hop control.
Sketch #2 is a lowered car with no relocation brackets.
The first and most important thing I want readers to notice is the new angle of the control arms.
Notice how the rear end of the control arm is now higher than sketch#1.
In fact, it’s close to horizontal.
See the little arrow lines I drew in to indicate the direction of the energy being transferred by the control arms?
Now that the control arm is close to horizontal the energy is no longer being transferred down onto the axle.
It is just being transferred on a horizontal plane toward the back, no longer contributing to added traction or minimizing wheel hop.
This happens because when a car is lowered, the axle moves up under the car, reducing this downward rear angle of the control arms.
So any lowered car, no set numbers required, has less traction and is at risk for more wheel hop. Any lowering contributes to this condition, whether 1/4 inch or 2 and a 1/2 inches. Any lowering starts to affect things.
This is why I don’t agree with the specific advice given above.
Sketch #3 shows a lowered car, no specific numbers suggested, with relocation brackets.
The relocation brackets allow to restore that downward angle of the control arm toward the axle.
This restores that geometry pushing energy down onto the axle under acceleration in order to provide traction and control wheel hop.
Some relocation brackets only have 2 points to adjust the control arms to.
Others have 3 points allowing for more variance in adjustability.
With a 3 point of adjustability relocation bracket, one can return the control arm angle close to original whether on a slightly lowered car or aggressively lowered car.
Top attachment point for conservative drop and lower attachment points with more aggressive drops.
So, any lowering and relocation brackets become a viable option.
This is where driving style and intended use of the car become important.
The Sunday afternoon cruiser never puts his car in a situation of loss of traction, therefor does not require relocation brackets, but it does not mean that they are not an appropriate option for another driver.
A driver, for example, who likes to do hard launches and burnouts, and is contending with wheel hop.
Here I show the BMR brackets.
Second picture shows them installed.
The top three bolts tie them to the axle.
This one more point of attachment than the other brackets which only have two points of attachment.
The bottom three holes are the three points where you can attach the rear end of the control arms in order to restore that downward angle onto the axle discussed above.
In the installed picture, they choose the middle attachment point for the control arm.
This is the look I was going for in sketch #3.
Sketch #4 is a stock height car using relocation brackets for specific applications.
Namely a drag car seeking maximum traction and maximum wheel hop control.
Or someone who likes to do burnouts and wants to tame wheel hop.
In this application, the relocation bracket is used to increase the rearward angle.
I sketched it as if they were using the top attachment point for the control arm, making that angle more aggressive, for more energy on the axle on acceleration.
Relocation brackets can have many useful applications on the S197 cars in the right circumstances.
Research and knowing the intended use of the car very important.
Advice from sources who have actual on car experience is most often more insightful than advice from sources who have not experienced the product in question.
It most often is not as clearcut as, if you are this high - no, and if you are this high- yes.
Note to readers.
The above information is only applicable to the S197 platform cars.
Those between 2005 and 2014.
Happy modding everyone.
Last edited: